Nuclear power: Myths about low cost, safety and emission

 

Mathew Thomas

Former president Dr Abdul Kalam’s effort at mollifying the Kundamkulam protesters has not succeeded.

TV debates did not shed light on cheapness, emissions and safety of nuclear power plants. Are the efforts to push for nuclear power a reflection of ignorance? In the 2005 Energy Bill, the US Congress allocated $ 13 billion in subsidies to revive the moribund nuclear power industry. It did not succeed. Why was USA interested in the 123 deal? Public debates on the nuclear power option are needed.

That India signed the Kundankulam agreement with Soviet Union just a year after Chernobyl, speaks volumes both of the cavalier foolhardiness of Indian signatories and the delusional power of nuclear lobby. Fukushima has re-focussed attention on nuclear plants. Several claims about nuclear power should be examined, to avoid a ‘Fukushima’ here. Nuclear reactors are expensive, complex and inefficient burners; they are a sophisticated, yet hazardous, if silly, way to boil water to produce electricity. They consume and pollute huge quantities of water.

The nuclear lobby propagates the myths of cheap and clean power. Now disgraced Enron sponsored the ‘Clean Power Group,’ which constantly met former US vice-president Dick Cheney. Kenneth Lay, Enron CEO, gave Cheney a list of corporate recommendations. These found their way into the report of the US national energy policy development group. Could this be the root of US influence in our government’s anxiety to rush into nuclear power?

Three nuclear power myths are discussed here.

- See more at: http://www.dianuke.org/nuclear-power-myths-about-low-cost-safety-and-emission/#sthash.BUU1fQjc.dpuf