Several questions on safety unanswered, cry activists

Editor

posted on 12 years ago — updated on 1 second ago

33
views

Follow us:WhatsappFacebookTwitterTelegram.cls-1{fill:#4d4d4d;}.cls-2{fill:#fff;}Google NewsAnti-nuclear activists have expressed disappointment over the Madras High Court’s nod for commissioning Units I and II of the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant Project (KKNPP). “It is a disappointment. No questions raised by us were answered in the judgment. We will soon appeal to the Supreme Court,” said G Sundarrajan, who filed cases against the KKNPP in the High Court. Similarly, Dr V Pugazhenthi, who worked among those affected by radiation in Kalpakkam, said, “After the Fukushima incident, a committee constituted by the Centre gave 17 recommendations to the government. As per the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidelines, a nuclear plant must be commissioned only after putting in place thorough Emergency Operative Procedures (EOP). But as per the recommendations of the committee, it has given an assurance that the EOP can be finalised six months after the nuclear plant is commissioned. This is a complete violation.” He has also alleged holes in the safety assessment of the KKNPP. “The expert panel on the KKNPP — headed by Prof Muthunayagam— said that there are no chances of a ‘Near Field Tsunami’ in the region. It also did not acknowledge the possibility of ‘slumps’, the under-sea phenomenon that causes a tsunami. But, after we put out our report indicating the presence of such slumps, they modified their report. As per international norms, if any slump is found, its chemical composition must be studied. The expert panel did not consider this,” Dr Pugazhenthi said. Dr Ramesh, a member of the fact-finding team on the mock drill held in Nakkaneri, alleged, “The final request made to the State was the conduct of an emergency preparedness drill. The claim that such a drill was conducted in Nakkaneri is a blatant lie.” People’s Expert Committee member M G Devasahayam said there was ample evidence to support the case against the KKNPP.“The documents against the KKNPP are formidable and factual,” he said.first published:September 01, 2012, 09:57 ISTlast updated:September 01, 2012, 09:57 IST
window._taboola = window._taboola || [];_taboola.push({mode: 'thumbnails-a', container: 'taboola-below-article-thumbnails', placement: 'Below Article Thumbnails', target_type: 'mix' });Latest News

Anti-nuclear activists have expressed disappointment over the Madras High Court’s nod for commissioning Units I and II of the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant Project (KKNPP).

“It is a disappointment. No questions raised by us were answered in the judgment. We will soon appeal to the Supreme Court,” said G Sundarrajan, who filed cases against the KKNPP in the High Court.

Similarly, Dr V Pugazhenthi, who worked among those affected by radiation in Kalpakkam, said, “After the Fukushima incident, a committee constituted by the Centre gave 17 recommendations to the government.

As per the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidelines, a nuclear plant must be commissioned only after putting in place thorough Emergency Operative Procedures (EOP).

But as per the recommendations of the committee, it has given an assurance that the EOP can be finalised six months after the nuclear plant is commissioned. This is a complete violation.”

He has also alleged holes in the safety assessment of the KKNPP.

“The expert panel on the KKNPP — headed by Prof Muthunayagam— said that there are no chances of a ‘Near Field Tsunami’ in the region. It also did not acknowledge the possibility of ‘slumps’, the under-sea phenomenon that causes a tsunami. But, after we put out our report indicating the presence of such slumps, they modified their report.

As per international norms, if any slump is found, its chemical composition must be studied.

The expert panel did not consider this,” Dr Pugazhenthi said.

Dr Ramesh, a member of the fact-finding team on the mock drill held in Nakkaneri, alleged, “The final request made to the State was the conduct of an emergency preparedness drill. The claim that such a drill was conducted in Nakkaneri is a blatant lie.”

People’s Expert Committee member M G Devasahayam said there was ample evidence to support the case against the KKNPP.

“The documents against the KKNPP are formidable and factual,” he said.