Premium

This is an archive article published on May 4, 2000

`If India needs energy, nuclear power has the edge’

After turning the Nuclear Power Corporation into an efficient and profit making entity, Dr Y.S.R. PRASAD, chairperson and managing directo...

After turning the Nuclear Power Corporation into an efficient and profit making entity, Dr Y.S.R. PRASAD, chairperson and managing director, handed over charge to his stopgap successor Ch Surendar, currently executive director (operations) on April 30. In an exclusive interview with D N MOORTY, Prasad takes on several ticklish issues, be it the production of nuclear power or its economics and environmental pollution due to radioactivity.

During your tenure as head of the Nuclear Power Corporation (NPC) from 1995 till now, the organisation has travelled a distance in terms of efficiency and new projects. Yet, glitches persist: For instance, Kaiga-2, which Prime Minister Vajpayee dedicated to the nation in March this year, is currently under shut down. Does this not reflect adversely on the quality of the process of indigenisation and efficiency in general?
When we completed Kaiga-2, we observed vibrations in the turbo generator, constructed, fabricated and commissioned by BHEL (Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited) which supplies all our turbines. People have been working on the problem, and though they haven’t given us a reason, they plan to return in three-four months to set things right. Other problems have cropped up in between. We expect to be back in operation soon. The problems have nothing to do with the nuclear side of the technology but with BHEL’s turbine.

Of all your PHWRs (pressurised heavy water reactors), the Maps (Madras Atomic Power Station) and Naps (Narora Atomic Power Station) units have given recurring trouble. Is it the age factor, design deficiency or the monitoring system?
Maps is performing reasonably well, as is Rajasthan-2. Narora has been performing excellently after the plant’s rehabilitation. It is now at almost 85 per cent of its capacity. But it is true that some equipment failure did occur in the units. In Madras, the failure is in the calendria inlet of the moderator system, while at Narora, we had a problem with turbine failure. That apart, the reactor system and reactor control system have performed excellently. Now even Narora is meeting targets for the last three years.

In the West, a reactor is phased out once its life is over. Shouldn’t Tarapur’s BWR (boiling water reactor), which is perhaps the oldest, be phased out? Anyway the BWR technology is considered outdated.
First, it is not true that BWR technology is outdated; Japan has built an advanced BWR. But it is true that PWRs (pressurised water reactors) are the largest in operation. Everything depends on economy of operation. In the United States, the costs of manpower and equipment are higher. Economics of scale matter to them because they can bring in capital and invest large amounts on higher capacity stations with modern and increased automatised functions. Bigger stations with advanced modern reactors cost less than old stations. Such old stations are then decommissioned.

There is also the safety factor in terms of human deployment. Manpower is reduced in modern reactors, and they do not have high calibre manpower like we do.

Some countries have reactors that are operating for 30 years. It is not that a plant should be closed down after completion of three of four decades. As long as the in service inspections indicate that the health of the reactors is good, we will continue to operate them.

Story continues below this ad

There is feverish activity to increase nuclear power capacity. We have the Kudankulam project with 2,000 Mwe and the Tarapur projects with another 1,000 Mwe, Kaiga-2 and Raps-3 have already joined the grid, Kaiga-1 and Raps-4 will soon go critical and another 1,000 Mwe from the PFBR for which work will begin next year… In all, an added capacity of 4,500 Mwe by the year 2,008, giving you about 7,000 Mwe in all. Given the constraints in funding for new projects, how will the NPC meet the 20,000 Mwe target by the year 2020?
Before last year we had 1,800-odd Mwe. We are going to have 880 this year. We are adding 3,000 more. At Rajasthan-3 and 4, we plan to put four 500 Mwe units. So we are progressing well.

Let me ask you one question: the main requirement to improve the standard of living in energy. The only way to produce electricity today is thermal or nuclear power. Thermal power contributes considerably to pollution; nuclear power is definitely more benign. Also internationally, a considerable amount of safety technology is incorporated in the design. The country needs power, so nuclear power is a reasonable option before us. The costs involved in reducing environmental pollution due to thermal power and the infrastructure needed to move coal through large distances make it expensive. Moreover, coal reserves will dry up in a hundred years. We need a long-term perspective; thus nuclear power has the edge.

What about the cost factor? You always talked of cheap nuclear power at no more that Rs 1.80 per unit. Kaiga power was projected at around Rs 2, but it is now expected to cost Rs 3.
What was the projected cost of Enron power when it came to India? Rs 1.50, but now it costs as much as Rs 4.80. And you accept that without saying anything. Whereas with respect to power that is developed in this country, after adding value to imported technology, you ask all sorts of questions. All I had were only one or two plants and the rest have been developed indigenously, whereas Enron built its plants all round the world. Yet you don’t question their tariff, which is given to us without any value addition.

There is also criticism that the NPC indulges in grandstand tactics in projecting the health and efficiency of its plants. For instance, the current 80 per cent capacity utilisation is not based on original installed capacity but re-rated or de-rated capacities with respect to several power plants. Maps is de-rated to 160 Mwe from the originally installed 220 Mwe. Is this because a sufficient margin was not provided for while constructing these plants?
Narora, Kaiga and Kakrapara are all calculated at 220 Mwe. Only in Tarapur do we calculate at 160 and Madras at 170 instead of 200. At Tarapur power station, within two years of its operation one of the equipment, the re-circulating heat exchanger that’s part of the re-circulating system and is supplied by another country became inoperable and had no replacement. Given the economics of the design, it was not easy to replace it. So we decided to operate it instead at 160 Mwe without using the re-circulation loop.

Similarly, at Madras the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board has authorised us to operate it at only 170 because of the changes that happened in the internal set up in the calendria. Now we have planned to change that system along with the coolant tubes. Then it will automatically come back to 220 Mwe. So it is very unfair to say that is has happened because of any error in our design. We are operating as per the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board clearance. We go by their norms.

Since you have to go by AERB norms and you are also answerable to the Atomic Energy Commission, isn’t the independence of managerial and economic functions hampered and the NPC’s growth affected?
In the last five years, the NPC has come out as a strong pillar of the Atomic Energy Commission and the biggest pillar of the Department of Atomic Energy. We have been operating very, very efficiently. Of course, AERB has its functions and conceptions. That is part of the game. Under the present circumstances, the NPC has done much better than might have been possible.

The general perception is that the low-grade plutonium which is coming out of the PHWRs is being recycled and converted into weapons-grade plutonium-239. Don’t you think that the nuclear power programme has to be de-linked from the weapons programme to avoid charges of dual purposes technology of a civilian set up?
Let me put it this way. Normally in natural uranium reactors, there is a lower amount of irradiation and better quality plutonium, but that is not the intention of our nuclear power reactors to be sourced. We sourced it because it is very difficult, meaning very costly to make enriched fuel. Whereas preparing natural uranium is very simple. We wanted to use our system for peaceful utilisation of all our uranium. And heavy water moderated reactors are more efficient and will produce more plutonium. It is the most important material for our breeder technology. It also happens to be the material used in nuclear bombs, but that is not the main intention. We require good plutonium for our fast breeder technology. So our power reactor programmes have nothing to do with weapons related programmes. But if our policy changes… I do not want to go into that.

There is concern that nuclear waste management has still not come of age and effluents from reactors like Tarapur pose health hazards.
Frankly, nuclear power waste management is very good and safe, because we don’t produce anything other than what is there in the fuel itself. Whether nuclear waste or the fuel itself or the fission products, very little escapes into the primary heat transport system. Ultimately, the amount we are putting out is only 2 to 3 per cent of internationally permitted limits. So there is no question of environmental effects because of the operation of our plants. Whatever waste is there is absorbed in resins and collected into sub-soil systems.

The main thing is in the fuel, one of which is plutonium. Once it extracted, most of the radioactivity is minimised. Look at the Americans. Of the 103 reactors which have operated through the last 30 years, they have not still finalised how to dispose of their waste. What India opted is, take out this plutonium and the remaining activity will be reduced. The technology for this has been developed by the BARC as it is responsible for the safe disposal of nuclear waste. It is only during re-processing that plutonium radioactivity is generated. What happened in Tarapur is not because of the nuclear power station.

Trump announces TikTok deal, surprise China visit ‘early next year’ after call with Xi

World12 hr ago

Trump and Xi had a successful phone call, addressing trade, Fentanyl, and TikTok. They plan to meet at APEC Summit and for Trump to visit China, with Xi visiting the US. Congress wants TikTok to sell its US assets or shut down, but Trump has not enforced this due to the app's value and progress.

View all shorts

Live Blog

Photos

In pics: From concept supercars to electronic SUV's: Bharat Mobility Global Expo 2025 was all about innovation

In Pics: From Concept Supercars to Electric SUVs – Innovation at Bharat Mobility Global Expo 2025