Minimising risks

Even without the current spotlight on it,the question of nuclear power was always a fraught one. Part of the nuclear faultline are matters of a strictly practical nature the how,where,when and even why of every single nuclear plant. But part of the debate in fact,a significant reason for its public nature is the psychological impact of the very idea of nuclear energy. Whenever a crisis hits a nuclear unit or plant anywhere in the world,as with Chernobyl at the top of the list or Three-Mile Island or now Fukushima,it triggers responses across nuclear and non-nuclear nations ranging from the realistic to the fantastic. Yet,through all this,the relative safety of nuclear plants has been demonstrated time and again,not least in the rarity of nuclear accidents.

Its also undeniable that growing economies like India will depend increasingly on nuclear power in the coming decades. And although the prime minister and the nuclear establishment have assured the nation of immediate safety reviews at all our nuclear sites,its in the fitness of things that the government and nuclear establishment be seen to be acting on checking and upgrading nuclear safety standards to deal with multiple and simultaneous calamities. The message conveyed to the nation as well as Indias current and potential nuclear partners is as important as the action. Part of that message and a big step in safety upgrade will be the independence of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board AERB the only body in India capable of assessing the radiological impact of any nuclear activity at present from the Atomic Energy Commission,to which the regulator currently reports. This would enhance confidence in the autonomy and lack of bias in the regulators assessments in the eyes of the public and nuclear partners,and also free the AERB from any sense or circumstance of deference to the nuclear establishment.

The nuclear industry is a constantly evolving sector. Thus,nuclear states are always on a learning curve. As such,nuclear safety aims at maximum risk-assessment and corresponding safeguards. So the public needs both the government and the nuclear establishment to talk to it,engage it in a debate and explain things. But that cannot be enough. Granting the AERB more teeth and making it independent is necessary as a public policy issue,because even the best and least risky institute needs unbiased regulation.