A A A
Change Text Size

M V Ramana

Flunking Atomic Audits

CAG Reports and Nuclear Power
Vol - XLVII No. 39, September 29, 2012 | M V Ramana

The recent Comptroller and Auditor General's report on the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board and, more broadly, on nuclear safety regulation has highlighted many serious organisational and operational flaws. The report follows on a series of earlier CAG reports that documented cost and time overruns and poor performance at a number of nuclear facilities in the country. On the whole, the CAG reports offer a powerful indictment of the department of atomic energy and its nuclear plans.

Inadequate Basis for Safety of the PFBR

Vol - XLVI No. 52, December 24, 2011 | Ashwin Kumar and M V Ramana

A comment on "The Limits of Safety Analysis: Severe Nuclear Accident Possibilities at the PFBR" by Ashwin Kumar and M V Ramana (EPW, 22 October 2011), followed by a response by the authors themselves.

The Limits of Safety Analysis: Severe Nuclear Acciden Possibilities at the PFBR

Vol - XLVI No. 43, October 22, 2011 | Ashwin Kumar and M V Ramana

The Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor that is being built in Kalpakkam in Tamil Nadu has the potential to undergo severe accidents that involve the disassembly of the reactor core. Such accidents could release sufficient energy to fracture the protective barriers around the core, including the containment building, and release large fractions of the radioactive material in the reactor into the surroundings. The designers of the PFBR have made choices aimed at making the reactor cheaper rather than safer. The safety assessment of the PFBR points to some fundamental problems with how nuclear technology is regulated.

Feeding the Right Wolf

Vol - XLVI No. 11, March 12, 2011 | M V Ramana

Bridging Partition: People's Initiatives for Peace between India and Pakistan edited by Smitu Kothari and Zia Mian with Kamla Bhasin, A H Nayyar and Mohammad Tahseen (Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan), 2010; pp 360, Rs 495.

The Other Side of Nuclear Liability

Vol - XLV No. 16, April 17, 2010 | M V Ramana and Suvrat Raju

The draft nuclear liability bill indemnifies the supplier of a nuclear plant and caps the liability of the operator in the event of an accident. The indemnity for suppliers is meant to please multinational plant vendors who wish to be free of liability even for accidents that result from a design flaw. The cap on operator liability is far lower than the potential damage that a nuclear accident could cause. This clause is designed to facilitate the entry of domestic big business into the nuclear market by ensuring that domestic operators will not be held responsible in the eventuality of damage following an accident. Hence the bill transfers risks for a nuclear mishap onto the people at large. Furthermore, it offers almost no financial disincentive for unsafe behaviour on part of the operators and suppliers of nuclear plants.

Safety First? Kaiga and Other Nuclear Stories

Vol - XLV No. 07, February 13, 2010 | Ashwin Kumar and M V Ramana

The November 2009 exposure of employees at the Kaiga nuclear power plant to tritiated water is not the first instance of high radiation exposures to workers. Over the years, many nuclear reactors and other facilities associated with the nuclear fuel cycle operated by the Department of Atomic Energy have had accidents of varying severity. Many of these are a result of repeated inattention to good safety practices, often due to lapses by management. Therefore, the fact that catastrophic radioactive releases have not occurred is not by itself a source of comfort. To understand whether the dae's facilities are safe, it is therefore necessary to take a closer look at their operations. The description and discussion in this paper of some accidents and organisational practices offer a glimpse of the lack of priority given to nuclear safety by the dae. The evidence presented here suggests that the organisation does not yet have the capacity to safely manage India's nuclear facilities.

Violating Letter and Spirit: Environmental Clearances for Koodankulam Reactors

Vol - XLIII No. 51, December 20, 2008 | Divya Badami Rao and M V Ramana

The environmental clearance offered to the Koodankulam reactors in Tamil Nadu is not based upon a careful examination of all the potential impacts on the environment and livelihoods nor does it incorporate public concerns.

Going MAD: Ten Years of the Bomb in South Asia

Vol - XLIII No. 26-27, June 28, 2008 | M V Ramana and Zia Mian

India and Pakistan have been talking peace since 2003, yet they have continued to expand their nuclear arsenals. This suggests a failure both of imagination and of political will to seriously engage with the nuclear danger. The peace process does not seem to recognise the fact that since the two countries conducted their nuclear tests in 1998 there has been a war and a major military crisis, both prominently featuring nuclear threats. Nuclear denial in south Asia is not a symptom of inattention, or passivity in the face of an overwhelming problem. It is deliberate blindness to the contradiction between word and deed. India and Pakistan talk of peace while pouring scarce resources into developing their nuclear arsenals, the infrastructure for producing and using them, and doctrines aimed at fighting a nuclear war.

Uranium Mining in Meghalaya: Simmering Problem

Vol - XLII No. 52, December 29, 2007 | M V Ramana and U A Shimray

There is intense opposition to the uranium mining project in the West Khasi Hills district of Meghalaya. Yet the state government and central institutions in charge of nuclear energy are intent upon continuing with the project.

Masks of Empire: Ideas Have Consequences

Vol - XLII No. 48, December 01, 2007 | M V Ramana

Ideas Have Consequences M V Ramana On October 1 of this year, speaking at the council on foreign relations, New York, Indian external affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee said,