Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP)

The CNDP deeply condoles the untimely death of J. Sri Raman in Kochi on 7th November. Sri Raman was a distinguished CNDP founder-member who remained a front-ranking anti-nuclear campaigner until the very end. An eminent journalist and highly felicitous writer, he will be remembered above all as a pre-eminent peace activist in the subcontinent who viewed communal harmony at home as key to India-Pakistan friendship as well as the elimination of the region’s nuclear weapons. Little wonder then that Sri Raman should have waged many battles for peace simultaneously on several fronts.

Sri Raman, who died at 68, was the moving spirit behind many campaigns against nuclear weapons and communalism at the grassroots. The earliest of them, Journalists Against Nuclear Weapons (JANW) in Chennai, was an audacious effort to protest against the May 1998 Pokharan-II nuclear explosions, given the predominant portrayal of the tests in the mainstream media as proclamation of India’s status as a nuclear superpower. The “Media Bomb,” a collection of essays by the journalists in Chennai was educative as well as effective in exposing the jingoism and ultra-nationalism underlying the official and mainstream media stance.

The second, the Movement Against Nuclear Weapons (MANW), the umbrella body of anti-nuclear organizations, was already in the making by the time of the first anniversary of Pokharan-II. The massive public rally on the occasion had brought under a common platform like-minded groups among scientists, chiefly those in the atomic energy establishment, doctors, and trade unions in the telecom and banking sectors. But no less significant was Sri Raman’s determination to engage the very ordinary people on issues of communal harmony and peace – through public meetings on street corners, bus termini and more remote areas.

These speak to Sri Raman’s deep conviction on the importance of raising awareness among the working classes on issues of an ideological nature as on questions of life and livelihood. Since its inception, Sri Raman was convenor of MANW and also of JANW.

Sri Raman was also an active member of Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP) since its inception in the year 2000.

The 2002 state-sponsored pogrom against the Muslim minority in Gujarat left little option but to mobilize the people against the forces of majoritarian communalism. Sri Raman was of course at the forefront of the campaign to combat communalism under the banner of the Movement for People’s Unity (MPU).

In the CNDP, the fourth forum where he was a pivotal figure, Sri Raman was among those who refused to countenance any kind of equivocation on the question of unilateral nuclear disarmament. Similarly, he advocated the establishment of a United Nations convention for the abolition of nuclear weapons as an answer to the nuclear nationalism unleashed in India during the debate on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). No less vocal was his support for the establishment of a nuclear-weapons-free zone in South Asia.

Until recently, Sri Raman had – unlike many in the CNDP – had not taken a firm position on the question of nuclear energy, although he never spared criticism against official callousness on matters of safety, non-transparency and nuclear waste disposal. His reasoning was along the following lines. That nuclear weapons were brutal weapons of mass destruction is a matter of common sense and beyond doubt. On the contrary, the potential for safe nuclear energy could not be ruled out for all times. This line of thought often led him to say fondly that the Indian peace movement was unique in the sense that the CNDP was the one campaign in the world that was anti-nuclear weapons, not anti-nuclear energy also. But his close associates say that that the calamity at Fukushima had forced Sri Raman to rethink his stance.

Born in Dindigul, Tamil Nadu, Sri Raman graduated from Loyola College in Chennai. He was on the staff of “Patriot”, the “Hindustan Times” and later “The Indian Express” before becoming an independent journalist. He wrote extensively on world affairs. His work was published regularly by “Truthout” and “The Daily Times” of Lahore. His book, "Flashpoint: How the U.S., India, and Pakistan Brought us to the Brink of Nuclear War" (Common Courage Press, 2003) won wide acclaim among global peace campaigners. He had published a sheaf of poems as well.

Sri Raman’s travels as an anti-nuclear weapons campaigner took him to the United States, China, Japan and Germany. In recent times, he referred to himself as an 'India-Pakistan journalist', and he would have loved to visit Pakistan. He was also a regular contributor of book reviews in “The Hindu” and articles in “The Tribune”.

The CNDP conveys its deepest condolences to Sri Raman’s wife Papri and daughters Taranga and Varna.

Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP) Statement in Solidarity with the Struggle against the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant

Last few weeks have witnessed an intense struggle in the Koodankulam district of Tamil Nadu in India against the nuclear power project. Government of India’s plan to commission two 1,000 Megawatt VVER type reactors in Koodankulam in December 2011 has ignited the anger of people in the region who have been fighting against the setting up of the reactors since the very beginning. Instead of heeding to the people’s demand, both the Central Government as well as the State Government have displayed callous disregard for democracy by arresting a large number of peaceful protestors without the slightest provocation. Even the local MLA has complained that his plea to raise the matter in the State Assembly was rejected and that he was not allowed to speak.

People in Koodankulam have become even more apprehensive after the Fukushima accident about nuclear safety, health and radiation. The safety review report submitted by Russian state agencies to President Dmitri Medvedev in the wake of the Fukushima accident has underlined the vulnerabilities, lack of regulations and practices in the nuclear industry and has clearly pointed out that Russian reactors are completely under-prepared to face large scale disasters.

CNDP extends is solidarity to the struggling people in Koodankulam and with their demand.

We demand that the Central and State Governments stop harassing the protestors immediately.

We also demand the Central Government should hold a democratic and transparent national consultation on nuclear power projects in the country with proper assessment of economic, environmental and human cost of such expansion.

For CNDP

Admiral L Ramdas
Praful Bidwai
Achin Vanaik
J Sri Raman
Admiral Ramdas
N D Jayaprakash
Sukla Sen
Anil Chaudhary

September 16 2011

Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP)
A 124/6 Katwaria Sarai, New Delhi-16
Telefax: 011-26517814
Web : www.cndpindia.org

Press Release
19 August, 2011

Scrapping of Proposed Nuclear Power Plant in
Haripur, West Bengal


The Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP) takes note of and warmly welcomes the statement made by the West Bengal Power Minister on the floor of the state assembly on the 17th instant to the effect that the state government has decided to scrap the proposal for a nuclear power plant at Haripur. It also welcomes the assurance by the Power Minister that the present government has no plans to set up nuclear power plants in any other parts of the state.

This is a heartening development no doubt given the strong and wide misgivings about nuclear power, further reinforced by the ongoing nuclear disaster in Fukushima, Japan since March 11th last, and the huge mass resistance against the proposed nuclear power plant in Haripur, and also elsewhere including Jaitapur in Maharashtra in particular.

The CNDP urges both the central government and state governments, where nuclear power plants are scheduled to come up, to take the cue from the West Bengal government and act likewise.

Achin Vanaik
Sukla Sen
Anil Chaudhary
for CNDP

On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the first use of Agent
Orange and other herbicides on Vietnam that falls on 10 August
2011, the Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP)
expresses its unqualified support to the appeal issued by the
Vietnam Association for the Victims of Agent Orange/Dioxin
(VAVA).

The indiscriminate and wide-spread spraying of nearly 80 million
liters of dioxin-laced “Agent Orange” and other herbicides from
1961 to 1971 had wrecked havoc in Vietnam by destroying over
3 million hectares of forests, mangroves and cultivable land and
rendering over 3 million Vietnamese people crippled and disease-
stricken. Over the years, hundreds of thousands of such victims
have died in agonizing circumstances and hundreds of thousands
of their progenies were born with unimaginable birth defects. The
Agent Orange victims are a living example of the long-lasting and
horrendous effects of chemical warfare.

The United States Government, which is guilty of conducting
chemical warfare in Vietnam, has to be held accountable for
committing this horrendous war crime against the Vietnamese
people and has to be brought to justice. The U.S. Government
and the chemical companies – Dow, Monsanto, etc., which
had manufactured and supplied the toxic chemicals – must be
compelled to pay adequate compensation to all the victims of
“Agent Orange” and held responsible for remediation of the dioxin-
contaminated land and water bodies in Vietnam.

The CNDP expresses its full support to the just demands of the victims
of “Agent Orange” and, hereby, assures them that it will do all it
can to rally the support of the Government and people of India
and as well as of concerned people elsewhere in the quest of the
Vietnamese people for justice.

N. D. Jayaprakash
Achin Vanaik
J. Sri Raman
Sukla Sen
Anil Chaudhary

6 August 2011

We are shocked at the government’s sheer insensitivity in announcing on the 25th anniversary of the Chernobyl catastrophe that it is going ahead with the Jaitapur nuclear power project. This means disregarding the overwhelming opposition to the project by 40,000 local people and the larger public, the caution counselled by numerous experts, and the grave safety concerns raised by the still-unfolding Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan. These concerns are eminently reasonable. Many governments, including those in Germany, China and Switzerland, have taken them on board by adopting a “pause-and-review” approach towards reactor construction. The European Union has ordered “stress tests” on all its 143 reactors lasting many months.

Our government too promised to review its nuclear installations for safety. But the Department of Atomic Energy has conducted a wholly internal, hasty and technologically superficial exercise and declared all installations perfectly safe. This is unconvincing. What is urgently needed is an independent, thorough and transparent review of our nuclear policy and installations by a broadly representative body, which includes non-DAE personnel and civil society representatives. Pending this, projects like Jaitapur must be put on hold and their clearances revoked.

We welcome the government’s intention to separate the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board from the DAE. But the AERB’s responsibilities and powers must be defined in advance and its members selected with exemplary prudence so that only persons with the highest integrity, impartiality, and commitment to the public interest are chosen by a broad-based collegium. This is as important as choosing the Lokpal. The life and death of millions will depend on the AERB. India’s experience with regulatory authorities in telecom, insurance and hydrocarbons is unhappy. We simply cannot afford “regulatory capture” in nuclear matters.

A Gopalakrishnan, former Chairman, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board
Achin Vanaik, Professor, Political Science, Delhi University
AGK Menon, Architect and conservationist
Amit Bhaduri, Economist, Professor Emeritus, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Amit Sengupta, Journalist, Executive Editor, ‘Hard News’
Amita Baviskar, Sociologist, Delhi School of Economics
Ammu Joseph, Journalist and writer, Bangalore
Amrita Chhachhi, Sociologist, International Institute for Social Studies
Anil Chaudhary, Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace
Anuradha Chenoy, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Arun Mitra, General Secretary, Indian Doctors for Peace and Development
Aruna Roy, Mazdoor Kisan Sangharsh Samiti, Rajasthan
Arundhati Roy, Writer and Social Activist
Banwarilal Sharma, Azadi Bachao Andolan
Bharati Chaturvedi, Chitan Environmental Group
Bharti Kher, Sculptor
C Rammanohar Reddy, Editor, ‘Economic and Political Weekly’, Mumbai
Darryl D’Monte, Environmental journalist and writer, Mumbai
Deepak Nayyar, Economist and former Vice-Chancellor, Delhi University
Dunu Roy, Environment and Safety Activist, Hazards Centre, Delhi
EAS Sarma, Former Power Secretary, Government of India, Vishakhapatnam
Geeta Kapoor, Art critic, historian and writer
Girish Sant, Energy specialist, Prayas, Pune
Gulam Mohammed Shaikh, Artist, Baroda/Delhi
Harsh Kapoor, Social and Internet Activist, Delhi
Imrana Qadeer, Public Health Researcher, former JNU Professor, Delhi
Jagdeep Chhokar, former Professor, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad
Jaya Mehta, Economist and activist, Indore/Delhi
K Ashok Rao, Engineer, leader of public sector officers’ union
K. Sujatha Rao, Former Health Secretary, government of India.
Kamal Mitra Chenoy, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Kamala Bhasin, Feminist Activist, SANGAT
KN Panikkar, Historian, formerly JNU, now in Kerala
Krishen Khanna, Artist
Kuldip Nayar, Columnist, former High Commissioner to the UK
L Ramdas, Former Chief of Naval Staff, India
Lalita Ramdas, Educator and Social Activist, Raigad district, Konkan,Maharashtra
Lawrence Surendra, Environmental economist, Mysore
LS Chawla, President, Indian Doctors for Peace and Development
Meher Engineer, ex-Professor of Physics, Bose Institute, Kolkata
Mushirul Hasan, Director, National Archives of India, former vice-chancellor, Jamia Millia
MV Ramana, Physicist, currently at Princeton University
Navroz K Dubash, Senior Fellow, Centre for Policy Research, Delhi
Nikhil Desai, Energy economist and environmentalist, Ahmedabad
Nikhil Dey, Mazdoor Kisan Sangharsh Samiti Activist, Rajasthan
Nirupam Sen, Former Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations
Pamela Philipose, Director, Women’s Feature Service
PM Bhargava, Former Director, Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad
Praful Bidwai, Columnist, Nuclear Affairs Analyst
Rajeev Bhargava, Director, Centre for Studies in Developing Societies, Delhi
Ramachandra Guha, Anthropologist and Historian
Ranjit Roy Chaudhury, National Professor of Pharmacology
Ritu Menon, Feminist publisher, editor and writer
Romila Thapar, Historian, Professor Emeritus, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sadanand Menon, Art Critic and writer, Chennai
Sanjay K Biswas, Professor, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore
Satyajit Mayor, National Centre for Biological Sciences, Bangalore
Satyajit Rath, National Institute of Immunology, Delhi
Seema Mustafa, Columnist and former Editor, ‘The Sunday Guardian’
SG Vasudev, Artist, Bangalore
Shabnam Hashmi, Activist, ANHAD
Sonia Jabbar, Writer and activist
SP Shukla, Former Member, Planning Commission and Finance Secretary, GoI
Subodh Gupta, Sculptor and artist
Sudhir Chandra, Historian, Baroda university
Sudhir Chella Rajan, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
Sudhir G Vombatkere, former Major General, the Indian Army
Sujata Patel, Professor of Sociology, University of Hyderabad
Sujatha Byravan, Molecular biologist and safe food campaigner, Chennai
Surendra Gadekar, ANUMUKTI, Vedchi, Gujarat
Sumit Sarkar, Historian, Delhi
Suvrat Raju, Physicist, Harish Chandra Institute, Allahabad
Tani Bhargava, Social Activist, Delhi
Tanika Sarkar, Professor of History, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Vandana Shiva, Ecofeminist and writer-activist
Vineeta Bal, Immunologist
Vinod C Khanna, Indian Foreign Service (Retd)
Vishnu Bhagwat, Former Chief of Naval Staff, Dapoli, Ratnagiri district, Maharashtra
Vivan Sundaram, Artist
Zoya Hasan, Political scientist, Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi

CNDP strongly deplores the repression launched by the government in Jaitapur in Maharashtra’s Ratnagiri district
in order to impose a giant nuclear power station on people who resolutely oppose it. More than 20 activists have
been arrested since Maharashtra Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan visited the area on Feb 26 and failed to
persuade its people that the project is good for them.
The police have slapped externment notices and trumped-up charges on the activists, including attempt to murder.
Eminent citizens, including former Chief of Naval Staff L Ramdas, former Supreme Court judge PB Sawant and
Communist Party of India general secretary AB Bardhan, have been barred from visiting Jaitapur.
The harassment further compounds the government’s culpability in promoting an exorbitantly expensive,
inappropriate, and extremely hazardous project based on a reactor design (the French-origin company Areva’s
European Pressurised Reactor) which is untested anywhere and which has not been cleared by the nuclear
regulatory authority of any country, including France.
The world’s first EPR, under construction in Finland, is in grave trouble—delayed by 42 months, 90 percent over
budget, and mired in bitter litigation. Finnish, French, British and US nuclear regulators have raised 3,000 safety
issues about it. Yet, India is planning to install 6 EPRs with a 9,900 MW capacity at Jaitapur although the
Department of Atomic Energy cannot certify that they are safe.
Nuclear power generation is inherently hazardous because of routine radiation exposure of workers and the
public; high-level wastes which remain dangerous for thousands of years and cannot be safely stored, leave alone
disposed of; and the potential for catastrophic accidents like Chernobyl, in which 65,000 to 110,000 people
perished.
Besides carrying these generic hazards, the Jaitapur project will destroy a unique and stunningly beautiful
ecosystem in the Western Ghats, which is one of the world’s 10 greatest biodiversity hotspots, with virgin
rainforests, great mountains, and an extraordinary range of endemic plant, animal and marine species. Two great
rivers, the Krishna and the Godavari, originate there.
The region has a flourishing farming, horticultural and fisheries economy, which grows the world’s most famous
mango, the Alphonso.
The site was cleared for political reasons a week before French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s visit last December
on the basis of a flawed Environmental Impact Assessment report which does not recognise the area’s great
biodiversity or the ecosystem’s carrying capacity. The report does not even mention high-level wastes.
Going by current Finnish estimates, which will probably escalate with further design changes, the Jaitapur EPRs’
capital cost will be Rs 21 crores per MW, compared to Rs 9 crores for domestic reactors and Rs 5 crores for coalfired power. Jaitapur’s electricity will cost Rs 5 to 8 a unit—compared to Rs 2 to 3 from other sources, including
renewables.
Jaitapur is a singularly bad bargain, made worse by the undemocratic means being used to ram it down the throats
of an unwilling population. CNDP calls for the scrapping of the project.

For further information:-
Admiral L Ramdas (Retd) (09860170960) Vaishali Patil (09422696976)
Praful Bidwai (9868129242) and Anil Chaudhary (9811119347)

The Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP) expresses its deep grief and sorrow at the devastation caused by the earthquake and tsunami in Japan and the explosion at the Fukushima nuclear reactor, which reportedly suffered a loss-of-coolant accident.

The accident, in which unspecified quantities of radioactivity were released, highlights the grave inherent hazards of atomic power generation the world over, and confirms the scientific assessment that all nuclear reactor-types can undergo a catastrophic accident like Three Mile Island (US, 1979) and Chernobyl (Ukraine, 1986), irrespective of the precautions taken and safety systems installed.

An estimated 65,000 to 110,000 people perished in Chernobyl. The toll from Fukushima is as yet unknown, but is likely to be high.

The incident calls for a thorough review and transparent audit of the safety performance of all nuclear reactors in India, as well as of evacuation and other emergency procedures, which are known to be flawed.

CNDP demands a moratorium on all further civilian nuclear activities in India, including the construction of reactors at Jaitapur in Maharashtra, based on an untested French design, until India’s nuclear power policy is radically reviewed for safety, viability, appropriateness and costs.

Anil Chaudhary (9811119347)
Achin Vanaik
Praful Bidwai (24377278/79, 9868129242)

http://expressbuzz.com/edition/print.aspx?artid=227880
By A Gopalakrishnan
02 Dec 2010 11:42:00 PM IST


On November 26, the Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF) accorded environmental clearance for the 6x1650 MWe nuclear power project in Jaitapur, Maharashtra. Extensive opposition to the project, notably from the Konkan Bachao Samiti (KBS), was overruled by the MoEF in granting this clearance. Environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, in a press statement however clarified that, “I can take on board only the ecological objections raised by the KBS. I have asked the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited and its partner Areva to address the other economic, commercial, safety and technological issues. Indeed, I do believe that NPCIL must significantly improve and expand its public outreach programme”.

Areva is a predominantly state-owned nuclear power company in France, which has developed the 1650 MWe European Pressurised Reactor (EPR), based on the French N4 and the German Konvoi reactor types. But, what is the maturity of the EPR technology today? Till date, no EPR has been constructed and commissioned for operation anywhere in the world. There are four EPRs in different stages of construction elsewhere, and two of them are already facing serious problems and delay. Areva sold the first EPR to Finland and this plant construction started in 2005. Several construction and design problems have delayed the start-up of this plant to the second half of 2013 — a delay of 3.5 years, with a cost escalation of 50 per cent. France itself decided to set up the second EPR, and the construction of this unit started in December 2007. Very similar construction and safety issues have led to a 50 per cent cost increase and a delay of commissioning to 2014. China bought two EPRs, but they are moving cautiously towards completion dates of 2013 and 2014.

Realising that the EPR is in trouble, the French government asked Francois Roussely, a former chairman of the Electricite de France (EDF), in October 2009 to evaluate the status of the EPR and the French nuclear industry in general. The Roussely Report (July 2010) has concluded that the credibility of the EPR has been seriously damaged by the problems of the two reactors under construction. Roussely states, “The complexity of the EPR comes from (questionable) design choices, notably of the power level, containment, core-catcher, and redundancy of systems. It is certainly a handicap for its construction, and its cost — the EPR should therefore be further optimised based on feedback from the EPRs under construction”.

Part of the problems encountered during construction of the two EPRs relate to poor quality control and construction. Reported flaws include the poor fabrication of the pressuriser and the reactor vessel in Finland, cracks developing in base concrete at both sites, defective welds in the containment steel shells, etc. One of the serious design deficiencies pointed out to Areva in a joint letter from the French, Finnish and UK nuclear regulators is the lack of adequate redundancy in the instrumentation and control system design, a safety issue which is not yet resolved completely over the last two years.

There are other basic design issues of the EPR which could cause serious problems in the later stages of operation, those which neither the NPCIL or DAE is highlighting today. The EPR will use 5 per cent enriched uranium, as against the normal 3.5 per cent in current PWR designs, which will enable its fuel burn-up to reach in excess of 70 GWd/tonne as against 30-40 GWd/tonne in current LWRs. This improved fuel economy is touted as an advantage of the EPR. What no one has highlighted is that such high burn-up leads to much higher toxicity of the radioactive waste, with the production of a larger ‘immediate release fraction’ of radioisotopes. It is reported that according to an EDF study, EPR waste will have about four times as much radioactive bromine, iodine, caesium, etc, compared to ordinary PWRs using lower burn-up, with other reports putting these figures much higher.

Consequently, radiation doses to the workers and general public could also be correspondingly high, in case of radiological releases. These problems will persist during spent-fuel transfer, storage, reprocessing and waste disposal. Furthermore, it is reported that the higher burn-up in EPR will result in thinning of the fuel cladding, making it prone for early failure and fission product release. Since no EPR has ever been operated, there is no in-situ data on long-term clad integrity under high burn-up, and therefore the current NPCIL assurances that radiation dose rates to workers and the public will be kept within the AERB-stipulated limits have no basis.

Current cost estimate of the Finnish EPR is 5.7 billion euros. The price of each Chinese EPR is stated to be 5 billion euros. Taking the average cost of a 1650 MWe EPR as 5.3 billion euros, at the 2010 exchange rates, the cost works out to be a whopping `19.5 crore per MWe! At this rate, the six EPRs at Jaitapur alone will cost the tax-payer about `1,93,000 crore, a little over the 2G Spectrum allocation loss. In comparison, a typical 700 MWe indigenous pressurised heavy-water reactor (PHWR) would cost about `8 crore/MWe, while a supercritical-steam based coal-fired station would cost just about `5 crore/MWe.

Asked about the cost of the project, the NPCIL says it is not yet finalised. That NPCIL is indeed hiding the enormous cost of the EPR from the public is clear from the answer given by Anne Lauvregeon, CEO of Areva in an interview given to The Hindu on November 25. When asked about the EPR price, she said, “You know giving out the price depends on the customer (NPCIL, in this case). It is not for me to give the price”.

Over and above the cost of the reactor, the NPCIL will have to add on other costs which truly belong to the project. These will include the significant costs of the storage and disposal of radioactive waste from the high burn-up EPR spent-fuel, the eventual decommissioning cost, the extensive additional physical security costs including anti-aircraft batteries and extra coast guard deployment (none of which would be required if Jaitapur were to have a coal-powered station), substantial increase in nuclear fuel cost over the years, etc. If complete transparency is not demanded from the NPCIL, all such extra costs will be swept under other heads and in effect become tax-payers’ hidden subsidy to promote the prime minister’s foray into these unjustified nuclear reactor imports.

In summary, on the false premise of ensuring energy security for the nation, the PM is leading India to purchase six unproven French EPRs at an enormous cost to the exchequer. No EPR has so far been built and operated anywhere in the world, and the partial construction of two such units have already shown significant deficiencies. In the long run these EPRs are likely to have serious operational, safety and radiological release problems far in excess of current generation reactors. It is best if India does not embark on an EPR-based power project until significant operational experience is gained elsewhere with such systems.

In her November 25 interview Lauvergeon said, “Before buying something, people need to see the product. There are a lot of designs which are perfect on paper but which do not work”. Truly spoken, Lauvergeon, the Indian people shall wait till your EPRs in Finland and France gain enough operational experience, before considering to place any orders for EPRs.
(The writer is a former chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board of the Government)