Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Kudankulam’

Power situation in Tamil Nadu and other states

November 1st, 2012 4 comments

Reports suggest that the first reactor of the Kudankulam power plant is close to operational. With state discoms struggling, advocates of nuclear power see Kudankulam as a necessary boost to India’s struggling power sector.  The Kudankulam power plant will have two reactors.  At full capacity, the plant would produce 2 GW of energy, making it India’s largest nuclear plant, and significantly increasing India’s nuclear capacity (currently at 4.8 GW or 2.3% of  total capacity). Internationally, nuclear power plants contributed 12.3 % of the world’s electricity production in 2011.  In terms of number of nuclear reactors, India ranks 6th in the world with 20 nuclear reactors (in seven power stations across five states: Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu).  The Kudankulam power station would be Tamil Nadu’s second power station after the Madras Atomic Power Station (MAPS).

Tamil Nadu is struggling to meet electricity demand, recently moved the Supreme Court, asking the Centre for more power. Peak demand deficit (the difference between electricity supply and demand at peak periods) in the state was 17.5% in 2011-12.  The per capita consumption of electricity in the state was 1,132 kWh in 2009-10, significantly greater than the India average of 779 kWh.  Currently, electricity in Tamil Nadu is fueled by a mixture of coal (35% of capacity), renewable sources (42%) and hydro sources (12%).  A fully operational Kudankulam reactor would boost Tamil Nadu’s capacity by 6% (including state, private and centrally owned generating entities).

The interactive table below provides a state-level breakdown of key power sector indicators.  To view data in ascending or descending order, simply click the relevant column heading.  (For a detailed overview of the power sector and even more state-wise statistics, see here.)

Power statistics in the states

StatePer capita consumption, kWh (2009-10)Coal capacity, % of total capacity (Aug 2012)Nuclear capacity, % of total capacity (Aug 2012)T&D Loss, % of avl. electricity (2010-11)Peak demand deficit, % (2011-12)
Andhra Pradesh96750.131.6516.0614.80
Assam2055.880.0029.855.30
Bihar12288.590.0037.0014.40
Chhattisgarh1,54792.180.8434.694.50
Delhi1,65161.441.76NA0.10
Gujarat1,61561.432.3422.741.80
Haryana1,22271.611.4424.394.20
Himachal Pradesh1,3803.640.9214.617.10
Jammu & Kashmir95212.583.2760.0125.00
Jharkhand88092.750.0033.4615.70
Karnataka90345.371.8920.1018.90
Kerala52523.462.5019.065.10
Madhya Pradesh60254.622.9334.137.10
Maharashtra1,02859.272.5022.4922.10
Meghalaya6750.000.0029.9816.30
Orissa87465.670.00NA1.80
Punjab1,52745.492.9117.7616.90
Rajasthan73649.875.5927.627.10
Tamil Nadu1,13234.942.9618.0017.50
Uttar Pradesh34875.082.4528.862.30
Uttarakhand1,11210.990.8722.530.70
West Bengal55083.660.0023.540.90
Arunachal Pradesh4700.000.0035.602.50
Goa2,26475.176.1717.3810.60
Manipur2400.000.0043.330.90
Mizoram3770.000.0035.364.90
Nagaland2180.000.0030.775.40
Puducherry1,74381.476.9013.534.50
Sikkim85035.890.0042.445.00
Tripura3350.000.0020.940.50
All India77956.922.3023.7310.60

 

Source: Central Electricity Authority; Planning Commission; PRS.

Note: capacity for states includes allocated shares in joint and central sector utilities.

T&D (transmission and distribution) losses refer to losses in electricity in the process of delivery

 

Are there enough regulatory safeguards against nuclear power?

October 30th, 2012 No comments

The protests against the nuclear power plant at Kudankulam have intensified over the recent weeks.  The Kudankulam plant is expected to provide 2 GW of electricity annually.  However, activists concerned about the risks of nuclear energy are demanding that the plant be shut down.  The safety of nuclear power plants is a technical matter.  In this blog post we discuss the present mechanism to regulate nuclear energy and the legislative proposals to amend this mechanism.

Atomic materials and atomic energy are governed by the Atomic Energy Act, 1962.  The Act empowers the central government to produce, develop and use atomic energy.  At present, nuclear safety is regulated by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB).  Some of the drawbacks of the present mechanism are discussed below.

Key issues under the present nuclear safety regulatory mechanism

The AERB is not empowered to operate as an independent operator.  The AERB was established by the government through a notification and not through an Act of Parliament.  Its powers and functions are therefore amendable by the Department of Atomic Energy through executive orders.  The parliamentary oversight exercised upon such executive action is lower than the parliamentary oversight over statutes. 1

Furthermore, the Atomic Energy Commission that sets out the atomic energy policy, and oversees the functioning of the AERB, is headed by the Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy.  This raises a conflict of interest, as the Department exercises administrative control over NPCIL that operates nuclear power plants.

It is pertinent to note that various committee reports, including a CAG Report in 2011, had highlighted the drawbacks in the present regulatory mechanisms and recommended the establishment of a statutory regulator.  A summary of the Report may be accessed here.

Proposed mechanism

Following the Fukushima nuclear incident in 2011, the Nuclear Safety Regulatory Authority Bill, 2011 was introduced in Parliament to replace the AERB.

The Bill establishes the Nuclear Safety Regulatory Authority (NSRA) to regulate nuclear safety, and a Nuclear Safety Council to oversee nuclear safety policies that the NSRA issues.  Under the Bill, all activities related to nuclear power and nuclear materials may only be carried out under a licence issued by the NSRA.

Extent of powers and independence of the NSRA

The Bill establishes the NSRA as a statutory authority that is empowered to issue nuclear safety policies and regulations.  The Nuclear Safety Council established under the Bill to oversee these policies includes the Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy.  The conflict of interest that exists under the present mechanism may thus continue under the proposed regulatory system.

The Bill provides that members of the NSRA can be removed by an order of the central government without a judicial inquiry.  This may affect the independence of the members of the NSRA.  This process is at variance with enactments that establish other regulatory authorities such as TRAI and the Competition Commission of India.  These enactments require a judicial inquiry prior to the removal of a member if it is alleged that he has acquired interest that is prejudicial to the functions of the authority.

The proposed legislation also empowers the government to exclude strategic facilities from the ambit of the NSRA.  The government can decide whether these facilities should be brought under the jurisdiction of another regulatory authority.

These and other issues arising from the Bill are discussed here.