Tuesday, December 1, 2015

Alternate solutions to Mulla periyar dam

Alternative paths to Mullaperiyar dam controversy
Prof. T.|Shivaji Rao,[fisheries report on lake]
Director,center for Environmental studies,
Gitam university , Visakhapatnam.
The Director said that the Mullaperiyar dam did not meet modern safety norms and was under-designed for hydrological safety. If the Mullaperiyar dam collapsed, it will cause not only loss of lives of lakhs of people but also an economic disaster affecting the two States and the nation. Lakhs of acres of agriculture land in Tamil Nadu would become barren for want of water.
In a press statement, Mr, Rao said that the Mullaperiyar dam did not fulfil three goals of public safety, “The first goal is based on the geological foundations, seismic potential and seismicity of the area. The second goal pertains to structural safety of the dam based on maximum credible earthquake including hydrological safety and spillway design flood. The third safety goal for the dam pertains to the environmental safety that comprises on risk analysis, dam break analysis, emergency response, disaster management including emergency evacuation plans and cost benefit analysis. In the case of the 116-year-old Mullaperiyar dam, none of these safety criteria was considered.”
He said that the dam could not withstand the stresses resulting from peak ground accelerations due to a 6.5 magnitude earthquake at a shallow focal depth in close proximity of the dam. Even a strong Koyna dam cracked in some parts in 1969 due to an earthquake of 6.5 magnitude and caused serious damage.
The Mullaperiyar dam was designed for historical maximum flood is 86 lakh cubic feet per second (cusecs) and the design flood for spillway discharge is 1.22 lakh cusecs. However, the extreme flood magnitude in terms of safety works out to 2.44 lakh cusecs based criteria published by the International Commission on Large Dams.
“Since Mullaperiyar dam is thus under-designed both from seismological and hydrological safety aspects this dam is inevitably bound to collapse irrespective of the pronouncements of the engineering experts who could not stop the collapse of more than 40 dam bursts in India including the masonry dams of Tigra in Madhya Pradesh, Kundali in Maharashtra, Chickhole in Karnataka and Kadhakwasla in Maharahstra.”
He said that Tamil Nadu was failing to read the writing on the wall for want of dam safety studies and was indirectly promoting man-made catastrophe like the Bhopal disaster in spite of the forewarnings.
“Since Mullaperiyar dam is a prescription for disaster it must be prevented by the whole nation by exerting pressure on the Prime Minister to resolve the problem by building a new dam even without dismantling the existing dam by forming a corporation on the lines of the one used for building Tehri and Sardar Sarovar Project.” 

 Jayalalitha must realise that just as the recent abnormal range in chennai andTamilnadu have flooded all the streets in Chennai and drowned most ofthe houses due to abnmormal Mullaperiyar dam the old dammay burst and flash floods may kill 35 lakhs of people in Kerala state and simentously the periyar dam will be disabled to supply releave order to Tamilnadu with result that lakhs of Farmers in south Tamilnadu may commit suicides . Hence she must take initiative to solve Mulla periyar dam cotraversy by requesting the prime minister to construct 4 or 5 small dams all along the length of the Mulla periyar river up to the neighbourhood of the existing old Mulla periyar dam . In such a case the flood water touching Mulla periyar dam can be stored at different places upstream and the last block of water storage touching the existing dam will be limited to 5 to 10 T.M.C.only for ensuring the F.R.L. at mulla periyar dam to increase the water supply to Tamilnadu while simentously providing safety to the lives of 30 lakhs people of Kerala . Hence the demand of Kerala state for a new dam can be met as objective of a new dam demanded by Kerala can be met by this new proposal of multiple smaller dams  the catchment of MKulla periyar dam . Let jayalalitha give the option for asn alternative dam demanded by Kerala to be built on the upstream of Idukki dam far below the existing Mulla periyar dam.

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Radiation - Fluctuations and impacts

Radiation - exposure – Fluctuations and impacts

Director, center for environmental studies,
Gitam university, Visakhapatnam.
According to the experts Bushburg of university of California when the radioactive plume passes overhead. Radiation particles fall on you and you will be contaminated outside. But this can be eliminated by a shower bath and change of clothes and it will keep dose to a person below 1 rem or 10 MSV . That is why first EPZ is kept as 10 miles (16km) . If doses are less than 1 rem there are no health effects. Japan reported on 17.3.2011 0.17 MSV per hour at 30K.M. Which is high level were 1- 10 percent and they must persist for 60hours to bring 10 MSV or 1 rem of radiation, not a high dose to bother.
            Sheltering in a distant place is effective form of protection, but it should not be along the plume path.
            Sheltering of people from     20 to 30 KM of Fukushima is ment to minimize ingestion of  radioactivity and to prevent the skin and clothing to get contaminated as the plume below 1 rem or 10 MSV  is treated as healthy dose with no health effects.
             A 1100 MW Nuclear plant has the Nuclear reaction caused by 100 tonnes of uranium oxide fuel in 50,000 packed fuel rods which are tubes of 0.5 diameter of Zirconium  alloy the reactorcore is placed in a thik steam pressure vessel through which 18 tonnes of water is pumped per second to takeaway the heat that is used for making pressure steam which drives a turbine that is linked with a Generator that produces electricity. The fuel rods are kept at 3400 centigrade by circulating cooling water for removes  heat from the rods and if this flow cooling water is blocked the fuel temperature rises to 12000   centi grade and then the Zirconium tubes begin to melt and with this core getting melted , the fuel and the large quantities of radioactivity breaches  all the safety barriers and pushes its way into the open atmosphere. Alternative means are used to flood the the reactor core in emergencies to avoid core melt down and to maintain integrity of the containment building, if the emergency core cooling system fails, a cloud  of radioactivity  will enter the atmosphere  and will be carried by the winds which deposit fissions products of the core in a ribbon pattern downwind for hundreds of miles from the reactor. Health hazardous due to this contamination of Air-water and soil, causes physical, economic and social damages in the Zone of influence. Dosage of radioactivity are estimated and preventive and curative measures , in sheltering the people and giving them medicines and also evacuating people to safe Zones, within  the prescribed time schedules damages to crops, and milk are also estimated to take public health protection  measures.

            A large population can be exposed to a dangerous dose of radioactivity in many ways .Such an event is inevitable result of even the most limited nuclear war. It can happen if an accident to a nuclear reactor caused its containment vessel to burst and allowed material from the core to escape into the atmosphere. The inadvertent release from a reactor of water or gases baring radioactive nuclei would create the danger of an exposure of lesser magnitude still another possibility is an accident during the manufacture, transportation, reprocessing the storage of radioactive material for nuclear reactors or nuclear weapons .
            There are large differences in the amounts of radioactivity that could be released in such events and so each possibility must be considered separately. Who will describe the radioactivity that would probably   each of three events. The first is the detonation of a thermonuclear weapon at a ground level. The second is the melting melting of the core of a nuclear reactor and the bursting of its containment vessel. With a resulting escape of radioactivity. the third is the explosion of a thermo-nuclear warhead on a nuclear reactor.
            We want to emphasize that we shall not include in these comparisons the blast and the heat that constitute the prompt.Exposiveeffect of a thermonuclear weapon. We shall examine and compare only the delayed effects brought on by the release of radioactivity. It emerges none the less that the detonation of a nuclear weapons far more to be reared than any accident of a weapon on a reactor is many times more damaging than the detonation of a weapon on the ground. The nuclear attack turns the reactor into a devastating radiological weapon.
In the course of decay of radioactivity in the course of the decay the   nucleus expels an electron.  Within this context is called a beta ray. Such transformations can again leave the nucleus in an excited state, from which it returns to a lower energy level by emitting electromagnetic radiation.      
The fall out is radioactive in part because some of the newly created nuclei are unstable in general they have an excess of neutrons. The instability is relieved when a neutron is transformed into a proton by the process called bets decay. |IN the course of the decay the nucleus expels an electron which in the context is called a beta ray. Such transformations can again leave the nucleus in an excited statye from which t returns to a lower energy level by emitting electromagnetic radiation, mainly gamma rays. The fallout particles continue to emit bĂȘte and gamma rays for many decades after the explosion.
Still it has been  established that if the human body is exposed to more than 500 or 600 rem in an interval not much longer than a day or two, survival is almost impossible.IF THE DOSE IS BETWEEN 200 AND 450 REM.Survival is possible but by no means assured , even if medical care is available. All things considered, it seems reasonable  that a dose of hundred rems in a day implies mortality of 50% or more. Exposal of population  to 100 rems in the same period causes sickness and some deaths. At this dose many people may recover even without medication .
In caliculating land area becoming inhabitable due to radiation we shall take the maximum acceptable dose to 2 rems per year and this is 10 times EPA dose and morethan 20 times background radiation . It is also less than 5 rems per year. The present upper dose for radiation workers. Astandard of 2 rems  per year, may be adopted in the aftermath of a nuclear accident. In nuclear war 2 rems per year is force d on poor people forced to  50 rems that make 50%  fatal and cancer .In some people after some years . In one nuclear accident the total loss of coolent to the fuel rods in the core occurred and the consequent more over heat caused melting which maded contact with water used for cooling and the steam explosion caused the containment vessel was damaged leading to radioactive release into the environment . Another accident is the over heating of the core leading to hydrogen and other flammable gases , which mix with oxygen in the air and then ignite and explode . Again the containment vessel is breached  and radioactivity escapes into atmosphere .
The lower dose rate and the smeller size of the contaminated area due to accident suggest that people might be evacuated before they inhaled much radioactivity dust . This is the principle danger due to reactor accident, and it involves that land as to be decontaminated and afterwards it will be available for reoccupation after atleast one year at distant places(170 to 200km) after one year and 20 years(Upto 80 kilometers) in short distance from the reactor.

Monday, November 2, 2015

Haryana reactors are timebombs to New Delhi



Monday, November 2, 2015

How Haryana Nuclear reactors are time bombs to New Delhi regions and neighbourhoods

 PROF T. SHIVAJI RAO[high costs][MOEFguidelines,some violated] [subsidy Act][myths of safety] 
Fukushima accident cost$250 billion,equivalent to 15 lakh crores of rupees business,reactor accdent costs]
 about:blank [accident] [nuke accident costs] [accident cost] at pickering ,Darlington,canada] [nuclear disaster damaging costs]
[Fuel- assembly]
fukushima spread map] [How Reactor Works,in colour animation][costs] 
[example of nuclear accident-emergency preparedness planning] 
[NIDM Guidelines for nuclear disasters,india ][fukushima details][fukushima data][accident scenarios][hanford releases]
 Director, Center for Environmental Studies
GITAM University[Makhijani][routine releases from canada][routine releases,NPP]]  [EIA manual][spread of Fukushima Radiation  in  the world] 
In Nature, The Uranium ore contains the Uranium-238 at is 99.3%  and the remaining 0.7% is Uranium-235.  Uranium-238 and Uranium-235  in nature are least harmful.  But business people and other vested interests dig the Uranium ore and convert  the least harmful Uranium-235  into the fuel form of Uranium-235  by purifying it to make a fuel by enriching it to about 4% of Uranium-235 that is packed in pellets and inserted into the core of the nuclear reactor for producing both electricity and harmfull  materials for making the bomb  when the nuclear atom in the reactor is given a blow  by a neutron, enormous heat and other poisonous Radio-active atoms like Xenon, Barium, Cesium, Strontium, Plutonium and other dangerous radioactive substances are produced.  These radioactive substances are naturally discharged into the air and water by several ways and  when they enter into the environment consisting of air, water and soil and foods like vegetables, fishes, prawns they ultimately get into human beings and produce cancers and birth defects in generations of people for many decades to come.  These poisonous radioactive substances  destroy natural and human life and culture and convert lands upto hundreds of kilometers into permanent nuclear burial grounds.
How the  harmless Uranium ore materials in nature are converted into destructive and killer materials by man can be understood by the following simple example. For instance king cobras live in nature in anthills in forests and lead their normal life peacefully by catching their prey for food during nights.But greedy people go and poke their iron rods into their abodes and disturb the Cobras when they become angry and bite the trespassers to inflict death over them by their poisons.   Similarly, the selfish people are mining the harmless Uranium and converting it into harmful  Enriched Uranium and then using it to produce electricity by means of the Nuclear plants and in the process they are producing Radioactive pollutants that poison man and nature slowly due to routine releases of radioactivity into the environment.  In course of time if an accident occurs in the Nuclear plant due to several reasons like in Fukushima or Chernobyl, the poisonous pollutants are thrown into the atmosphere and they kill thousands of people slowly and inflict cancer to millions of people living downstream upto hundreds of Kilometers as in case of Fukushima and Chernobyl accidents. 
         The Nuclear plant operators are misleading the public by stating that Nuclear power is safe and cheap just like the medical representatives of various pharmaceutical companies praise before the doctors about the virtues of their medical tablets and tonics as part of their sale promotion activity the nuclear authorities are praising the nuclear plants as safe and cheap energy producers which is  very wrong.  This misinformation is dangerous to public health and welfare because in European states almost all people agree that safety of Nuclear power is a Myth as confirmed by Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany. She had consulted the genuine experts on nuclear plants and realized that nuclear safety is a myth and ordered for gradual closure of all the nuclear plants in Germany.  If Indian Prime Minister and Union Cabinet Ministers including the Chief Ministers of the states  want to know the truth about the safety of the nuclear power plants they must go and visit advanced countries like Germany and Japan  and discuss the issue with foreign experts.  so that they can refrain from promoting nuclear plants which ruin natural life systems including the lives of flora and fauna including animal and human populations in several countries all over the world . For more scientific details see the above web sites on this topic prepared by independent experts. 

Environmental impact:-  In order to assess the cost benifit analysis risk analysis Environment Impact ,disaster management every Nuclear plant must prepare an Environment impact Assessment (E.I.A.) this report  is placed for public hearing in all the areas likely to be affected by the reactors. But in India               
            Environmental Impact Analysis reports are fabricated by consultants according to the national Green Tribunal and also according to the Chief Justice of India, S.H.Kapadia  who said “If you leave report preparation to the project proponent, I am sorry to say the person who pays will get the answers he asks for” and hence he called for a change in the system of preparation of E.I.A. reports for the development projects.Even today the E.I.A. reports are not prepared comprehensively and hence are harming public interests.  See website 
Tepco, the fukushima plant owner,  is expected  to pay 1.02 trillion (about 50 thousand crores in indian rupees) yen up to March 31 in compensation to people affected by the Fukushima accident.According to an October report of government investigation the company finances as Compensation may total 4.5 trillion (about 250 thousand crores  in rupees) yen in the first 2 years of the disaster, In the context of Fukushima disaster,the Haryana nuclear plant must be considered as its accident costs Rupees four lakh crores due to an accident while its initial cost is only RS@24,000 crores and so uneconomical and highly risky,likely to ruin  lakhs of lives of delhi and Haryana regions.
Haryana Nuclear reactors are considered to be safe by the Government and that the site is suitable for them. But Environmentalists consider the Reactors as a prescription for a national disaster for the reasons mentioned below.
1.(a).Seismically Risky site makes Nuclear plant explode:- A glance into seismic aspects of the plant site, shows that the plant  is located in zone III rd and the eastern regions of Haryana are located in zone IV implying that  Haryana  Eastern zone can be expected to experience, high Earthquakes of about 8 magnitude on the Richter scale and that means peak level  accelerations  in the state and hence the shaking Impacts can spread  from  Eastern zone  to the Western zone in which Gorakhpur lies .In fact a recent Earthquake in the region as caused many towns in Haryana to experience shaking of buildings.see website:
1.(b).The Hazard Map prepared by the state also source that Zone III will experience  Earthquake damages corresponding to intensity scale of 7 points. According to Russian standards the experts add two points more  to the local sight intensity value for Building heavy structures. So Gorakhpur  site will face Earthquakes of intensity 9 points in near future  which according to Russian standards will be Hazardous as the damazing effects show collapse of buildings and disruption of pipe lines. Consequently the Nuclear plant faces an explosion. Which costs damages of Rs. 4 lakh crores as against the initial cost of Rs. 24,000 crores estimated for the plant . Since this plant is Hazardous and uneconomical it should be cancelled. Hence the Nuclear plant will experience high shaking effects which may cause Nuclear accidents. Thus Gorakhpur site is not safe for Nuclear plant.
2.a.Water needs of the reactors:- As regards water the Haryana Government has sanctioned 320 cusecs of water  for the plant from the Fathehabad branch of  the  Bhakra canal. Electricity power stations can use large quantities of water. They usually use river , lake, dam, or sea water and as such are located  close to large and reliable water sources. The water is needed to turn the turbines that drive the generators. To do this, water is turned into high pressure steam by the boiler or nuclear reactor. This steam is then cooled,  so that the water can be pumped through the system again. The amount of water a power station uses and consumes depends on the cooling technology. water is also assential for cooling the reactor and also spent fuel storage tanks. 
2b.Unreliable and inadequate water causes Nuclear explosion:- But in a research note submitted to the parliament of Australia on 4.12.2006 states that water withdrawal for Nuclear steam based on once – through cooling is 227 124 liters per megawatt hour of a Nuclear plant . According to this standard Haryana plant needs more water for safety purposes.  But this water alotment violates the agreement between punjab and Rajastan , on the utilization of Bhakra water which according to 1959 Agreement between the states has to be used only for irrigation and Hydro- power generation, and it cannot be used for Nuclear – power generation and that too, by denying water for drinking and irrigation in about 1.5 lakh acres of Fertile land that produces the food, the basic  requirement for the survival of mankind.Moreover the Farmers of Punjab, Haryana and Rajastan are agitating for more water from this canal for their Agriculture. Punjab Government says that since Haryana is not a riparian state, they have no right to use the waters of Bhakra canal and hence Sikhs are agitating to draw full water flow of Bhakra canal for diverting the same for lands  in Punjab. Hence Gorakhpur reactors will face water shortage sometime or other,  as the  punjab   terrorists may plan  to damage canal Banks or the Farmers may use pumps and dig  many open wells along the banks of the canal to draw more water from the canal,  and consequently Haryana will get less water from the canal. During accident conditions the plant  requires abnormal quantities of water for cooling  the heat generated in the core – cooling system and spent Fuel Rods storage tanks. Since 5320 cubic meteres per hour of waste water from the plant containing radioactivity will be discharged  into the canal, all the water which is going to be used for  drinking and irrigation  in the downstream areas will pose high- health risks to lakhs of population, both humans and animals including Agriculture products.
3.Improper waste disposal:- With regard to solid waste disposal. The ash and  scrubbed  water after solidification will be put into cement containers which will be put into trenches, and this will pose risks in case of local accidents.
4..Nuclear pollutants promote health hazards:- With regard to safety and disaster management,the plant authorities claim that Nuclear power production is entirely safe. But this claim is very wrong, because any addition of radioactivity to the Background level radiation causes a proportional increase in the incidence of cancer and ill- health, as per the latest reports.
5. Improper disaster management:- With regard to disaster management in case of anticipated accidents ,the N.P.C.I. L. should have prepared accident cum  disaster scenario, indicating the concentration of Radioactive  substances that  are likely to be  emitted  into the atmosphere and their concentrations deposited at different distances  from  the plant up to about 200k.m. Based upon these concentrations the human population likely to the exposed to Radioactivity not more than 1 milli sievert per year dosage must be shifted  to distant places and some people should be kept in their houses and given iodine tablets, to avoid getting cancer. But N.P.C.I.L. has  not made these calculations to decide on disaster management plan. Hence the Nuclear plant is unsafe to protect public health and Environment. So it must be cancelled.
6.Absence of off-site disaster plan:- N.P.C.I.L. states that the offsite disaster management plan will be prepared in consultation with district Authorities only  when the plant goes into operation. This is  not correct. This plan must be made before the site selection. Because after the site is selected and the Nuclear plant constructed and if they find that the evacuation  of the victims of dissater cannot  be implemented within stipulated time, it will be a belated discovery that the site is unsuitable and unsafe. There will be serious damage to   public health and the cost of damage due to compensating the victims might run into 4 to 5 lakhs crores of rupees making the state and the central Government economically Bankrupt. Hence the disaster management plan should be prepared before site selection and the mock drills must be conducted to find out if all the people likely to be exposed to excess Radioactivity can be saved by sheltering and evacuation  by providing  the required facilities intime.
7.Irresponsibility of N.P.C.I.L. for off-site emergency plans:- A.E.R.B. states that off-site emergency plan must be made and implemented by the local district collector in consultation with Nuclear plant authorities. This means that the plant owners do not take any responsibility for ensuring the safety of the public and the Environment even in case of accidents. Unfortunately the local district collector, and the local administration are unfit for this task as they are not experts in the field of disaster management. Moreover all these state officers are subject to frequent transfers and hence none of them can be held responsible for the accidents caused by human errors.Most Nuclear plants failed in ensuring public safety due to such human errors. Since a vast area  from Gorakhpur to New – Delhi will have more than 10 Districts not one of the district collectors can implement disaster management plans properly and hence lakhs of people and cattle population will be poisoned. Hence the Nuclear plant must be cancelled as public safety cannot be ensured as per the Environmental Impact Assessment report for Haryana Nuclear plant.
8.Impact of reactor accidents on the public :- If  the Fukoshima reactor accidents scenario is super- imposed over  the Gorakhpur reactors or if SIZE-WELL reactor ACCIDENTS used for Gorakhpur reactors, highly radiactive Nuclides like Xenon, crypton, iodine, strontium, cesium, and other radioactive substances will be coming out of these stacks of Gorakhpur reactors and they will get deposited on the ground all along the path of the plume, so that all places up to and  including New Delhi itself  will be poisioned by radioactivity , and millions of people on the way between Gorakhpur and New Delhi will be poisioned along with cattle population and the lands will be converted into Nuclear burial grounds . Thus Haryana Nuclear reactors will be almost working as Atom Bombs  over New Delhi and other places depending upon the prevailing wind speeds and directions as can be observed from the Fukushima Nuclear accident scenarios .The chief minister of Delhi, Mr. kejriwal, an educationalist must be held responsible for not  inform the public about these nuclear Hazards. So that people can agitate to save their Lands, cattle well and there famillies of the present and future generations of people.
9.Irresponsibility of Mr. Kejriwal,:- Chief minister of Delhi state,since Mr.Kejriwal is a technolagist he cannot be expected to remain a silent spectator to the impending Haryana Nuclear reactor explosions due to various reasons mentioned above and the resulting ruination of public health and welfare of lakhs of people in the villages and towns of Delhi state and the surrounding areas due to the impending explosion of Nuclear reactors coming up at Gorakhpur of Haryana state .Which will make Delhi region a Nuclear burial ground in the near future. He must take up this issue with the central Government and educate the people on the Hazards of people of Nuclear power and insist on changing the location of the Nuclear plant to a safer place in the remote deserts of Rajastan. He must insist on alternate methods of producing electricity by using natural gas, wind power, bio-mass , Hydro-power generation and lignate coal to be imported from Tamilnadu as is being done in Uttar pradesh .

It is defined  as the chance of facing danger or loss. For Nuclear plant ,the risk is defined as the probability of an accident multiplied by the costs of damage  as caused by the Nuclear accidents.A literature review shows that Nuclear accident probability is placed by experts at 0.15 to 1.5, by  Max planck  Institute of experts of Germeny. While other experts put the probability of an accident at 1 in 10 .U.S.authorities( G.A.O.) reported that the cost of accident at the  Indian Point Nuclear plant could reach 15 billion dollars and during bad weather conditions the costs may be 10 times higher. 
since an American dollar is Rs.60,Rs. 50 at present,$1 million =Rs.6crores and $15 billion =Rs.90,000crores or one lakh crore rupees.So Nuclear accident costs,Rs one to ten lakh crores of Rupees,based on local conditions
A ccordingly the nuclear risk for the Haryana Nuclear plant reactors may be caliculated as follows:
The risk= (1/10) X ( Rs.1/10 x costs of damage)
AS per the table above
(1).population likely to be effected by the accident = 55.3 lakhs
(2). compensation for the loss of land ,loss of biodiversity , loss of Industry and other losses like Medical treratment including Agriculture and Animal husbandry is added to the costs of human life, and total compensation due to the accident is placed at Rs. 5 lakhs per victim.[based on losses for 60years and,power plant-life of 60 years]
(3).Total compensation = 55lakh population x (5lakhs per victim) = 2,75,000 crores.cost of risk is
(4). Risk = (1/10)x(2,75,000)=27,500 crores.
Since the risk cost is Rs. 27.500 crores and the intial cost of the Nuclear plant is Rs. 24,000 crores the plant becomes uneconomical and hence is not feasible. Hence it must be cancelled.


Does this mean that all our patriotic Indian leaders of all political parties plan to ruin india ? .

As per the Table presented below on the population likely to be affected by the nuclear accidents,

Haryana Nuclear Reactors explosion scenario ,impacts on the public

Distence from
Time taken to
Execute counter
Places to be effected
due to accidents
Population to be effected


part 1)
(ZoneA,part 2)
(Zone c)
(Zone D)
Palam,Okhala,Delhi, ,Gurgaon,
Ghaziabad, New Delhi,Surajkund.
150 and above
(Zone E)


Note:- If all  the people from Delhi and New Delhi areas cannot be sheltered within 6 hours and all those people are evacuated to distant safer places within TWO DAYS Haryana Reactors must be treated unsafe.



According to some experts the fuel gets yellow-hot at its core, attaining a temperature of 4100oF (2250oC) while the metal casing around the fuel is kept at 650oF (350oC) by the cooling water.  If due to an accident the coolant water gets interrupted for just a few seconds the fuel temperature rises rapidly and the zirconium casing begins to break at 1800oF (1000oC) and melts at 3350oF (1850oC) The actual danger comes when the hot fuel begins to lump together in a molten mass that can explode the containment or seep into the ground, a process known as “Chinese-Syndrome”, and release massive quantities of radioactivity into the air, water and soil environment.
If the main pipe in the primary cooling breaks, immediately the control rods eliminate the nuclear fission process, halting the activity.  But the radioactivity in the already disintegrating fission products cannot be arrested.  In a 650MW plant, the heat formation by the radioactive disintegration process amounts to roughly 200MW three seconds after the reactor is switched off, 100 MW after one minute, 30MW after one hour and 12MW after 24 hours.



spread of radioactivity from Fukushima over the northern hemisphere from March 18th to April 7th,2011


Three The Classes of Reactor Accidents
There are four classes of reactor accidents in which the fuel could dangerously overheat: loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA), spontaneous reactor-vessel-rupture accident, power-cooling mismatch accident (PCMA), and the above-mentioned power excursion accident (PEA).
In a LOCA, a coolant pipe is assumed to rupture spontaneously. The hot, pressurized coolant would then

blow itself out of the reactor, flashing to steam as the coolant pressure is relieved. This process is called the coolant "blowdown." The basic protection against excessive overheating of the fuel in a LOCA is the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS), which injects auxiliary coolant into the reactor following the pipe rupture (certain types of LOCAs also require a SCRAM). Although fuel melting and crumbling are predicted to be avoided in a LOCA that is controlled by the ECCS, a substantial amount of radioactivity could escape from both the core (fuel rods) and the reactor vessel, if fuel-rod cladding ruptures occur, which are conservatively predicted.
A much more severe loss-of-coolant accident would be a spontaneous rupture of the reactor vessel, due to a design or manufacturing defect. The ECCS would be ineffective in this situation, since the core could not be reflooded, except for limited vessel ruptures above the core level. Moreover, in the extreme case, the reactor vessel closure head, if blown off, could become a missile and easily pierce the containment. 1 Though in one sense the worst vessel rupture is a LOCA, its immediate
This is a free sample. Join today for full access to this book and others like it!
This page is only available to active members of Questia



Animal products
Contamination of animals and livestock products (meats, milk, eggs, etc.) is mainly a result of the
ingestion of contaminated food products: fodder and, to a lesser extent, water.
In general, based on the results published in Japan, the activities measured in milk seem to
have been relatively moderate in comparison to the very high levels of deposits and the
contamination of grass to the northwest of the damaged power plant. Thus, the higher activities
measured in milk were 10 to 100 Bq/L, with a maximum measurement of 210 Bq/L for each of the
caesiums (in Iitate, 19 March 2011) and 100 to 1,000 Bq/L, with a maximum measured value of
5,300 Bq/L for iodine-131 (in Kawamata, 20 March). Between March 2011 and the beginning of
February 2012, out of approximately 2,000 analyses of milk and milk product samples, only 23
exhibited iodine or caesium activities that exceeded permitted sales standards.
It is likely that the date of the accident, occurring at the end of winter, limited animal
contamination (and thus milk contamination), as animals must be fed with either local fodder
harvested during the previous season or imported fodder (the importation of animal feed seems
common in Japan). For reference, the graph below shows the contamination levels that could have
been reached in cow's milk in the community of Iitate, approximately 40 km northwest of the
Fukushima Daiichi plant, if the cattle had consumed locally grown grass, based on the results
published in Japan on samples of “weeds” from this area. The concentrations measured in milk from this area