LIFE IN A NUCLEAR ERA

Group members

Ashwin M. – 04

Bento Fernandes – 12

Ishan Gindra - 13

Rinat Mendon – 30

Subramanyan R. – 52

Nevil Thakkar - 53
 INTRODUCTION

When the first nuclear bomb was exploded on July 16, 1945 at Almogorodo
of New Mexico deserts in the USA, the great scientist and leader of the
Manhattan Project, Professor Robert Openheimer, described what he saw by
quoting two lines of famous stanza of Bhagavad Gita.

“The shine of a thousand suns in the sky,

Shall n’t match, my Lord, Thy brilliance.”

For once the mankind at large came face to face with two faces of the atom,
one as the destroyer of humanity and the other as the provider of electrical
energy for development and prosperity. This dilemma has continued ever
since as the essence of the nuclear saga facing mankind.
 Nuclear Terror Days
When the two bombs, nicknamed Little Boy and Fat Man, were dropped by
the United States over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on
August 6 and 9, 1945, fortunately the only such cases so far, over 340,000
persons were killed barbarously. Near the centre of the explosion, people
were instantaneously vaporized by the searing heat, leaving only their
shadows scorched into the stonework of walls or roads. Thousands more
were killed by being blown to bits, more commonly being hurled against
solid objects, crushed beneath falling buildings or lacerated by the shrapnel
of flying glass. Others were simply cremated into charred corpses or
hideously burned with great patches of skin stripped from their bodies and
hanging grotesquely in flaps around them. In Hiroshima 13 sq.kms. of area
was devastated and 9.2% of all buildings destroyed. The destruction in
Nagasaki was relatively less due to its hilly terrain which shielded part of the
city from the heat and blast effects even though the bomb was more
powerful than the one dropped in Hiroshima. It is estimated that about 60%
deaths were caused due to burns, 20% due to injuries and the rest due to
physical disorders caused by nuclear radiation. Hearing of those terror days,
Mahatmaji said “I regard the employment of the atom bomb for the
wholesale destruction of men, women and children as the most diabolical
use of science”.
Even though such horrible effects of the atom bomb became well known, the
nuclear powers went ahead with massive programmes of nuclear
weaponisation. They conducted 403 atmospheric tests between July 16,
1945 and August 5, 1963 – 216 by USA, 162 by USSR, 21 by UK and 4 by
France.
 THE CHERNOBYL DISASTER

Chernobyl nuclear plant is located at about 80 miles north at Kiev. On 26th

April, 1986 at this plant the worst reactor disaster took place. The accident
was a result of many small mistakes adding up to create a catastrophe.
Before the test, the power output pf the reactor was dropped in preparation
of the upcoming test. Unexpectedly the power output dropped almost to
zero. Because of this, some control rods were removed to bring the power
back up. The power output raised & all appeared normal.
Later 2 pumps were switched on in the cooling system. They increased the
water-flow out of the reactor & thus removed heat more quickly. They also
caused the water level to lower in the steam separator of the reactor. In the
hopes that the water level would rise, the operator increased the amount of
feed water coming into the steam operator. Also more control rods were
taken out of the reactor to raise the internal reactor temperature & pressure,
also hoping the water level to rise. The water level in the steam separator
began to rise, so the operator adjusted again the flow of feed water by
lowering it. This decreased the amount of heat being removed from the
reactor core.
As there wasn’t enough coolant, the core’s temperature kept rising. A valve
at the top of core automatically opened to vent some of the steam. But the
valve didn’t close properly, because of which steam continued to vent from
the reactor, further reducing the coolant level. The operators didn’t know
about it as the indicator in the control room was covered by a maintenance
tag. They thought that the situation was under control as the temperature
stopped rising. Because they didn’t know the pump outlets were closed, they
thought the coolant had been replaced. A few minutes later the temperature
began to rise again & the Emergency Core Cooling System automatically
switched on. But the operator deactivated thinking the situation was under
control.
Because of the coolant lost through the open valve, the core temperature
started to rise. At this point the fuel rods started to collapse from the intense
heat. The operators knew something was wrong but didn’t understand what
it was. After 2 hrs. someone figured out that the valve at the top of the core
didn’t close properly. During that time precious coolant was released from
the reactor. At around 6am an operator discovered it and closed the valve.
During the day, hydrogen gas began to accumulate inside the reactor &
caused an explosion later in the afternoon. The explosion did not damage the
containment systems. A group of nuclear experts were called to help as the
core was still not under operator control for past 2 days. They figured that lot
of hydrogen gas had accumulated at the top of the core, which could have
exploded or it could have displaced the reactor causing a complete nuclear
reactor meltdown. A hydrogen recombiner was used to remove some of the
hydrogen, but it was not very effective. However, hydrogen dissolves in
water, which is what the coolant was composed of. Thus, overtime the
hydrogen that had collected at the top of the core completely dissolved in the
coolant. Two weeks later the reactor was brought to a cold shutdown & the
accident was over.
No one was directly injured as a result of the accident. However some
radioactive gas & water were vented to the environment around the reactor.
At one point, radioactive water was released into the Susquehanna River,
which is a source of drinking water for near by communities. No one is
really sure what effects these radio active releases might have had on the
people living near the power plant.
 NUCLEAR POWER & SAFETY

As mentioned earlier, when a nucleus of U 235 absorbs a neutron, the

resultant compound nucleus fissions into two fragments roughly of equal
mass number in the case of symmetrical fission and a number of unequal
fragments in other cases. These fission fragments undergo radioactive decay
and ultimately end up as stable nuclei. In the case of U 235 there are formed
over 80 primary products which, as a result of further radioactive decay,
would end up as over 200 radio-isotopes of over 30 elements as fission
products. This is simultaneously followed also by evolution of large
amounts of energy. This symmetrical fission process is described in a
simplified way as below.
U 235 + n …………………..> X 95 + Y 139 + 2n + 200 MeV
The major public concerns on the safety of nuclear reactors arise from the
following:
a) Health hazards from nuclear radiations (both from the background
around the reactors and from exposures from accidents).
b) Long term effects from nuclear wasters.

Based on very elaborate and rigorous scientific studies appropriate strategies

have been worked out for managing these aspects of reactor
 Nuclear Waste

Although the benefits of nuclear power seem to make it the obvious

choice for the power source of the future, it still has many drawbacks.
Nuclear disasters can become of the most devastating incidents on the
planet, and though rare, the possibility of their occurrence must be taken into
consideration. Many safety features exist to prevent such catastrophes;
however, the environment does not have any safety features to protect it
from the harmful effects of nuclear waste.
Obviously, nuclear waste consists of the Uranium broken down
during the fission process that creates nuclear energy. However, many
people forget to take into account that nuclear waste also means the
machinery used in the process, and the architecture of the nuclear power
plant. During the fission process, anything that has come in contact with the
energy created becomes radioactive. Not only does the energy released
create radioactivity, but so do the by-products created by the fission process.
The elements cesium, strontium and plutonium are highly radioactive and
must also be disposed of. Since there is no long-term solution for nuclear
waste disposal, and because nuclear energy is a relatively new source for
energy, long-term environmental and health effects remain to be seen.
Mostly, nuclear waste is just dumped in low population areas all over the
globe, but with the population growing as fast as it is, it is only a matter of
time before we will have to find a new solution. Especially if nuclear waste
begins to destroy the environment we are trying so hard to protect (Reaching
Critical Will).
The effects of nuclear waste are much like the effects of nuclear
fallout; however, the former can be avoided. Contaminated soil and
groundwater do not have to be a problem, but they are. Increased risk of
cancer, birth defects, and infertility are just a few of the harmful effects
caused by nuclear waste. Concerned citizens created the Not in My
Backyard organization in an effort to deter government attempts to dispose
of nuclear waste near populated areas. However, the United States is
currently dumping waste in an underground site only 26 miles from a city
called Carlsbad with a population of 30,000 (Military Nuclear Mess). Now,
these people live in constant fear of possible contamination from leaking
radioactive material. The effects of nuclear waste on the population aren’t
only physical, they are mental as well. In 1957, the specifications for a safe
underground storage facility were “a site that is dry, geologically stable,
away from natural resources and water, and has a salt creep which would
slowly entomb the nuclear substance. In addition, the waste should be
retrievable” (Military Nuclear Mess).
If humans become exposed to nuclear waste, their cells may become
damaged, and repair themselves incorrectly, resulting in biophysical damage
that more often than not results in cancer. Different types of cancer than
have resulted from radiation exposure from nuclear waste include
leukaemia, breast, bladder, lung, colon, liver, lung, oesophagus, ovarian, and
stomach cancers (Harmful Effects). Humans become exposed to nuclear
waste radiation when nuclear waste is disposed of improperly. One example
is when low-level waste that is not properly stored seeps through its
containment area and comes in contact with groundwater. The same goes
for the soil. In this manner however, plants become contaminated, and in
turn the organisms that feed on them, including humans (Harmful Effects).
 USED FUEL DISPOSAL

At the present time, there is no disposal facilities (as opposed to storage

facilities) in operation in which used fuel, not destined for reprocessing, and
the waste from reprocessing can be placed. Although technical issues related
to disposal have been addressed, there is currently no pressing technical
need to establish such facilities, as the total volume of such wastes is
relatively small. Further, the longer it is stored the easier it is to handle, due
to the progressive diminution of radioactivity. There is also a reluctance to
dispose of used fuel because it represents a significant energy resource
which could be reprocessed at a later date to allow recycling of the uranium
and plutonium.

A number of countries are carrying out studies to determine the optimum

approach to the disposal of spent fuel and wastes from reprocessing. The
general consensus favours its placement into deep geological repositories,
initially recoverable.
 INTERNATIONAL DATA FILE

Nuclear Power Status around the World

In Operation Under Construction
Countries No. of Total net No. of Units Total net
Units MWe MWe
Argentina 2 935 1 692
Armenia 1 376 - -
Belgium 7 5,631 - -
Brazil 1 626 1 1,245
Bulgaria 6 3,538 - -
Canada 21 14,907 - -
China 3 2,167 - -
Czech 4 1,648 2 1,824
Republic
Finland 4 2,310 - -
France 56 58,493 4 5,810
Germany 20 22,017 - -
* This total includes Taiwan, Chine where six reactors totaling 4884 MWe

are in operation.

Notes to table: During 1995, two reactors were shut down (including Bruce-2

in Canada which could restart in the future).

 THE INDIAN SCENARIO

Indian Nuclear Energy Programme was initiated with great farsight by its
great pioneer Homi Jehangir Bhabha in March 1944 (barely sixteen months
after the Fermi’s demonstration of the nuclear chain reaction) through his
letter addressed to the Tata Trust soliciting support to establish an advanced
research centre in Bombay so that “when nuclear energy has been
successfully applied for power production in, say a couple of decades from
now, India will not have to look abroad for the experts but will find them
ready at hand”. Subsequently developments are as given below:
1945 Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay,
with Bhabha as Director
1948 April Atomic Energy Act
1948 Atomic Energy Commission under Ministry of
August Natural Resources & Scientific Research
1954 Atomic Energy Establishment, Trombay
January
1954 Department of Atomic Energy with Bhabha as its
August Secretary

The Department underwent steady expansion over the decades

NUCLEAR RESEARCH CENTRE
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Trombay*
Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam*
Centre for Advanced Technology, Indoor*
Atomic Minerals Research & Directorate, Hyderabad*
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay*

NUCLEAR INDUSTRIAL UNITS

Nuclear Fuel Complex, Hyderabad
Heavy Water Plants, Udaypur, Baroda, Hazira, Tuticorin, Manuguru, Nangal
and Talchar
Uranium/Thorium Mills, Jadaguda, Chatrapur, Manawalakurichi and
Alwaye ECIL, Hyderabad.

NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS

Tarapur, Kota, Narora, Kalpakkam, Kaiga, Kakrappara.
Total Capacity – 1820 MWe
The activities of the DAE are centered around the above units and
interestingly enough they cover all established major uses of nuclear energy .
 APPLICATIONS OF NUCLEAR ENERGY

Protector of Green House Effect

Fossil fuels including coal form the major source of energy, thereby also
contributing significantly for increase in CO2 concentration in the
atmosphere. It is estimated that unless corrective action is taken, the present
value of around 280 ppm in air by volume would double between the middle
and the next century, leading probably to a rise in global mean temperatures
“greater than any in man’s history”, between 1.5 to 4.50C. (These values are
only typical. According to the reports of the US Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, the CO2 values were 285 ppm in 1850 increasing to 312 ppm in
1953 and 360 ppm in 1993). This “Green House Effect” described by some
as the “granddaddy of all environmental issues”, trapping an extra 2W/m2
energy on the earth’s surface, can be combated to a good extent through
nuclear energy which generates only one hundredth of green house gases
compared to coal. It is already eliminating 40 million tones CO2 annually in
UK, with France reducing her contribution by as high as 50% through
generation of nuclear electricity; UK Atomic Energy Authority estimates that
if the world generates 50% electricity through nuclear sources, the Green
House Effect would perhaps be eliminated altogether.

THE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT INSTALLED IN FRANCE IN 1980’s AND

WITH THE HELP OF THIS PLANT IT REDUCED ITS POLLUTION BY 90%.

 Summary & Conclusions
Ever since the phenomenon of nuclear fission was discovered in 1938 by
Hahn and Strassmann and the chain reaction demonstrated in 1942 in the
Chikago Pile by Enrico Fermi, humanity have never looked back to utilize
the power of the atom. The nuclear bombs have made the humanity quite
gullible. Nuclear (electric) power on the other hand has provided a Faustian
Alternative for uninterrupted development and progress. As the well-known
Buddhist saying goes, to quote the Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman from
his “The Value of Science”.
“To every man is given the key to the gates of
heaven. The same key opens the gates of
Hell”. The value-neutral science looks as always to Man, its master, for
instructions!