Sie sind auf Seite 1von 4

Strategic Business Ethics

The adoption and transition to clean energy alternatives is a long-standing debate and point of
non-convergence among many developing as well as the developed western world. Among
the many renewable sources of energy, Nuclear energy has always invited controversies and
speculation on it’s real worth as a “Clean fuel”. This leads to an ethical dilemma for its
adoption and implementation. In the context of a developing nation such as India, which is
trying to catch up with the lost industrial development during the 18 th and 19th century , the
challenge presents additional acute dimensions through the eyes of economical front, besides
social and environmental implications. The report presents with the facts , relevance in the
Indian sub-continent , the consequences of the decisions ( short term and long term ) and
finally some recommendations to the Indian government on its path forward.
Nuclear energy has advocates in it as the most viable alternative to the existing oil based non-
renewable energy sources. This is because the energy requirement of a country like India
which is moving towards accelerated industrial development is bound to grow by 120% by
2040.The existing fossil fuels besides running out of existing resources , also are creating
huge carbon footprints , the impacts of it being witnessed globally through symptoms of
climate change, air pollution, land pollution, ozone layer depletion etc. Hence the huge
energy requirements , as per experts can only be met by the unravelled potential of a nuclear
alternative. It is endorsed that only nuclear energy can meet the growing demands with least
implications to environment. However, there are many facets to this argument which we shall
dissect here:
1. Identifying the moral values, obligations, ideals, rights through the established “Code
of ethics”
International atomic energy agency ( IAEA) is a global organisation that has jotted down
many codes to ethics for nuclear operating organizations. Some of the most important
behaviours include
 Adopt a conservative, risk-based approach to decision making
 Always place safety before commercial gain
 Integrate safety and environmental considerations into business practises
 Accept personal responsibility for own and others’ safety
 Being a good neighbour to, and supporter of, the local community , including
advising them of measures taken to protect their health and safety , and the local
environment.
From the above most important expectations, it is aptly clear that for operating with a high-
risk energy source such as nuclear power , safety should be placed the highest on priority.
Extending the argument, we can understand that building nuclear plants take substantial
investment but also few decades before it becomes operational. Additionally , a lot of
investment and time should go into making the design completely fool proof and highly safe
that demanded as per global standards. This is a significant economic investment for a
country like India which at the present time is looking to catch up with the developed western
world on industrial revolution at cost efficient means. This also translates to the fact that the
priority of country like India is in alleviating Poverty over its contribution to sustainability.

Roll No : 1903025 Name : Mohanapriya J


Strategic Business Ethics
This is the economic disadvantage that India would be at while trying to follow the developed
economies in its adoption of Nuclear power.
2. Clarifying key concepts and obtaining relevant information
In this step, we intend to collect all the arguments currently placed by environmentalists
in favour of nuclear power as a clean resource but closely observing the developments in
the recent past to validate or invalidate its accuracy. Further , we are adding the pressing
issue of India in its majority of population suffering from poverty, unemployment and
hence are wary of the basic standards of living.
 It is widely proposed that Nuclear energy will reduce CO 2 emission and will contribute
to reducing the emission of greenhouse gases, reduce ozone layer depletion, will
decelerate the climate change and its impacts. Although this is a valid argument in
favour of nuclear energy, it is not a necessarily an environment friendly option. This is
mainly through mining and water discharge, the uranium used to produce nuclear
energy has to be mined. Mining of any kind has a negative impact on the surrounding
area. Uranium mining in particular is known for releasing arsenic and radon. This
has had a negative impact on the health of those living around uranium mines. Nuclear
power plants also cause something called ‘thermal pollution’. Most nuclear power
plants are located on a body of water, like a lake or the ocean. The power plant uses
water from the lake or ocean, referred to as cooling water, to condense steam back into
water. This process causes the cooling water to increase in temperature and is then
released back into the body of water. This hot water, usually around 100 degrees
Fahrenheit, significantly changes the chemistry of the ocean or lake it is discharged
into, making it inhabitable to most aquatic life. Based on our ecocentric ethical
perspective, we have the moral obligation to preserve the environment in its natural
form and associate an inherent value to the whole ecological system.
 Extremely water intensive- Nuclear power plants require a lot of water to produce
energy. That’s more water than what is used for coal processing. As water becomes
more scarce, especially in the face of climate change, this enormous consumption of
water could become unsustainable. We risk exhausting one natural resource water over
the attempts to save the reserves of coal and oil. Also ,the reserves of uranium are not
infinite. According to the best estimates , they are only available for the next 200
years. The next alternative is thorium which is explored in countries like India and
Russia. Presence of Uranium-232 in irradiated thorium or thorium-based fuels in
large amounts is one of the major disadvantages of thorium nuclear power reactors. It
can result in significant emissions of gamma rays, which has huge impact on health.
 Risk associated with operating nuclear accidents- Despite strict safety measures in
place, accidents in nuclear power plants have a catastrophic effect. Examples of its
impact can be studied from incidents in Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island
in Pennsylvania. In the event of a nuclear meltdown, harmful radiation can leak,
which can cause adverse effects on the environment and on human health. The 1986
incident at Chernobyl ultimately led to thousands of deaths, with estimates ranging
from 4,000 to 60,000 dead as a result of the incident. Not only that, more than 2
million people are still struggling with health problems related to Chernobyl. Today,
over 30 years later, access is still limited within the 19-mile Chernobyl exclusion zone.

Roll No : 1903025 Name : Mohanapriya J


Strategic Business Ethics
 Dumping of radioactive waste - Generating nuclear power does not emit harmful
greenhouse gases in the air, however, it does create hazardous waste. The waste
created by nuclear power plants remains dangerously radioactive for thousands of
years after it is created. Many issues arise when trying to figure out how to store this
radioactive waste. Waste continues to accumulate at nuclear power plants, as there is
no long-term storage facility for it. The accumulation of hazardous nuclear waste will
become an issue once power plants run out storage space. Plus, if there is a
compromise in the storage facility, such as a leak, the radioactive material could cause
significant damage to surrounding areas.
 Global withdrawal of Nuclear energy- Unlike the popular expectations, even the
western world which was advocating to the adoption of nuclear energy is not growing
at the rate expected. Nuclear power is in decline worldwide. Nuclear power generation
peaked in 2006 and is now annually falling by 2%. The number of operating reactors
has declined from 444 in 2002 to 438 in 2009. A major reason for this is that nuclear
power is unpopular, and reactors are seen as bad neighbours. After incidents such as
Chernobyl and  the Fukushima disaster, countries such as Germany began to undergo a
“nuclear phase out” shutting down their nuclear energy units. The Negatives
Outweigh the Positives.
 India focussing on poverty – India as a second world country has the moral
obligation to alleviate a major proportion of the population from poverty. This
translates to the need to industrialise, to create jobs, to educate people , to increase
their per capita. In the current standing, India would have to put its foot down to a
short-term goal of massive job creation at relatively lower costs. They do not have the
luxury to construct expensive nuclear power plants, employ fool proof safety standards
through the full value chain of activities- beginning from procuring the radioactive
material Uranium/ Thorium to disposing the radioactive waste. It is perhaps advisable
to monitor the situation with the developed world making strides, setting a precedence
and then later India following the steps into a safe and sustainable source.

3. Paradigm case /Practical reasoning for all the options


The various options with India fall in the range of adoption the maximum percentage
of fossil fuels ( continue with a 97 % trend ) to mixing the energy portfolio through
more sustainable options like solar energy, wind energy etc to maximum adoption of
nuclear power , which replaces the huge demand requirement in the next few decades.

Options Options

Develop an energy
Increase the safety For the first few
Maximum adoption portfolio which is a
standards of Nuclear years , maximize the Continue with the
of Nuclear energy healthy mix of
plants , draft detailed industrialization goal present trend on fossil
sustainable and non- fuel consumption
code of ethics, RACI to alleviate poverty
sustainable energy
matrices to ensure while taking actions
sources balancing
that the local to implement
economic and
community is not sustainable sources
sustainability aspects
affected by its in the following
Roll No : 1903025 presence years : Mohanapriya J
Name
Strategic Business Ethics

Both of the extreme options can only help a country like India to achieve either of the goals,
to alleviate poverty or to keep pace with the global requisites to sustainable energy options
which protects the environment. From our analysis , we have established that a country like
India needs to concentrate on its internal needs before being able to make significant
investment for the studies on sustainable and safe use of nuclear energy, build expensive and
safe nuclear power plants, hence the proposal is to move from the rightmost option to left
over the period of next 50 years. We recommend continuing using Fossil fuels for a
period of 5-8 years , while closely monitoring the global situation with the advancements
in Nuclear energy. Over the period, India should of course diversify the energy portfolio
reducing the fossil fuel consumption, opting for solar & wind energy ( a success story in
tropical countries ) . Also furthering into the 25 year horizon India should strengthen its
regulations, compliances, standards with Nuclear power, identify potential locations but draft
detailed action plans to relocate the communities there safely and also take adequate
measures such as clean dumping, opting for expensive constructions which keep the
radiations internal, reduce manual interventions in the operations, apply highest level of
safety protocols etc before gearing to use nuclear energy at a commercial level.
It is in the best interests for India to channelize its resources , policies, and government
expenditure for the first decade into advancing industrialization and employee generation.
From the current situation and the ongoing studies, the developed world is surely studying the
long-term adoption of nuclear energy and it’s expected that there will be improvements from
the present design that would avoid the repeat of Chernobyl, Fukashima. The ongoing protest
against the nuclear power plant in Kudankulam ( Tamil Nadu, India) is a testimony to the
popular sentiments of common man and underpreparedness of government to rise above the
speculations.
References :
1. https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-g-n/india.aspx
2. https://www.power-technology.com/features/nuclear-power-pros-cons/
3. https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/nuclear-energy-pros-and-cons
4. npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/04/10/473547227/for-the-navajo-nation-uranium-
minings-deadly-legacy-lingers
5. https://www.orfonline.org/research/the-future-of-nuclear-energy-in-india/
6. https://cnpp.iaea.org/countryprofiles/India/India.htm
7. https://www.epw.in/engage/article/nuclear-energy-answer-indias-growing-energy-needs
8. https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/P_1311_web.pdf
9. https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/news/newsmajor-pros-and-cons-of-thorium-nuclear-
power-reactor-6058445/#:~:text=The%20fuel%20in%20nuclear%20fission,significant
%20emissions%20of%20gamma%20rays.

Roll No : 1903025 Name : Mohanapriya J

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen