ENERGY OPTIONS FOR INDIA K. Periasamy, M.Tech (Chem. Engg), Chennai - 600 096. 1. INTRODUCTION India is the second largest populist Country in the world with a total electricity generation of 892 Billion Units with a per capita electricity consumption of just about 735 units during the financial year 2011-12. This per capita consumption is far less compared to that of China and the world average. There is no comparison if we look at the values of developed countries like USA, France, Germany, etc. as can be seen from Figure-1. If India has to improve the standard of living of its teaming millions atleast to the level of China, then the per capita GDP has to triple to catch up with that of China. This is because the Average Life Expectancy, which is the most important parameter of Human Development Index has a direct correlation with per capita GDPas can be seen from Figure - 2. Of course correction for Inequitably Index needs to be given for a still better correlation. Also, it is a well known fact that GDP growth rate is directly proportional to Energy Consumption and it is called as Energy intensity. In India, the energy intensity for the electricity part in the past several decades has been hovering at about 0.01 units for every Rupee of GDP. It is likely to soften to some extent, with the steady increase of service sector contribution to GDP. But it will not fall very drastically. In fact this will be offset to some extent by the increase in electricity demand due to lifestyle changes. So, there is no magic wand to improve the standard of living of the Indians other than substantially increasing the per capita electricity availability. All other talks of Socialism Vs Capitalism, Globalization Vs Protectionism, Centralization Vs Decentralization, etc. have no relevance if we do not increase the Energy production leaps and bounds. 2. POWER RESOURCES AVAILABLE IN INDIA India has sunshine throughout the year and is bestowed with reasonably high level of average rainfall. With the result, the human fertility and population growth has always been on the higher side in our Subcontinent. With the welfare measures initiated by the British Raj and the impetuous given by the subsequent Governments of Independent India, the population grew steadily. After independence, with marked decline in infant mortality rate and eradication of several epidemics in the last 6 decades, the population of India has more than tripled from 35 crores to 121 crores. Unfortunately, to keep pace with this population growth and to improve the standard of living of our people, atleast to match with that of our contemporaries like, China and Brazil, we do not have sufficient quantities of two important resources. These Two resources are Energy and Water. Atleast the later is sufficiently available in terms of total quantity. It is only the question of storage, diversion and distribution from areas and periods of surplus to deficit. The Government is embarking on the River Interlinking Schemes to solve this problem. But Energy resources available are limited except Thorium.
Transcript
ENERGY OPTIONS FOR INDIA
K. Periasamy, M.Tech (Chem. Engg), Chennai - 600 096.
1. INTRODUCTION
India is the second largest populist Country in the world with a total electricity generation of 892 Billion Units
with a per capita electricity consumption of just about 735 units during the financial year 2011-12. This per
capita consumption is far less compared to that of China and the world average. There is no comparison if we
look at the values of developed countries like USA, France, Germany, etc. as can be seen from Figure-1.
If India has to improve the standard of living of its teaming millions atleast to the level of China, then the per
capita GDP has to triple to catch up with that of China. This is because the Average Life Expectancy, which is
the most important parameter of Human Development Index has a direct correlation with per capita GDP as
can be seen from Figure - 2. Of course correction for Inequitably Index needs to be given for a still better
correlation.
Also, it is a well known fact that GDP growth rate is directly proportional to Energy Consumption and it is called
as Energy intensity.
In India, the energy intensity for the electricity part in the past several decades has been hovering at about
0.01 units for every Rupee of GDP. It is likely to soften to some extent, with the steady increase of service
sector contribution to GDP. But it will not fall very drastically. In fact this will be offset to some extent by the
increase in electricity demand due to lifestyle changes.
So, there is no magic wand to improve the standard of living of the Indians other than substantially increasing
the per capita electricity availability. All other talks of Socialism Vs Capitalism, Globalization Vs Protectionism,
Centralization Vs Decentralization, etc. have no relevance if we do not increase the Energy production leaps
and bounds.
2. POWER RESOURCES AVAILABLE IN INDIA
India has sunshine throughout the year and is bestowed with reasonably high level of average rainfall. With
the result, the human fertility and population growth has always been on the higher side in our Subcontinent.
With the welfare measures initiated by the British Raj and the impetuous given by the subsequent
Governments of Independent India, the population grew steadily. After independence, with marked decline in
infant mortality rate and eradication of several epidemics in the last 6 decades, the population of India has
more than tripled from 35 crores to 121 crores.
Unfortunately, to keep pace with this population growth and to improve the standard of living of our people,
atleast to match with that of our contemporaries like, China and Brazil, we do not have sufficient quantities of
two important resources. These Two resources are Energy and Water. Atleast the later is sufficiently
available in terms of total quantity. It is only the question of storage, diversion and distribution from areas and
periods of surplus to deficit. The Government is embarking on the River Interlinking Schemes to solve this
problem. But Energy resources available are limited except Thorium.
Gapm
inder World C
hart 2010 Version May 2010b
Money GDP per person in US dollars (purchasing power adjusted) (log scale)
Hea
lth Li
fe ex
pecta
ncy a
t birt
h (y
ears)
Low–income countries Middle–income countries High–income countries
1. San Marino2. Monaco3. Cyprus4. Montenegro5. Saint Lucia6. St Vincent & Grenadines
Data are for 2009 for all 192 UN member states and the other 5 countries and territories with more than 1 million people (Hong Kong, Taiwan, Palestine, Puerto Rico and Kosovo). Free to copy, share and remix but attribute Gapminder. For sources see:
LIFE EXPECTANCY Vs PER CAPITA GDP
FIGURE - 2
The various Energy Resources available in India and their usage options are given in the following Table:
TABLE – 1
S.No. Energy Resource Usage options Remarks
1 Crude Oil Road / Rail Transport Fuel, Chemicals, LPG, ATF, etc.
1
2 Gas (Associated Gas, Liquified Natural Gas, Coal Bed Methane, LPG, etc.)
Fertilizer Feed Stock, Fuel for Power Plant, Chemicals, Plastics, Fuel for Cooking, Transport, Etc.
2
3 Coal, Lignite Fuel for Power Plant, Fuel / Reagent for Steel and Cement Plants, Chemicals, etc.
3
4 Hydel Electricity 4
5 Wind Electricity, Water Pumping
6 Solar Electricity, Heat7 Biomass Manure, Fuel
Remarks:
1. The Crude oil on distillation produces various products like, LPG, Petrol, Kerosene, Diesel, Naptha,
Aviation Turbine Fuel, Lube Oil, Low Sulphur Heavy Stock (LSHS), Coal Tar, etc. Most of these have
specific uses, except Naptha and LSHS which can be used either as Fuel for Power (or) Feed stock /
Fuel in Fertilizer Plants.
It is always better to avoid the use of petroleum products for power generation, since there are no
other resources, which can replace petroleum products for their other needs. The Crude Oil reserves
throughout the world are finite. In the last about 60 years there has been continuous growth in
petroleum products consumption. There was matching production with new oil fields adding up. But
in the last 10 years or so, there is slow down in the discovery of new oil fields. This has resulted in a
situation called “Oil Peaking” whereby oil production is just matching the requirement with no room for
further growth in production. This is clearly seen from Figure – 3.
So, as a country with heavy dependence on imported petroleum, we must plan our alternative
transport fuel on priority. Ethanol is an obvious choice as being followed in Brazil. It is unfortunate
that we are having a very casual approach on this matter. There is an urgent need for producing more
sugarcane for increasing the ethanol production. For this we need to bring more area under irrigation.
From this perspective also River Inter Linking needs to be taken up on top priority.
2. There are several Gas resources. The Associated Gas comes along with Crude oil in some Oil wells.
Some Wells produce only Gas and it is called Natural Gas. Gas can be produced by in-situ
Gasification of Coal, called Coal Bed Methane (CBM).
These Gases contain mainly Methane (CH4 – one Carbon atom) Propane (C3H8 – 3 Carbon atoms)
and Butane (C4 H10). Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) is mainly Propane & Butane. It is either
obtained during crude oil distillation in Refineries or by extracting the Propane and Butane from the
Natural Gas or Associated Gas received from the Oil wells.
The LPG part of these Gases has a distinct use as domestic fuel. But the Methane, which is the major
part of Natural Gas has two options. One as Fertilizer Feed Stock and the other as Fuel for Power
generation. Gas is a better feed stock for fertilizer production. For a Country like India, which needs
lot of fertilizers to produce enough food from limited land resources, using this Methane Gas for
fertilizer production shall take precedence over Power generation. This is because, for producing
urea, the most important fertilizer (Urea), we need lot of Hydrogen. Methane has the highest
Hydrogen to Carbon ratio (4 : 1) and it is easy to handle.
3. Coal has a low Hydrogen to Carbon ratio of 0.7: 1 compared to that of Methane Gas (4 :1) and typical
Crude oil (1.5 : 1). Moreover it has lot of inert like Silica and impurities like Sulphur. Hence, it is better
to use it directly as fuel for power.
4. Hydel Power is direct electricity. In some locations, we can build a lower Dam for storing the water so
that it can be pumped back to the higher dam during Non Peak hours using surplus power from Coal /
Nuclear Plants. This can be used to generate power during peak period. The Generator itself will
work both as Generator and Pump. This is called Pumped Storage Scheme and this is the only way of
storing electricity in high capacities. There will be a net loss of about 10 - 15% during pumping and
regeneration.
Out of these various energy usage options, in this Article, let us discuss about Electrical Energy, which is the
key for the development of any society.
The present Installed capacity, Units generated, Total additional resources available, etc. for various Electrical
Energy sources in India is given in Table - 2.
For a country like India with such a large population, looking at imported resources, like Iran Gas,
Turkmanistan Gas, LNG, Indonesian Coal, Oil Wells in Africa, etc., as part of long term energy security plan is
ridiculous. These resources are finite and are expected to last for just 20 years. There are always technical /
political / commercial risks. What happened to Indonesian Coal import price in the last 3 years is a typical
example. Also, when an individual considers 10 to 20 years as long term, should a Country not plan for atleast
100 years as part of its long term energy security plan? If we do not understand the long term energy options
of India properly and plan accordingly, at some stage it will create chaos in the society.
Let us analyze the various energy resources available with us and evolve the right long term energy security
plan.
A. Hydroelectric Power: This is one of the cheapest and cleanest forms of energies and it is renewable as
well. This is produced by water flowing from the Dams which store water at higher elevations. Thus, Dams
serve by providing both Water and Electricity, the lifelines for the society.
Hence, we need to exploit this resource fully by building more dams which have a total capacity to produce
100000 MW and by completing the 29 Inter Link Canals already identified and approved by the Central Water
Commission. These Inter Link Canals are expected to provide a net surplus of 30,000 MW after deducting the
pumping needs for pumping in certain areas like Vindhyas. With this 30,000 MW, the total hydel potential yet
to be exploited works out to 1,30,000 MW (1,00,000 + 30,000).
4,780 32 80 3.6 20,000 60,000 Ton of Natural Uranium
80 2
NUCLEAR - Thorium
0 0 0 4,00,000 4,00,000 MW with 4,00,000 Tons of Natural Thorium
400 3
HYDRO 38,990 130 35 14.5 1,30,000 RENEWABLE NO LIMIT 4
BHUTAN IMPORT 5 0.6SMALL HYDRO 3,200 25 8,000 RENEWABLE NO LIMITWIND 15,700 15 50,000 RENEWABLE NO LIMIT 5SOLAR 482 15 20,000 RENEWABLE NO LIMIT 5COGENERATION 2000 5 30 0.6 5,000 RENEWABLE NO LIMIT 6BIOMASS 1325 2 20 0.2 15,000 RENEWABLE NO LIMIT 7TOTAL 197,830 899 100
1 Includes 113 Bn tons of Proven reserves, 137 Bn Tons of Indicated Reserves and 33.5 Bn tons of Inferred Reserves.2 If we consider imported Uranium, there is no limit, since there are huge Uranium resources available in the world.3 We have about 1/3 rd of world known resources of Thorium and it is estimated between 3,60,000 tons to 5,18,000 tons. 4 It includes 30,000 MW of net surplus that is possible with River Inter Linking schemes.5 The Wind and Solar power plant capacity additions are limited by the huge investments required for every unit of electricity produced
( about 10 times) due to their very low PLF, which is 5 times lower.6 Cogeneration is mainly from Sugar plants, which generate bagasse a bye-product, which is used for power generation.7 The Bio mass potential is assumed as if all Agriwastes are treated as wastes and given for burning, which is not true.
INDIA - ENERGY RESOURCESTable -2
16 1.8
TOTAL ADDITIONAL MW WITH AVAILABLE / SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE
SOURCE INSTALLED CAPACITY AS ON MARCH'12, MW
UNITS PRODUCED FROM APRIL'11 TO
MARCH'12, Bn KWHr
PERCENTAGE UNITS PRODUCED BY
EACH RESOURCE, %
AVERAGE PLF, %
709 78.9
We must exploit the entire hydroelectric potential on top priority, since these projects are multipurpose and the
investment is shared between various benefits like Drinking water, Irrigation water, Flood Control, Navigation,
Saving on health care, Carbon fixation, Saving on electricity consumption in agriculture pump sets, etc.
All the talks of environmental damages due to large dams need to be bulldozed as we know that the one time
damage to flora and fauna due to submergence of few thousand acres is much less compared to the
destruction caused by annual flood and draught, year after year.
Also, we can always create forests equal to double the area submerged by any dam. Moreover, with the
advent of large Tunnel Boring Machines, we can minimize destruction of forests by avoiding open canals in
those areas. The Tunnel concept has many other advantages like, need for lesser land acquisition, lesser
human displacements, eliminating bridges, eliminating the pumping needs across hills, minimizes the pilferage,
etc.
The arguments that the Dams and Inter Link Canals hardly store and divert few percentage of the flood water
and hence does not help in flood mitigation is totally false. Since the Dams store the water mostly during the
peak flow periods, they eliminate the peaking flood flow, even though the storage is less compared to the
yearly total flow. Every inch reduction in water flow level in rivers is important during flood times.
B. Coal: As can be seen from Table – 2, this source contributes the maximum electricity production, and it
continues to be given top priority in the on going power projects also. With the present installed capacity, the
Coal resources are expected to last for about 200 years. But with the tripling of Coal based power plants in the
next 15 years, the resources will last only for 80 years. Already we are importing about 100 million tons to
meet the total coal requirement of 800 million tons. International coal prices have doubled in the recent 3
years from USD 60 to USD 120 per ton. It will continue to rise since China, Japan, India, etc need to import
large quantities of coal if they continue to rely on coal for major part of their energy needs.
One of the major issues with Coal resource in India is that much of the Coal is at a depth of 1200 meters. But
it is technically and commercially feasible to mine coals available upto a depth of 300 meters only.
Hence, it is absolutely necessary for us to slowly reduce our dependence on coal as part of our long term
energy security.
C. Nuclear: Nuclear Power is the second best in terms of clean, safe, environmentally benign and cheap
power, next to Hydel Power. There are two nuclear fuels–Uranium and Thorium. Natural Uranium has 0.72%
of U – 235 and balance U-238. Only U – 235 can be used directly as fuel. U – 238, can be used as fuel only
by converting it into Plutonium – 239 (Pu–239). Natural Thorium ore has only Thorium – 132 which can be
used as fuel only by converting it into U – 233.
As can be seen from Table – 2, we have only 60,000 Tons of Uranium. But we have 3,60,000 to 5,18,000
Tons of Thorium. With this Thorium we can generate 2,00,000 MW of Power for next 800 years or 4,00,000
MW for 400 years. Hence, for our long term energy security, we shall rely on Thorium based nuclear energy.
As mentioned above, Thorium – 232 can not be directly used as fuel. For converting this Th – 232 to U
– 233, we need Pu – 239.
For producing sufficient quantity of Pu – 239 and U – 233, we need to have a Three Phase Nuclear Power
Program, as shown in Figure – 4.
In the First Phase, we operate Natural Uranium based reactors to get electricity and simultaneously produce
Pu -239 from the U – 238 present in Natural Uranium. This Pu-239 is separated from the Spent Nuclear Fuel
by Reprocessing.
In the Second Phase, this Pu-239 is mixed with U–238 and used in Fast Breeder Reactors to get
electricity and produce more Pu – 239. The specialty of Fast Breeder Reactors is that for every Atom of Pu-
239 consumed, about 1.4 Atoms of Pu-239 are produced from U – 238. Simultaneously, some part of Th–232
kept as Blankets around the core gets converted into U–233. This Pu-239 and U–233 are separated by
reprocessing.
In the Third phase which starts when we have sufficient quantity of U – 233, we switch over to the U–133.
Here U – 233 is mixed with Thorium – 232 and used as fuel in the U – 133 based Fast Breeder Reactors.
Here again these Fast Breeder Reactors produce about 1.3 Atoms of U – 233 from Th–232 for every
Atom of U – 233 consumed. If Thermal Breeder Reactors are used, then 1.4 to 1.5 Atoms of U-233 are
produced.
We have the complete technology for the Design, Construction and Operation of Nuclear Reactors. Contrary
to the general belief, we also have the complete Technology for the Fuel Enrichment, Reprocessing and Waste
Management. What is not available with us is the collective political will and the priority for funds
allocation. For example, we have invested Rs. 51,000 Crores to build 6,300 MW Wind Mills in Tamil Nadu.
With the same amount we could have built 6000 MW of Nuclear Power Plant, which would produce 4 times
that of Wind Mills Of course there are some limitations in the Indian industry in manufacturing certain large
components required for Nuclear Reactors. Slowly our industries are gearing up. In the meanwhile, we shall
import those components. Nothing wrong or unusual about it, since the scale of operation now does not justify
the investments required to be made.
Hence, we need to give priority for Nuclear Energy by getting sufficient funds by way of Foreign Direct
Investment (FDI) and also by encouraging import of Reactors from foreign suppliers at favorable credit terms.
Please note, presently the foreign companies do not have sufficient orders and hence they will offer attractive
price and payment terms. It is a win – win situation for all.
Talks like American MNCs want to exploit us, they want to dump outdated technology on us, etc are all
childish. The fact is that, we have Russian, French, Canadian, Korean and Japanese Companies who are
already in dialogue with us. American Companies are lagging behind. All companies offer the latest Reactors.
In Jaitapur some people oppose Nuclear Power because AREVA offers the latest technology !
One important dimension to the whole Energy scenario is the Nuclear Fusion Energy. The Nuclear energy
presently in vogue is based on Nuclear Fission. That is, when a larger atom, like U–235 or
Pu – 239 or U – 233, is split into two smaller atoms, there is energy release. In the same way, if two smaller
atoms (like Hydrogen) are fused together to form a bigger atom (Helium), then also there is energy release.
This is called Fusion Energy. Fusion Energy is almost 200 times higher in intensity compared to Fission
Energy. The newly formed bigger atom (Helium) is also harmless. Hence, Fusion Energy is the best form of
energy.
Sun gets its energy by this fusion reaction only. Fusion Energy is likely to be commercialized in the next 50 to
100 years. The Technology is conceptually proved. For commercialization of the Technology, the major
impediment is the development of some metal alloy, which can have super conductivity near room
temperature. Once such an alloy is developed, Fusion Reactors will be commercially feasible. Till then
Fission based Nuclear energy is an obvious choice.
D. Wind: India has some wind potential, thanks to the monsoon winds and some narrow Mountain Passes.
Wind Energy potential in the various windy regions of India is given in the Wind Power Density Map (Figure -
5). The wind energy potential with a wind velocity of 9 m/sec at 80 m hub height has been estimated to be
65,000 MW. Out of this, 15700 MW is already installed. The main driving force for the fast growth of wind
energy in India have been the 80% Depreciation benefit allowed in the first year itself and the permission to set
up Wind Mills under TUF Scheme. The accelerated depreciation benefit provides about 25% Income Tax
saving, which is almost the promoters margin money required for installing Wind Mills. The TUF scheme
offered loan at just 4% interest. But with effect from April 2012, the Depreciation benefit has been withdrawn.
We have to see how much this is going to affect the Wind Mill industry.
As wind is seasonal, the Wind Power will be available only during the few months in a year. During these few
months also, the capacity utilization will be hardly 40 to 50%, even in the best wind sites.
E. Solar: Being some what close to the Equator, most part of India has good sunshine throughout the year.
In some parts of India, which are close to Tropic of Cancer, the solar irradiance, a measure of solar power
intensity is substantially higher. But still due to the low average energy intensity per unit area, the land
requirement is substantially higher. Each MW of installed capacity requires about 6 Acres of land. Hence,
Solar Power can be installed in large capacities only in areas like Rajasthan and Gujarat where large tracts of
unused land is available. Due to the combination of humidity and dust, most of the fallow lands of other
regions of India are not suitable for Solar Power. The accompanying Map provides information on the Solar
Intensity across India (Figure – 6).
Major limiting factors of Solar Power are non-availability during Peak hours and the high investment cost
required per MW. It costs about Rs. 10 – 12 Crores per MW. Based on the land availability and high cost, it
has been planned to install about 20,000 MW of Solar Power using about 1,20,000 acres at an investment of
Rs. 2,00,000 Crores over the next 10 years. But, it is to be noted that this 20,000 MW is equal to only 4000
MW of Coal / Nuclear Power Plant in terms of electricity produced (Units) and that too it will not be available
during the peak load period of 6.00 P.M. to 10.00 P.M.
3. HEALTH, SAFETY & ENVIRONMENT IMPACT OF ENERGY SOURCES (HSE)
There has been lot of debates on these issues. The debates are taking place in two distinctly different
platforms. One is the well informed, scientifically substantiated debates with facts and figures, taking place in
AC Halls among the experts concerned and the officials involved. The other is the ill informed, emotionally
surcharged discussions often supported by “some experts” or “some eminent citizens” or “ former scientists” or
“former officials” with limited data, taking place in street corners. These street corner discussions are always
conducted in the guise of support of the project affected persons, who will always have genuine grievances,
which are nothing to do with HSE.
The participants of these two discussions seldom meet. If at all they meet, they meet at Courts, which is the
wrong place for any meaningful discussion of this nature to take place. After all this discussion is more to do
with science, engineering, economics, social development, etc. and less of legalities.
The Political Bosses who are supposed to be the bridge between the two platforms do not have time and
inclination to do the bridging. The lack of inclination on their part stems mainly from the media response,
which in most cases, is biased towards the emotionally surcharged street corner revelations rather than the
scientifically supported discussions. For the media, street corner meetings are sensational and have better
news value. The Politicians do not want them to be identified on the “wrong side” by the media. So, as far as
possible, they keep off or they side with those project affected people who are invariably there in any project.
Keeping this in mind, now let us analyze the HSE issues in detail with some techno-economic data in the
context of Power Options for India for the five major options – Hydel, Coal, Nuclear, Wind and Solar.
A) HYDEL
1. Health: Hydel Power Plants do not cause any health hazards to human beings or animals. But
actually they help in improving the health by providing adequate water for irrigation and drinking
water. With the increase in population there is more and more dependence on ground water for
drinking, by way of deep bore wells. As we go down deeper into the earth, the temperature
increases. This results in higher solubility of salts. If we drink this water the salts overload the
organs in our body resulting in health problems. Presently this problem has been completely
ignored by the Planners of India.
This problem is solved by the Hydel power projects which are always built as multipurpose
projects with Irrigation, Drinking Water, Power, Flood mitigation, Water Transport, Fishing, etc. as
part of the overall scheme.
The dams minimize the diseases caused by flood and also mitigate the effects of draught. Hence,
the Hydel Power Plant Projects help in improving the health of humans and animals, in many
ways.
2. Safety: The Hydel projects have some safety issues during construction and during operation.
During construction of Dams there are possibilities for accidental damages for the temporary
structures / Tunnels built to divert the regular water flow. Sometimes the accidents are caused by
unprecedented rain during construction causing landslides / excess flooding. These are rare
accidents happening despite precautions.
During operation of the Hydel projects the accidents can happen by way of Struck Sluice Gates
resulting in damage of dams, damages due to earthquake, etc. Failures of Turbine Blades,
Generator Fires, Transformer Fire, etc. are some of the other freak accidents.
In the past there were quite a few dam failures, some of which due to earthquakes. But with the
advent of technology the new major dams built in recent 50 years have not been damaged in
earthquake or any other natural causes. The details of Dam failures and the number of deaths in
each case are given in Table – 3.
According to International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD), as of 2011, there are 37,640
large dams (>30 m Height for China and > 15 M for others). If China dams > 15M height are also
included, the total number is about 52,000. Though there were about 300 accidents in these large
dams, the accident rates have come down drastically in recent decades.
Out of these 52,000 large dams in operation, more than half of them were built in the second half
of 20th Century.
It is important to note that if these Dams had not been built there would have been lot of human /
animal casualties due to draught and flooding each year. This aspect needs to be added to the
credit of the Dams when we evaluate the Hydel project for their safety.
.
3. Environment: This is one of the important factors which is put forth against the Hydel Power
Projects. There is some truth in it. But it is always exaggerated. More importantly the positive
effect of these projects on the environment is always overlooked. There are several environmental
aspects. Let us discuss each of them in detail.
a) Damage to Flora and Fauna due to the one time submergence of land when the Dam gets
filled up for the first time. Mostly these lands happen to be forests. Yes, it is true that there is
disturbance to humans and animals due to this. Most of the animals can be saved. Only the
insects, bacteria, the trees and other plants in these forests, will die.
However, these forests can always be grown in double of the submerged area and it can be
set as a precondition for project clearance. Most of the insects and bacteria can also be more
or less reestablished in this new forest. It is not fair to insist that we need to get back the
same insects. We forget the fact that these insects die every season and new insects are
born again.
Dam
Dam
type* Country Height, m
ReservoirVolume,106 m3 Date built Date Type
No. of
deaths
Vega de Tera CMB Spain 34 8 1957 1959 SF 144
Malpasset CA France 66 22 1954 1959 FF 421
Babii Yar Emb Ukraine 1961 OF 145
Vaiont CA Italy 265 150 1960 1963 LA 2600Baldwin Hills Emb USA 71 1951 1963 IE 5
Frias Emb Argentina 15 0·2 1940 1970 OF >42
Banqiao Emb China 118 492 1953 1975 OF tTeton Emb USA 93 308 1975 1976 IE 11
Machhu II Emb India 26 100 1972 1979 OF 2000
Bagauda Emb Nigeria 20 1 1970 1988 OF 50
Belci Emb Romania 18 13 1962 1991 OF 25
Gouhou Emb China 71 3 1989 1993 IE 400
Zeizoun Emb Syria 42 71 1996 2002 OF 20
Camara RCC Brazil 50 27 2002 2004 5
Shakidor Emb Pakistan 2003 2005 OF >135
Situ Gintung Emb Indonesia 16 2 2009 IE 100
Table – 3
DAM ACCIDENTS
Failure
*CMB, Concrete and masonry buttress; CA, Concrete arch; Emb, Embankment; RCC, Roller compacted concreteSF, structural failure on first filling; FF, foundation failure; OF, overtopping during flood; LA, Land slide (270 x I 06 m3 landslide into thereservoir caused overtopping of the dam by a wave 125m high, but remarkably the dam survived); IE, Internal erosiont-It has been reported that tens of thousands died in this disaster, which involved the failure of a number of dams, of which Banqiao was the largest.
There could be permanent destruction of certain species (both flora and fauna) which are
specific to that forest. We need not be unduly apologetic about it. After all they were neither
there time immemorial nor they are going to be there for ever in future also irrespective of
what human beings did or going to do. Also with passage of time, the type of insects also
keeps changing by natural evolution. Whether we like it or not, this is part and parcel of
nature. Our intervention is only minimal and incidental. It is very much justifiable, as long as
the street corner meetings do not address the population growth on this Planet, especially in
Countries like India.
It is quite natural for “Experts” and “Green activists” from those Countries which have sparse
population density, and from those Countries which have declining population, to ignore the
population growth issue. As long as we are unable to control the population growth, the
survival competition between man and other species in our country can not be
avoided. This is the ground reality. We can keep making abstract statements like
“Sustainable Development”, “Green Economy”, etc.
b) The Dams cause earthquake is another argument put forth against Hydel Power Projects.
This is a myth. How many of us know that there are atleast a dozen earthquakes taking place
everyday in some part of this planet? Some occur on the land and some others on the sea
bed. What relations these earthquakes have with dams? It was postulated that once Tehri
Dam fills up there will be earthquake the very next year. Nothing of that sort has happened till
date, even after several years.
Contrary to general perception, the environmental destruction caused by natural disturbances are much severe
and irrevocable compared to the manmade disturbances like Dams, Canals, Factories, etc. For example, the
dust thrown into the atmosphere by a typical Volcano in few days is higher than the dust thrown by all Steel
Plants in this world put together in one year. The environmental destruction caused by the river floods year
after year is much higher compared to the one time destruction caused by the Dam submergence.
Time and again we worry about silting of dam or sand quarrying in river beds. Supposing both are not
happening. What will happen? The river will continue to erode the hills, generate silt / sand and disburse in
the delta. If the silt / sand is not removed, the river bed in the delta area will get filled up and the river will take
new course every year. This will destroy the flora and fauna in new areas every year, apart from destroying
crops and flooding human habitats along the river.
Forest fires destroy thousands of acres of forests every year. They do not destroy only the trees. But they
destroy the complete flora and fauna as well. With human intervention using advanced technologies, we are
able to control the forest fires to some extent.
This is not an argument against the protection of environment and nature. This is not an argument against
regulation of sand quarrying in river beds. This is not against preserving forests. But this is only to make it
clear that certain things happening on this Planet are “natural”, including the growth of certain species in
certain periods and destruction of the same at some other time by nature. May be it is the turn of the human
species! With certain efforts of scientists we are trying to sustain our growth and simultaneously we may
retard the growth of certain others. In that process unknowingly we may also be making the life easy for the
nature to do its duty of destroying the humans!
But the anticlimax is that the human beings learn from their mistakes and make amends to the natural
disturbances made by them now and then. This game is going on for millions of years. This is also part of
nature!
Let us accept this reality and let us not over react to the changes brought by humans. After all change is the
only thing which is not changeable and human beings are also part and parcel of nature!
B) COAL :
1. Health: Among the various Energy Sources, Coal has the highest health hazards. Starting with
Coal mining, the working environment in underground mines or even in open cast mines is very
tough. The workers have no choice but to inhale the dust laden air. They are exposed to high
temperatures prevailing in underground mine shafts. It is a well known fact that the average life
expectancy of coal mine workers is reduced by several years depending upon their service in coal
mines.
The general public must understand and appreciate the sacrifices made by these workers while
enjoying the electricity. At the same time the public must also support the initiatives of the
Scientists when they try to find alternatives to coal. They shall not over react based on just one or
two incidents where the scientists / engineers might have failed or natural calamities might have
created trouble beyond expectations. Otherwise, we may have to live with old problems of Coal,
which we all know is much larger in magnitude. Moreover Coal is also a finite resource and we
need to firm up the right alternate for Coal before it is too late.
The same problems of coal dust are encountered while loading in the Ship / Train and unloading
from Ship / Train. Recently the Madras High Court has taken a sue motto petition against
Chennai Port Trust on this issue of coal dust coming to the Court premises and ordered the
shifting of Coal Terminal to Ennore Port.
The health hazards posed by the flue gases coming out of Coal Power Plant boilers are the most
severe one. It contains all sorts of chemicals harmful to the life on earth like SO2, SO, NO,
Unburnt Hydrocarbons, etc. It also contains particulate matter which causes Silicosis and several
other respiratory and gastric disorders.
There are certain other substances which are more harmful to the health. They are toxic
substances like Arsenic, Lead, Mercury, etc. These are mostly confined to fly ash. But a small
fraction does go with flue gas and pollute the Air.
The Fly ash which is the residue left out of Coal burning contain all the inerts like Silica, Calcium,
Potassium, Phosphorus, etc. It also contains all heavy metals like Lead, Mercury, Antimony, etc.
Some coals may contain radioactive substances like Uranium. Since the presence of Uranium is
rare, it is not measured as a routine. Hence, it may go unnoticed and get into the public domain.
This is more dangerous.
The quantity of Fly Ash is so much that the disposal is a real challenge for the coal power plants.
The Indian coal has close to 40% ash content thereby making both the transportation of coal and
fly ash handling as formidable tasks. The health hazards of fly ash being very slow, it goes
unnoticed. Typically a 1000 MW Coal Power Plant needs about 14,000 Tons of Coal every day (7
Trains!) and it discharges about 6000 Tons of Fly Ash. We can imagine the magnitude of the
problem.
In the power plant, the Boiler operators are also subjected to air pollution and hot working
environments.
2. Safety: The most striking safety issue is the coal mine accidents. The nature of coal mining is
such there are innumerable causes for unexpected accidents like, Gas explosions, Coal Dust
explosions, Mine collapse, Flooding, Poisonous Gas eruptions, Fire, etc. Due to this, despite the
best mining safety precautions, about 4,41,000 persons have died in coal mine accidents in the
world in the past 60 years. This is the single largest cause of industrial accident deaths in the
world. It has also caused 6,78,275 disabilities in USA alone in the same period. Coal mine
accidents are so common that they hardly make news !
Even now, on an average atleast one person dies every alternate day in Indian Coal mines!
Since it is so common, it has no news value for the Print media and Television channels. But, if
one person dies in Uranium mine or a Nuclear Power Plant or even a Road accident near a
Nuclear Power Plant, it will be a Breaking News, since it is uncommon.
There are other accidents in Coal Power Plants like Boiler explosions, Electrical accidents, coal
handling accidents, pipeline ruptures, etc. These are also some what frequent though not as
common as Coal mine accidents, and cause human loss and innumerable disabilities.
3. Environment: Like the single largest industrial activity which has caused the maximum deaths,
Coal is also the single largest cause for the climate change which is looming large. For every unit
of electricity generated, about 1.0 Kg. of CO2 is released into atmosphere. CO2 which is getting
accumulated in the atmosphere absorbs part of the infrared radiation emitted by the earth into the
space and reemits back to the earth causing an effect called, Green House Effect. This results in
continuous increase in the average temperature of earth. In the last 100 years, the CO2
concentration in atmosphere has increased from 280 ppm to 390 ppm. Currently it is increasing at
about 2 ppm per year and it is rapidly increasing year after year due to increasing trend in fossil
fuel dependence for energy. India and China are going to increase this rate by almost 30 to 40%
in the next 10 years.
The Acid rain caused by the SO2, SO3 released into the atmosphere by the Sulphur bearing coal
is another major environmental hazard.
Flue Gas, Dust, Soot, etc. coming out of coal power plants cause enormous environmental
damages in the vicinity of the power plants.
The environmental damages caused by Fly Ash dumping is another area of concern. The shear
volume of Coal / Ash handled in power plants brings in related environmental issues in Loading /
Unloading, Transportation, Storage, etc.
C) NUCLEAR:
1. Health : The effect of radiation on health of human beings has been extensively studied for so
many decades. Due to the hidden nature of radiation risk, there is always a fear psychosis and
stigma attached to the health effects of radiation. A detailed analysis on this subject is given in a
separate Article titled “Fission Products Radioactivity and their Effects” attached herewith
As can be understood from the above Article, though there is risk of higher cancer incidence due
to high radiation doses, it is not a monster as depicted by mass media and believed so, by the
gullible public.
Having known about the risks involved, the Nuclear Industry throughout the world has always
been extra cautious and has always been kept on toes.
With the result, the health effects from Nuclear Industry, either to the public or to the Nuclear
Industry personal, have almost been nil. In the early years of Uranium mining and
Reprocessing, there were lapses, like in any other polluting industry. But due to the radioactivity
associated with it, it has been quickly corrected unlike in other industries.
2. Safety: Safety in Nuclear industries is one subject which has been analyzed thread bare by
everyone, right from the common man on the street to the highest political head in every country.
In the 60 years history of Nuclear Industry there have been only 3 major accidents in Nuclear
Installations. They are:
(a) Three Mile Island Accident (1979) - USA
(b) Chernobyl Accident ( 1986) – Russia
(c) Fukushima Accident (2011) – Japan
Let us analyze these accidents in detail since there is complete misinformation and confusion
among the Public.
(a) Three Mile Island Accident:
This accident took place when a Safety Relief Valve got struck in open position and this was
misjudged by the operators. They overruled all the automatic safety systems which came online as
per design basis to cool the reactor with additional water injection. So the water level was not
maintained and dropped due to the continuous escaping of steam through the struck open valve. Due
to this, there was partial melt down of Nuclear Reactor Core.
But there was not a single fatality. There was no major release of radioactivity except the release of
short lived radioactive gases like Krypton-85, Xenon-133, etc. and about 15 Curies of I-131 into the air.
It was classified as level – 5 in the IAEA accident scale of 1 to 7. There was almost negligible radiation
effect for the human beings or for the environment. But still it became a world famous accident!
Based on the lessons learnt from this accident, “Fail-safe” concept was reinforced in design and
operation. That is, when some Equipment / Instrument / Valve fails to operate due to power problem
or leakage or malfunction, the Reactor can only lead to shut down and not increase in power
production. Also, the “Hands off” concept on safety systems was introduced. That is, when some
safety system comes on line, no one can interfere in it. It can only be strengthened. For example, if
one emergency coolant pump automatically starts, even by a spurious signal, it can not be stopped by
the operator. At the maximum he can start one more pump. This way safety of the plant is completely
taken out of human error / judgment.
(b) Chernobyl Accident:
This accident happened when some operators wanted to do Turbine Run Down Test when the
Reactor was about to be shut down. In fact some of the Control Rods had been removed as part of
shut down procedure. Reactor had been restarted at this stage bye passing all rules and regulations
in order to conduct this unauthorized test.
The chronology of the accident is – Overheating of Reactor core where Control Rods had been
removed – Rupture of a Coolant Header – Reaction of coolant water with Graphite Moderator –
Generation of Hydrogen during this Reaction – Accumulation of Hydrogen – Auto explosion of
Hydrogen – Opening of Reactor Roof Slab – Eventual exposure of Nuclear Reactor core to the
atmosphere – Continued burning of Graphite in Air – Escape of Radioactive Fission Products to
environment.
This is the worst accident that can ever happen to a Nuclear Reactor, and it is classified as Level – 7
in IAEA Scale.
Within one week of the accident, 28 persons died. All of them were among the 134 fire fighting and
army personal who were employed to drop Lead sheets over the exposed nuclear reactor core to stop
the fire and radiation. Out of about 5000 Thyroid cancer cases detected after few years, only 15 died
due to cancer. Rest all have responded well to the Thyroid treatment and are completely out of
danger.
What about the long term effects?
Now that 25 years have elapsed since the accident. Totally only 43 ( 28 + 15 ) people have died of
cancer caused by the accident.
The next question is, how many more will die of cancer due to the effect of radiation caused by this
accident ? It has been estimated that there will be about 5000 people among the 626,000 people living
in the vicinity, who may eventually die of cancer caused by this accident. It represents about 3-4%
increase over the normal cancer death. That is, out of the 626,000 people, about 1,30,000 are
expected to die at old age due to cancer. If this accident had not happened, about 1,25,000 would
have died of cancer in normal course.
Among the 5 million people who were living in Belarus region which had Cesium deposition of 37 KBq
per square meter due to wind direction, an additional cancer death of about 5000 had been predicted
based on scientific model. This represents an increase of 0.6% over the normal value. The effect in all
other areas including Europe and Russian Federation will naturally be much smaller due to very low
levels of radiation dose received.
Please note, these are only probabilities and not conclusive. However there is absolutely no
possibility for upward revision of these numbers (5000+ 5000) as evidenced from the fact that there is
no radiation effect on the remaining 106 (134 – 28) people who were acutely exposed.
Chernobyl Reactor is one of the earliest reactors built with primitive design concepts with not much of
redundant safety features. Moreover it is built with positive reactivity coefficient, as opposed to the
negative reactivity coefficient concept followed in most reactors. Negative reactivity coefficient makes
the reactor to bring down the nuclear reaction rate whenever the temperature increases (or) there is
steam formation. This makes the Reactors inherently safe.
( c ) Fukushima Accident:
Firstly, it is not equal to the Chernobyl accident, even though the Japanese have declared it as Level -
7, the most severe accident that can happen to any reactor, with widespread contamination with
serious health and environmental effects. Actually, Fukushima accident qualifies for Level – 5 or at the
max 6 only. Since the accident was unfolding slowly, with increasing severity day by day and it was a
cumulative effect of three reactor accidents, the Japanese probably thought that it is better to
anticipate the worst and declare the worst level upfront. That is how they would have skipped the
Level-6 while upgrading the levels one by one.
So far there is not a single casualty due to this nuclear accident. But more than 20,000 have died due
to tsunami triggered by a strong earth quake, about 150 KM away from the Reactor site. Many of the
common people have mixed up both tsunami effect and Fukushima Nuclear accident due to the
media hype on the nuclear incident. For example, when the Nuclear accident is discussed, the
tsunami death number of about 20,000 is always referred in very ambiguous manner that ordinary
people can not distinguish as to what caused the death, the tsunami or the nuclear accident !
The media has completely ignored the real disaster associated with the tsunami and blown the nuclear
accident out of proportions. Due to this, there was very little attention on the relief activities required
for the tsunami affected people, unlike in the tsunami caused by the Indonesian earth quake in 2004.
In Fukusima nuclear accident, so far no major Thyroid exposures have been identified. The fact is that
the quantity of I -131 which has been released into the air is much less, about 6 to 9% only, compared
to that of Chernobyl. In Chernobyl the fuel was completely exposed to atmosphere and literally
spewed radioactive material into the air for few days. Chernobyl was a 1000 MWe reactor and the
capacity of all the three reactors of Fukushima put together was almost same at 1317 MWe (439 *3).
Even the much talked about Hydrogen explosion in Fukushima needs to be proved beyond doubt,
since the quantity of Hydrogen can not be so much that even after dilution with so much steam, it
could have reached above the 4% concentration level for auto ignition to take place. Moreover, for
auto ignition to take place, we need sufficient Oxygen. Temperature also has to be above 5000C.
Where was so much Oxygen? The explosion of the outside reactor buildings in all the three Units of
Fukushima could be possibly due to the simple steam pressure build up also.
Since the Reactor vessels were in tact at the top, the reaction rate of Zircoalloy Fuel clad with the near
stagnant steam would have been much lower compared to the total exposure of the fuel / graphite to
air (Oxygen) in case of Chernobyl, which was like "free for all" ! Moreover, in Fukushima the I-131 and
small quantities of Caesium-137 were mixed completely with steam cloud unlike in Chernobyl, where it
was all air. Once the steam cloud condenses, majority of this I-131 and possibly all Caesium-137
would have settled in few KM vicinity of the Reactors only.
Now, everyone knows about all that hype created by the media as if USA, Europe, India, China,
everyone on this Planet is going to be affected by the fall out of Fukushima accident! Today, absolutely
there is no media to explain what happened to those “radiation clouds” carrying “so much “of
radioactive substances threatening every country including India! They didn’t know, it was a simple
water vapour cloud with small quantities of I-131 and Cs – 137.
.
But the fact remains that due to heavy pumping / pouring of Sea Water into the Reactors in unusual
manners, there was lot of low level radioactive contaminated water which was discharged into the sea.
Some water also directly seeped into the soil through the cracked trenches. However, owing to the
very low quantities of radioactive nuclides involved (primarily due to the fact that not much of fuel was
outside the reactor domain), and due to the slow development over several days (Read: I-131 half life
is only 8 days), the effect of sea discharge also would have been very low only.
Only if there had been substantial damage to Reactor No.2 at the bottom, and the fuel pellets /
particles were lying loose due to the damaged Zircoalloy clad, then there is possibility that these
pellets / particles could have been carried out of the reactor. But still the possibility of the particles
reaching the sea is remote. If it were really “core melt” as confirmed by almost everyone, and not mere
damage to the fuel pins due to Zircoalloy clad rupture, then this possibility of loose pellets / particles is
also ruled out. The fused / melted / sintered fuel will be in tact in the reactor only. It could not have
been carried away by the water. This will be known in due course of time.
The fuel Pond heating up also did not cause any radiation leaks, as feared during the course of the
accident.
So, in Fukushima there were no casualties. There were no Iodine effects on children. No major
contamination of Air. There was some contamination of soil and sea water in the vicinity only.
The present Exclusion Zones which have been maintained as a matter of caution, will be progressively
removed over the years with proper identification and decontamination of hot spots.
The facts and figures given above for the 3 Nuclear accidents are all based on scientifically studied Reports.
These are neutral Reports which are based on authentic studies conducted by World Health Organisation and
United Nations experts on the entire population in the vicinity. These are Reports which are written without any
prejudice to prove or disprove that Nuclear Energy is safe or not.
There are thousands of other Reports quoted by the media which are subjective studies conducted to highlight
the " ill effects" of Nuclear Energy and to prove that nuclear energy is unsafe, as they have been fearing from
childhood or as told by their parents.
Now, of late there are “experts” who come out with the concept of “Internal” and “External” radiation as if it is
not known to the Nuclear experts. They say, the damage due to the continuous irradiation of tissues by
radioactive particles which are inside the body is more and it should not be compared with the radiation dose
received by gamma rays externally.
It is perfectly correct and that is how the cancer probability based on the Iodine and Cesium intake are
estimated. These two are the two main radioactive elements which will come out in the event of breach in the
fuel clad. Rest all elements like Plutonium, Uranium, Neptunium, etc, which when go into the body stay long
and give appreciable dose to the body, do not come out to atmosphere as they are heavy elements. Without
knowing these fundamentals many argue that Uranium and Plutonium, if they go into the body will emit
radiation for 240,000 years ( as if he is going to live for 240,000 years !), and hence it also needs to be
accounted, while estimating the accident scenarios.
The three Nuclear Reactor accidents (in 2 of which no one died, and in one, only 43 have died and only about
10000 are expected to develop cancer in old age), have dispelled the myth that the Nuclear Reactor Accidents
will kill several thousand people immediately and create cancer among millions of people.
Also, the rebuilding of Hiroshima and Nagasaki cities within about few decades of Atom Bombs and the
healthy living of people there without any effect on the background radiation is a proof that the radiation can be
cleaned to a great extent and low levels of radiation do not cause any effect. Moreover, with the lapse of 70
years of Atom Bombs, among the few lakhs of acutely affected people, there is second and third generation
population of about 50,000. They do not have any symptoms of cancer / deformation dispelling another myth
about the genetic effects of radiation.
3. Environment: In the Nuclear Fuel cycle the environmental effects are there in two areas. One is the
Uranium Mining activity. The second is the disposal of radioactive fission products.
As explained earlier, the Uranium Mining activity is done with utmost care unlike in other mining activities due
to the involvement of radioactive substances. The wastes are recycled back into the mining area itself after
proper treatment.
Regarding the radioactive fission products disposal, it calls for a detailed technical discussion. It is given in a
separate Article titled “Nuclear Waste Management” attached herewith.
From this Article, we can understand that the Fission Products can be made into glass, embedded into
concrete cubicles and disposed off inside deep abandoned mines. This is an absolutely benign and
environmentally sound method. There is no short term or long term impacts on the environment due to the
disposal of fission products.
Except a few small countries, all those countries whose per capita GDP has grown more than 20,000 USD,
have had ambitious nuclear program with Nuclear Energy contributing more than 20% of their total power
production. Proportionately the life expectancy has also increased. This can be seen from Figure – 8.
From this Figure it is obvious that Nuclear Power has provided the cheap, clean and environmentally safe
power to these countries.
D) SOLAR:
1. Health : Solar Power Plants, either Photovoltaic (PV) or Concentrated Solar Thermal Power (CSP)
have no health hazards, except the health hazards associated with the manufacture of Glass, Steel,
Polysilicon, etc used in Solar Power plants.
2. Safety : There are no safety issues with PV based Solar Power. The CSP based solar power
involves handling of Chemicals (Thermic Fluid - Phenolic compounds) and steam at high pressures
and high temperatures. In CSP with Thermal storage, molten salts at high temperatures are used.
The other conventional accident probabilities related to Turbine / Generator / Pump / Piping exist in
CSP.
3. Environment: There are no major environmental issues associated with Solar Power excepting the
following:
a) Chemical pollution and used chemical disposal in the manufacture of Polysilicon and Glass.
b) At present the solar power installed capacity is not much and it is well spread out. But when there is
large scale deployment of PV or CSP in a particular region, say Dhar desert in India, then it might have
some implication on the climate by way of disturbance in the local atmospheric temperature / pressure,
leading to disturbances in monsoon pattern. It need not be in that region or in India. It can have some
effect anywhere in the world since the atmospheric changes are very complex and interlinked
throughout the Planet.
E) WIND:
1. Health: Wind Mills do not have any health effects on human beings. It may have some effect on the
birds. But due to slow speeds associated with Wind Mills, the effect on birds is minimal, excepting that
the birds are scared away from that region.
NUCLEAR POWER - GDP - LIFE EXPECTANCY
FIGURE 8
2. Safety: Excepting the accident probabilities during erection and maintenance, there are no major
safety issues associated with Wind Mills. Lightning damage to the Wind Mills is an area of concern.
3. Environment: Wind Mills have to be installed in specific regions where Wind speeds are higher.
Since the Kinetic Energy associated with the wind velocity only is converted into electrical energy in
Wind Mills, there is proportionate reduction in Wind Velocity down stream of Wind Mills. The Wind
Mills act as “obstructions” to normal flow of wind. As we all know, monsoon is associated with wind
flow pattern. So, naturally the Wind Mills are bound to have some effect on the monsoon pattern.
Today it may be insignificant and not yet mapped and correlated. But surely it will be known some day
when there is further growth of Wind Mills in high / medium wind regions, especially in narrow
mountain passes.
4. ECONOMICS FOR VARIOUS ENERGY OPTIONS
There are lot of confusions, myths and qualitative statements floating around about the economic aspects of
various power sources. Before going into the actual costing per unit of electricity produced from various
sources, we have to understand certain techno – economic parameters and they are discussed below.
a) Plant Load Factor (PLF): It is a measure of how many units a power plant actually produces in a year
per MW of installed capacity, as against how many units it can produce if it operates at its full capacity
for all 24 hours throughout the year. It is measured in terms of percentage as per following formula:
Total number of units actually produced (KW.hr)
PLF = ----------------------------------------------------------------- x 100
MW of Installed capacity x 1000 x 365 x 24
The following Table provides information on the average PLF of various Power Plants:
As can be seen from the above Table, Coal and Nuclear Power Plants have PLF of about 80%.
Whereas other sources have much less. Which means, the installed capacity, in terms of MW of each
Power source, can not produce the same number of units in a year. For example, a Solar PV or CSP
Power Plant with 1000MW installed capacity will produce only about 1/4th of what a 1000MW Nuclear
Power Plant will produce. So, just comparing the installed capacities on one to one basis is
meaningless. Most of the people do this mistake.
Most of the times, comparisons are made based on Percentage share of Installed capacity of various
energy sources. This does not serve any purpose. Especially in the Non-Conventional Energy data,
you will never find the percentage (or) proportion of electricity produced by Solar / Wind. However,
they will disclose big percentages like 10%, 20%, etc. in terms of Installed capacities! This is in a way
Investment Required per MW with interest for Gestation period
Total Investment Required
Interest cost per unit
ROI cost per unit
COST OF PRODUCTION PER UNIT
Life of the Plant
Average gestation period Investment required per MW
Fuel cost per Unit
Average Plant Load Factor ( PLF )
Total cost per Unit
Depreciation cost per Unit
Fuel Requirement per MW per yearCost of Fuel per ton
Depreciation cost per MW per year
Operating& Maint Labour cost per MW per year
Other oper.costs ( Insur., Consumables, Spares, etc) per Unit
COST COMPARISON FOR A 3000 MW POWER PLANT
Operating& Maint Labour Cost per Unit
Waste Management Cost per Unit
Remarks:
1
2
3 Average PLF value is considered since it is location specific, climate specific, grid availability, etc
4
5
6 Fuel cost includes Fuel Fabrication for Nuclear Power and Coal transport for Coal Power plants.
7 The total investment cost is amortised uniformly over the life of the plant.
8
9 Other operating cost values are only approximate.
Natural Uranium for Nuclear power plant and Indian Coal with 40% ash content for Coal based power plant are considered. If Fast BreederReactor based Nuclear power plant is considered, then the Uranium requirement will be just 0.0005 tons / MW.
For Coal fired power plants, this area excludes Coal mining area and Ash handling area which are substantial. For Wind Mills, the land can beused for agriculture purposes. But in case of Solar power, we can not use it for any other purpose. If we talk of Roof top units, they will be verymuch costlier due to smaller capacities. For example, a 1000 Sq Ft roof top can generate only 2 KW and it will cost not less than Rs.8,00,000with associated storage Batteries, Invertors, etc. Moreover, we can not avoid grid power supply connection and the associated investment. Itbecomes a double investment.
The life of Coal and Nuclear Power plants can be increased by about 20 years with complete revamp. It is not considered. For Wind Mills, theBlades need to be changed after 20 years to get the overall life of 40 years. This is included in the investment cost.For Solar, in case of CSPwithout Thermal storage ( HTF), the life is limited by the life of the Steam Generator, Super Heater, BFW Heater and Reheater. Since theseundergo daily thermal cycling, Fatigue will be a major issue. With the Thermal Cycling almost on daily basis, the life can not be expectedbeyond about 20 years.
For Solar, in case of CSP with Thermal Storage option ( Molten Salt ), the life will be better since it is not subjected to Thermal cycling on adaily basis. But, the investment will be substantially higher. But still, CSP with Thermal Storage will be a better option since the capacityrequired for the plant will be about 1 /3 rd of the CSP without Thermal Storage. Also, we can get better rate per unit based on peak loadgeneration possibility.
The waste management cost of Nuclear energy is a bit complex to calculate since we have to account for the value of recovered Pu-239 & U-238.But here it has been conservatively assumed as about 10% of total Unit cost ignoring the reuse value of Pu-239 & U-238. If we considerthe reuse value, then the waste management cost is more than offset.
Average values are considered in all cases since there will be substantial variations depending on location, installed capacity, etc. Since thereis difference in gestation periods, the interest for project implementation period is capitalised and included in investment cost.
5. OBJECTIONS FOR CREATING ADDITIONAL CAPACITIES
There are certain loose comments and blames on all Governments by certain NGOs, so called “eminent
citizens”, etc., whenever new power projects are started. These comments include (a) Only large industries
get uninterrupted power, (b) Rich consume more power, (c) There is “huge” loss in Transmission and
Distribution, (d) Remote villages still do not have electricity, (e) There is lot of theft, (f) The existing power
plants do not operate at full capacity, etc. These arguments always find prominence in the generic media
especially in the context of Nuclear Power, though none of these arguments are substantiated with facts and
figures.
Let us see these arguments one by one.
(a) All large continuous process industries need to be given uninterrupted power without which they can
not run. For that they pay atleast 2 times of what a household consumer pays per unit. By this way
the common man is benefited in may ways like, cross subsidization of electricity, better utilization of
the Power Plant investment which brings down the overall cost of electricity, and above all, the
products of the continuous process industries like, Chemicals, Cement, Petroleum Products, Paper,
Steel, etc. are all used by every one. It is not just used by the owners / employees of these plants
only.
(b) As for the argument that the rich consume more power, it is applicable for any resource, be it house,
car, petrol, food, etc. There are some checks and balances in the society like, Income Tax. We can
always play with these parameters. Why we should quote this disparity to stop further investments in
Power Sector? Already we charge higher rates for higher electricity consumption by the rich. Most of
the States give free power to small farmers and some States give 100% free power for all farmers.
These factors take care of this kind of disparities. Quoting this reason to stop further growth in
electricity generation is incorrect.
(c) As for the huge loss in Transmission & Distribution, there is lot of misunderstanding. Big numbers like
30 to 50% are thrown as “loss” due to T & D. The fact is that, these numbers are exaggerated and
they need to be understood in the right perspective.
Firstly, it is not just T & D loss. It is actually AT & C losses. That is, Aggregate Technical &
Commercial losses. The Technical Part is T & D loss. The Commercial part is the Theft, Unmetered
consumption, Tampered meter consumption, unauthorized usage for Public purposes, etc. The
average T & D loss across India in HT transmission is about 8% and LT transmission is about 16%.
The total T & D loss is 24%. The Commercial “loss” is about 10%. The total loss is about 34%. This
theft and unmetered consumption is mostly benefiting the poor and the public at large in the society,
baring a few exemptions of theft by industrial / commercial users reported now and then. Hence, it is
not a loss in terms of energy usage. It is only a commercial loss to the State Electricity Boards. It
needs to be plugged.
Regarding the 16% of LT Transmission loss, we must appreciate the fact that, we have about 17.6
million agricultural pump sets and about 250 million household connections spread across vast areas,
which are served by LT connections. In Developed Countries they do not have such high proportion of
LT consumers. May be there is a scope for bringing the T & D loss from 24% to about 20% by
increasing HT lines, by improving system power factor, by installing regional substations, by installing
more step up transformers, etc.
For reducing HT transmission, more number of 800 KV HVDC Transmission lines are being built.
Also, 1200 KV HVDC lines are also planned. People must understand one thing. The Transmission
infrastructure cost required for every MW of power to be transmitted is almost equal to the cost per
MW of Power Plant. So, even while attempting to reduce T&D loss, we must also keep the cost /
benefit analysis of large investments involved in creating transmission infrastructure.
(d) The blame about lack of electricity in remote villages - yes it needs to be addressed. But whether it is
good to spend several crores to lay transmission lines, provide drinking water, provide schools,
Hospitals, roads, etc. to villages with few hundred people living in remote areas in the hills (or)
encourage them to move out to nearby villages / towns so that they can get a better standard of living
with a much lower public investment? We need to look at the question from the socio-techno-
economic angles before blaming the Government for not providing electricity to the remote villages.
We can either move these people to nearby villages / towns (or) we can provide electricity by stand
alone solar power panels.
Citing this reason for stopping large nuclear power plants or coal power plants is absurd. In fact in the
past 5 years the Government has electrified 94000 villages which are in remote areas with scanty
population with an investment of Rs. 25,000 Crores. The balance is only about 20000 villages.
(e) Regarding theft of Power, it is like theft of any other resource. If we stop the theft, will the overall
availability of electricity increase? It will help to improve the financial position of State Electricity
Boards by proper metering. That is all. Citing this reason for stopping new Power Plants is untenable.
(f) As for the operation of existing Power Plants at lower efficiencies and lower capacity factors, it was
true that in earlier years the Plant Load Factors (PLF) used to be low and fuel efficiencies were also
low. Now with the improvement of technology and with more and more involvement of Private Sector
in Ownership and Operation and Maintenance of Power Plants there is substantial improvement in
PLFs. At present, the average PLF of Coal Power Plants is 78% and that of Nuclear Power Plants is
about 80%. These can be at best increased to 85%, if there is grid stability and there is not much of
Peak Load difference. Hydel, Solar and Wind Power Plant PLFs can not be increased any further
since they are controlled by natural phenomenon. Hence, overall there is very little scope for
improving the performance of existing Power Plants. We have no choice other than adding new
capacities.
6. RESETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION
In Countries like India where the population density is high (368 per Sq.Km) and the population spread is near
uniform, it is increasingly becoming very difficult to find the minimum area required to set up large projects.
Typically we need 2000 to 4000 acres for setting up Thermal / Nuclear Power Plants. For Nuclear Power
Plants, apart from this land, as a matter of abundant caution and prudence, the area surrounding 5 KM is
expected to be maintained as a sterilized zone with limited population growth, though there is no need to
vacate the existing population. For Hydel power projects, apart from the Dam construction area there is an
additional area required by way of submergence upstream of the Dams.
For Solar / Wind Power Plants the land area required is much higher, almost 3 to 6 times compared to Thermal
/ Nuclear Power Plants of equivalent capacity. For example if a Coal / Nuclear Power Plant of 2000 MW
capacity needs 3000 acres then Solar PV plant of same capacity needs 12,000 acres.
Hence, the need for few thousand acres at one location is inevitable. This land includes the area required for
employees’ quarters, schools, Hospitals, etc apart from the land required for the Power Plant itself.
As there is human habitation everywhere, we can only find areas with sparse population as project sites. Also
some part of this area would be agricultural land. Some part may be forest. This is the reality. We have to
accept it as an inevitable compromise for the overall betterment of the society.
The talks like, we can always find alternate sites where there is “no population” and where there is “no
disturbance to agriculture and forest land” is all hippocratic.
Having accepted the fact that human displacement is inevitable, we must evolve suitable Resettlement and
Re-habitation methodologies to ensure that the project affected people are adequately compensated and there
is long term security for the members of the project affected families. Though there can be no formula
which can be termed as absolutely fair, we have to accept some arbitrariness in deciding the compensation
formula. One such formula with a combination of 3 packages to take care of their immediate livelihoods and
the economic well being of future generations is given below:
1. Equal area of same type of land within about 10 KM of the periphery of the Project
(or)
3 Times the highest guideline value within 5 KM of the acquired land, at the option of the individual.
2. Shares in the Company for a value equal to the highest guideline value existing within 5 KM radius.
3. 10% Employment quota for land owners / wards.
Though everyone has to appreciate the pain and the psychological pressure the project affected families will
undergo, we shall also keep in mind the following realities:
(a) Human beings have sentimental attachments to their birth place. They would not like to move out
however wretched the place may be. This is natural. But most of the people will move out if
suitable compensation is given and their long term economic security is taken care of. However,
there will always be some people, who will be in minority, who would be so adamant that whatever
compensation you offer, they will not accept displacement. We can not afford to go by this kind of
irrational behaviours in a society, where compromises by a few for the betterment of the overall
society is inevitable. Almost every individual does compromise in some way or the other for the
betterment of the society. It can not be avoided.
(b) We have to keep in mind that most of the people who have come out of their birth place on their
own or due to compulsion are well off and they do not have any regrets.
(c) It is not always possible to take on board all people all the time. Some people who have accepted
the project and moved out can always change their mind and revolt again. We can not handle all
these issues only on compassionate and humanitarian grounds.
To take care of all these issues, we must have an Empowered Committee, whose decision shall be
final and beyond legal jurisdiction. Otherwise, a few people can always stall the development of a
Country.
7. ENERGY OPTIONS FOR INDIA
Based on the various resources available, their long term availability, their multiple usage options, Health,
Safety and Environmental issues and cost, let us arrive at an option which is balanced and sustainable on a
long term basis.
Table-5 gives the Projected GDP Growth, Energy Demand and Peak Load over the next 50 years.
The GDP Growth rates given in the above Table may look to be very pessimistic. But, for reasons given in the
Article “Indian Growth Story – What to expect?”, attached herewith these are the numbers which are going
to be realistic. So, let us plan for the energy requirement to achieve these growth rates. If the growth rates
planned are going to be better than this, we need to proportionately accelerate the installed power capacities.
Based on the information provided above with regard to the Resource availability, HSE, Long term energy
security, Cost, etc let us list out the pros and cons and evolve a policy on capacity addition for each of the
energy resources for the next 50 years to achieve the growth rates projected in Table – 5.
1. Coal :
a) It will be available for a reasonably long time even with the doubling of installed capacity from the
current level.
b) It has lot of HSE issues.
c) It has a large environmental issue in terms of climate change and the impending glacier melting.
OPTION - 2 ( WITHOUT SOLAR & WIND GROWTH ) Total Additional Capacity 679930
From To From To From To From To From To From To From To From To From To From To From To From To From To1 2012 2022 200000 259500 1.15 230000 298425 130000 250000 39000 50000 4870 10000 15700 15700 500 500 117000 225000 23400 30000 4383 9000 4710 4710 0 50 149493 268760 80507 29665 0 136130
1 In Option-1, the PLF of Coal + Gas and Nuclear are kept deliberately low so that Wind and Solar are utilized as and when they are avaialble.
2 The Estimate of total Electricity required includes the AT & C losses. Any improvement in this area will reflect in higher per capita availability for the given installed capacity.
3 As can be seen from the Total Additional Installed Capacity under Option-1 and Option-2, for the given Total Units produced meeting the same level of Peak loads, in Option-2, we need to install about
105800 MW less additional capacity.
Which means, there is no need for Grid connected Solar / Wind Capacities. By fully utilising the practical limit of PLF of Coal / Gas & Nuclear, we can meet the Total Energy Demand.
4 The PLF of Coal / Nuclear are assumed to be lower than the current level of about 75%.
This is because, we are planning to have sufficient installed capacity to meet reasonable level of Peak Load, better than the present situation.
5 In Option-3, PLF of Coal + Gas and Nuclear are slightly increased compared to Option- 2, to compensate for the reduced overall Total Installed Capacity.
1 Ratio of Peak Load to Mean load is not likely to decrease much due to the incresing demand from household consumptions in India.
2 With more and more Pumped Storage schemes / Inter Linking of Rivers, we can improve the Avialability factor of Hydel Power Stations. Hence 60% is taken for Peak Load Availability calculations.
3 Out of the total Solar Power, 50% is from CSP with Thermal Storage. Out of this, we can expect about 20% to be available during Peak Period.
4 It is completely impratical to eliminate Peak Shortage with substantial part coming from Hydel / Wind / Solar
It is possible to manage with increased use of Pumped Storage Schemes and by demand side management. Otherwise, we need to create too much excess capacity and keep it idle duirng Off Peak period.
5 As can be seen from the Total Additional Installed Capacity under Option-2 and Option-3, for the given Total Units produced meeting the same level of Peak loads, in Option-3, we need to install
39,000 MW less additional capacity.
This is because, the Availability Factor for Coal / Nuclear is higher @ 90% compared to 60% for Hydel.
TABLE - 6
TABLE - 7
REMARKS
As can be seen under Option-3, in Table-6 & 7, with about 1,30,000 MW of Hydel power, the utilization of Coal
/ Nuclear capacity in terms of PLF is somewhat reduced. Obviously, this is because of the lesser Percentage
Availability of Hydel power to meet Peak Load Demand compared to Coal / Nuclear, though it is better than
Wind / Solar. If we have this additional hydel capacity as Coal / Nuclear itself, then we need to have lesser
Installed Capacity and we can have higher PLF for Coal / Power. This will also bring down the over all cost of
electricity from Coal / Nuclear.
But, unlike the Solar / Wind option, Hydel should not be wished away, since anyway we need to invest in the
Dams and Canals for various other purposes and the Hydel Power Plant cost is only marginal in the overall
cost of the Dams / Canals. Hence, we can compromise on the PLF of Coal / Nuclear PLF. The higher cost of
Coal / Nuclear will be compensated by the lower cost of Hydel power.
So, the best Option among the three is Option – 2.
The proportions of various power sources given in Option-2 is planned in such a way as to keep the present
work horses active (Coal & Hydel), ensure the long term driver its right place (Nuclear), give the emerging
options (Wind & Solar) their chance to evolve in their fit domain only and relegate the unwanted player
(Biomass) to the negative list.
Analyzing our energy options in these lines in greater details and arriving at an early consensus on the long
term energy policy is the key for ensuring a steady improvement in the standard of living of our people on a
sustainable basis, without putting much pressure on the environment and without compromising the overall
