Thursday, October 21, 2010

Firsthand story


The catastrophe theory finally applied itself on 6th July after remaining dormant for almost six years of my life. Replying back to the mail was like breaking the cyst simply to reach out and be myself. That big sized bold font mail was seeking attention and participation of all the Greenpeace volunteers to raise a strong voice, a voice for change, a voice against injustice. A nation wide Public Consultation on the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill was announced by the Government following the pressure put by the fierce opposition, the activists and the concerned NGOs. Had it not been for a juggernaut action of petition signing by Greenpeace, the government would have been completely ready to finalize and pass the bill. How can this democratic procedure ignore such a strong voice of its nation? And how can this work simply get done without passing through the two important stages of ridicule and opposition? I believe the bill is at its second stage of opposition right now moving rapidly towards the third stage of acceptance which will be commencing within 15 days. An irony, indeed it is that a country of a billion population is told to wrap up with a NATION WIDE PUBLIC CONSULTATION in just 15 days. It clearly reflects the ‘name-sake-ness’ attitude of the ruling party! This indeed is the very first argument of Greenpeace condemning the short time given for a public opinion.
I was very quick to make a decision of attending it and so I reached the Santacruze office sharp at 11am as was informed. I was all ready with my research on the subject and so the air around got more cleared once we were briefed in detail by a Greenpeace activist at the office. We were enlightened with so many aspects of the bill, its history and its likes in other countries. There we were, all of us, very well aware of the subject, ready to step ahead. But before everything could start taking shape, I volunteered for taking the minutes of the day. I had not done that earlier. Ergo, with full of excitement inward and contained expressions outward, I was on my toes, literally noting the ‘minutes’ of every event. With two core volunteers we left for the venue – the magnificent edifice of Mumbai University’s Convocation Hall. Making friends with gabby newbies was easier and fun too. One of the core volunteers went further by referring us as family. What a warmth I felt! This was just the by-product of the entire chemical reaction. The catalyst was that common feeling of doing something, even though small, for bringing the change by being the change. Same feeling was ubiquitous.
When we reached the venue, that awe-inspiring sight of the Hall diffused with golden light, couldn’t have been better. Those delicately carved wooden doors and adeptly designed interiors gave a British-era feeling. This ambience provided a perfect set-up for the talks to proceed. The attendees to the session included the activists, the victims, the journalists, academicians and common people. Soon to arrive was the Greenpeace team with banners and posters. The work immediately began to fix the banners in the Hall. Particularly depicting the calamitous aftermath of the nuclear disasters occurred around the world; the cold black and white posters sent a clear message that – Nuclear energy is not what we want and that ‘In India Polluters Pay!’.
The session started with the speech of HOD, Department of Law, University of Mumbai explaining about the nuclear power. His explanation caught up with the details defining the terms in simplified manner. The succeeding speakers talked on complete ban on nuclear energy and how government is ignoring so many of the important clauses in the bill. There are so many clauses in the bill which need amendments. Briefing a few and important of them:
· Clause 6: The maximum financial liability in case a nuclear accident occurs in nuclear reactors has been set to $458 million. The amount is very meagre when compared to the destruction caused by a nuclear accident. A same kind of law in U.S. has set the financial liability for such accident at $10.5 billion.
· Clause 7: The clause 7 defines the share of financial liability for each of the culpable groups. It states that the operator will have to pay Rs. 500 crore and the remaining amount will be paid by the Indian government. This is considered as a ridiculous point as the operator will be the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCIL) which in itself is a government owned facility. The operator can claim the liabilities form the manufacturer and supplier if it is mentioned in the contract. But the maximum amount payable by the foreign companies will be a very little sum of Rs. 500 crore. Ultimately, it is the Indian taxpayer who will have to give the money even when the accident has occurred due to others mistakes.
· Clause 17: This clause deals with the legal binding of the culpable groups in case of a nuclear accident. It does allow only the operator (NPCIL) to sue the manufacturers and suppliers. The victims won’t be able to sue anyone. Practically, no one is considered legally liable because the recourse taken by the operator will yield only Rs. 500 crore at maximum.
· Clause 18: Clause 18 of the nuclear liability bill limits the time to make a claim within 10 years. This is very less as compared to the long term damage that may be caused due to a nuclear accident.
· Clause 35: Clause 35 extends the legal binding that the responsible groups may have to face. The operator or the responsible persons in case of a nuclear accident will undergo the trial under Nuclear Damage Claims Commissions and no civil court is given the authority. The country will be divided into zones with each zone having a Claims Commissioner. In the U.S. counterpart – the Price Anderson Act, the lawsuits and criminal proceedings goes under the U.S. courts.
The tides of questions started rising up in my mind as the session proceeded. Why is the government so lenient with the foreign investors, the manufacturers and the suppliers? Why was the health and environment ministry not consulted before finalizing the bill? Does the bill specify any liability for environmental damage in case nuclear disaster? We have all witnessed the recent and worst British Petroleum oil-spill and are still witnessing the methods U.S. authorities are adopting to hold the culprits liable. Why can’t we learn from them? The ecology and bio-diversity are equally important for a country’s wealth. Who will be claiming for the damage to environment? The bill is silent about the environment clean-up. The effects of a nuclear disaster are unimaginable and inevitable and they will persist for ages to come. Also, if the bill is named as the ‘CIVIL NUCLEAR LIABILITY BILL’, why aren’t the civil courts allowed to give justice? Creating zones and appointing zonal claims commissioners will not simplify the process. All are aware of how government bodies function. What about the health of the workforce working at the nuclear plant and the people dealing with scrape generated from such nuclear plants? There are many other issues which need a close attention. The bill, in this scenario, needs a serious second thought of amendment.
I grabbed the opportunity of expressing my opinions on the podium. The time was very less and so I made it straight-to-the-point expression. I wish I had more time to speak and explain the validity of my questions and arguments elaborately. That upsurge of tides of questions which arose in my mind propelled everything out so fast that I couldn’t manage the words running away. But I was contented as my words were taken as suggestion. Everything which was spoken by every speaker was simultaneously noted down for the purpose of presentation to the standing committee. The session soon ended and I reported the ‘Minutes’ to the Head of Greenpeace Mumbai. Now, if someone asks me whether Greenpeace made any difference to this important issue, I will be quick to reply that indeed Greenpeace made THE difference. It created awareness amongst the populace and also took its opinions regarding the bill for amendments. But the fight continues, petitioning continues, spreading awareness continues, as the rainbow warriors forge ahead. I am so proud to be one!

5 comments:

  1. You touch upon very crucial topic here, and raise many important questions. I will try to be as objective as possible.
    Energy and Economy are central to existence of any civilization. “No Taxation without Representation”, was a driving assertion that led to declaration of Independence from British by American colonies. Collapse of economy was a key factor that led to disintegration of erstwhile Soviet Union. And remember, after industrial revolution, it's the availability of energy that determines whether a society will have a sustainable economy. India is badly dependent of external sources for energy, which makes our nation very vulnerable. If you don't have energy, you don't have economy. If economy doesn't run well, countries simply collapse. This is the reason why government seems obsessed with building nuclear power plants.
    Having said that, nuclear energy is not the ultimate technology. In fact to speak in terms of numbers- most nuclear power plants operate in the range of 1000-2000 MW. Prime Minister Singh once said that we may need around, 950,000 MW of power by 2030 ( I truly believe we may need much more than 950,000 MW). Even if we are going to build Nuclear reactors relentlessly, Nuclear power will hardly make any significant contribution in terms of percentage to total power production.

    You see, White, if hammer is your only tool, every problem looks like a nail. For those who rule, the word “nuclear” implies power, status, and something that can be shown off as “Look, I'm powerful. I'm more nuclear than you're.” It's not a coincidence that permanent five in security council have the “hammer”. There is no better tool to show off power than having nuclear energy. Of course, in countries like France, significant percentage of power is drawn from nuclear plants. But we are not France. We are a nation of Billion.
    Even if half of the money, effort, PR, and willingness spent on nuclear power are spent on renewable and non-conventional energy sources, energy shortage would be a thing of the past.


    TD

    ReplyDelete
  2. Okay,
    Your comment points out that you are in favour of renewable energy resource at the same time you think that having nuclear power plants is equivalent to gaining power and status.
    Before participating in the Public Consultation, I was actually in favour of nuclear energy. But the eminent speakers present that day unveiled certain unknown aspects related to nuclear and clean-green energy which made me change my opinion.
    I agree to what you said about the obsession of government. It will solve all the problem is what they believe and turn a blind eye to other grave consequences. If you read the clauses in the liability bill carefully you will understand how risky the whole nuclear business is. The government and people at large fail to understand that huge investments required in nuclear energy. The import of technology, the equipments, building up of reactors (at places located far away from resident areas...in today's India where population and space is a major problem), maintenance, ensuring the safety, protecting it from terror groups/threats, etc. is a group of complex/sensitive issues. Besides we cant ignore the natural calamities. I see nuclear power as underestimation of the renewable/non-conventional sources of energy.
    What I want to know is - why is the government not ready to spend the same amount for solar energy, wind energy, etc? What is the problem with that? Why cant we be a nation generating all the required energy using clean sources and setting an example in front of the whole world?
    I do not think that having nuclear power will make us powerful. (That is my personal opinion.) Why do you think the world venerates the father of our nation and believes in his much experimented methods of non-violence? We simply cannot ignore that we are a country which has always propagated peace, has neither underestimate nor tried to
    impose our directions on any nation and has always considered every nation as equal (as is said by Swami Vivekanand). Having said this, I don't see any need for showing-off our power. That is not in our nature I think.... :)

    Anyways, thanks for reading the big article, commenting with great thoughtfulness, highlighting your concerns and raising the issues.

    PS - This article was my personal experience as a volunteer for Greenpeace. Its an article written in mid 2010 and will be transfered soon to the the blog exclusive for Greenpeace volunteers. Probably I will then take it off my blog. Depends..

    ReplyDelete
  3. 'Debate: Does the world need nuclear energy?'
    This is the title of a debate featured on www.Ted.com
    I am actually unable to paste a complete link to the video here in this comments section.
    Just go to Ted.com and type the above title.
    Enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Bury them in the market."

    I had a professor. He used to teach us mechanics. He always told us- "The method adopted for the solution must be suitable for the problem". Protests and consultations work in many cases. It's a part of functioning democracy. I agree. But here? They're even ready to risk their government's existence to bring nuclear reactors. (Remember? vote in parliament?)

    Market is a great burial place of technology. The weakest point of Nuclear power is cost. You can not stop the government by honorable debate. They're beyond anyone's communication skills. But you can build technology so cheap and so effective that all people will start using renewable energy sources. Nuclear power program will die its much deserved death.Today, capital, or resources, or support are not at all a problem- there are plenty of them. For instance-
    http://www.dsir.gov.in/tpdup/tepp/tepp.htm

    http://www.tie.org/

    http://www.nenonline.org/





    White, you and I may not want to show off power by going nuclear. But south block surely wants to project power(sic).



    TD

    PS: I'll surely watch the TED video. ^_^

    PPS: Our dear Gandhi said "Be the change you want to see in the world." Why wait for government to make India a model nation that generates all its power using renewable sources? ..................................

    (You are smart enough to fill in the blank)

    ReplyDelete
  5. The bill has been passed in both 'Sabhas' and we all will have a taste of it anyways.

    The links which you gave: I see some genuine efforts to encourage research in India. Thats good.

    You must be the change....
    that is one of my favourite quotations. I even have posted it on my blog long back and coincidently it is the first entry to my blog.
    Filling the blank is easier, but acting, making such concrete ideas come ture and living the dream is tough...but not impossible....I guess..

    ReplyDelete