Sunday, November 7, 2021

Kudankulam and cancer deaths

Re: Kudankulam plant cannot be allowed to remain idle: PM
On Board PM's Special Aircraft, Dec 17 (PTI)
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today said the Kudankulam Nuclear Power plant, whose commissioning has been stalled due to protests, cannot be allowed to remain "idle" when the nation has sunk an amount of Rs 14,000 crore on the project.
Unfortunately Hon'ble PM, the best is not good enough. Your experts are not good enough for nuclear power's unacceptable dangers.One million will die from cancer due to Fukushima say some experts and here are your experts saying nuclear is not likely to cause cancer! There you are. If you start the plant it will have grave consequences because it requires infallibility and the waste problem is insoluble. There are enough nuclear reactors in the world ready to cause catastrophes galore. Please do not be complicit in the creation of perfect murders that nuclear programmes cause. Thats deficit financing infinitely because no power will be forthcoming to society from the nuclear power programmes when all input output auditing is done till their decommissioning and their waste management energies are fully accounted for. Abandon nuclear power and hand over the work of mothballing the present nukes and waste management from generation to generation to the nuclear authorities under you. See the other two URLs at
Because you have not performed the complete energy audit of your planning and implementation you are leading the nation to insolvency and terrible synergistic effects of nuclearisation. Nuclear power, no thanks. I do hope you will have the good sense to desist from going ahead with Kudankulam whose cost is a pittance compared to the debts the nation will have to bear from generation to generation. The future generations are not here to vote no.
Go ask the people for a mandate by a nation wide referendum on such an issue which has a bearing on the life of countless generations of all life.
There are good people who can take the nation away from such a suicidal path. Ask their advise and for their involvement.
Let democracy really work instead of the government allowing foodgrains to rot and Public distribution systems to go haywire.
Yes living energy will generate all that the nuclear power systems can with no consequent ill effects.
See http://isothermalengines.blogspot.com Here are the health effects of nuclear power at Kudankulam: The following comments of mine appeared in Deccan Herald on 18 Dec2011 at http://www.deccanherald.com/content/211916/russia-nuke-coop-continue-peoples.html
It is worse than Fukushima! 9200 MW of nukes planned for Tamilnadu means about 30000 cancer deaths per year or deaths equivalent to 15 Bhopals every year! This is some 125 percent increase due to Kudankulam from the present cancer rate in Tamilnadu(1). And for the lifetime of the reactors of some 50 years it means even during normal operations of these nukes the contribution is 1.5 million cancer deaths by KNPP alone and in Tamilnadu alone! This is as per radiation facts and simulation given by Dr John Gofman,MD and his fallout data due to atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. He was Chair of USNRC! See Health Effects of Nuclear Power at http://isisunveiledhenp.blogspot.com/ and the references cited there. It is for the right to healthy life that the people are protesting and they are taking this responsibility for all life today and for those to come on Mother Earth.Have a heart and join the fight!Peace! Peace! Peace! Look at the report on the continuing Fukushima horror deaths at http://enenews.com/happening-now-medical-journal-article-says-14000-u-s-deaths-tied-to-fukushima-fallout-streaming-audio-available-at-4pm
The appeal to the PM in the top paragraph above also appeared in the Deccan Herald but was subsequently removed!
Given enough time modern civilization will destroy life. The annual cancer death rate ball park estimates for Kudankulam are compared with those of Kaiga, Jaitapur, Gorakhpur and Kovvada in Table 1 below. We may have to contend with excess annual cancer deaths from these four nuclear parks alone of 40 Bhopals/year, a unit of Bhopal being immediate deaths wrought by the Bhopal gas disaster of about 2259. View the figures by right clicking on the figure and opening link in new tab. Note: The estimated number of deaths for Tamilnadu are derived as follows(See Health Effects of Nuclear Power website above): The precautionary principle is kept in mind while deriving these estimates both here and in my article cited above. The planned nuclear plant capacity in Kudankulam is 9200 MW(2x1000,6x1200) as per 2007 NPCIL web site quoted in Wikipedia on Indian Nuclear Reactors. The lifetime load factor is assumed at 0.8 Thus the energy capacity MW-years/year is 9200x0.8= 7360. Radiation leak assumed 0.1 percent of annual Cs 137 isotope produced in the reactor core=3.55 Ci/MW-year. Or Cs137 leak= 3.55 Ci/MW-y x 7360 MW-y = 26128 Ci/y Tamilnadu 2011 population = 72138958. Area= 130058 km^2. Intensity of Radiation mCi/y/km^2= Cs137 leak/Area km^2= (26125/130058)x 1000= 200.895 mCi/y/km^2. Radiation Exposure= Wholebody rads/year/person= Intensity of Radiation x 0.00066= 200.895 x 0.00066= 0.132591 rads/y/person Tamilnadu Total Person Dose= Person Rads/year=Rads exposure x population= 0.132591 x 72138958=9564954 Dose per fatal cancer 300 Rads. Tamilnadu number of fatal cancers per year= 9564954/300= 31883.18. Tamilnadu Cancer Death rate due to Kudankulam Reactors of 9200 MW= 31883.18/72138958 x 100000= 44.2 per 100000 population per year. Tamilnadu overall cancer death rate at 50% of average annual cancers is 34.66 per 100000 per year(See reference 1 below). This is 127.5% increase due to Kudankulam, if all Kudankulam reactors were present now. Now let us turn to the effects on nuclear workers at Kudankulam. What we may be in for. The healthy worker effect See http://www.llrc.org/health/healthframes.htm See my comments below: Re: http://www.deccanherald.com/content/218577/govt-firm-kudankulamncpil.html Assuming cancer death rate among nuclear npcil employees at 50% of 54.05 or 27.025 gives a standardised mortality ratio(SMR) with reference to Tamilnadu of 77.98221. Assuming healthy worker effect as given in the reference http://www.llrc.org/health/healthframes.htm(See link above) of an SMR of 57%, this represents an excess cancer SMR of 36.81% of Tamilnadu cancer death rate of 34.66/100000 per year! This is an excess cancer death rate in Tamilnadu of 12.76/100000/year! Thus the cancer death rate among NPCIL staff becomes 47.41/100000 per year or greater than my estimate for the general population of Tamilnadu of 44.2/100000/year or 31883 cancer deaths per year! See my estimates here (at http://abandonnukes.blogspot.com/2011/12/kudankulam-and-cancer-deaths.html ). Note that the official estimates are based on the ICRP risk model for external irradiation which is not science, in fact pre DNA witchcraft(ECRR 2003). Internal irradiation risk is more than an order of magnitude higher. I would fervently support the general public's resistance against nuclear power plants based on science. References: 1.p72ff: THE NATIONAL MEDICAL JOURNAL OF INDIA VOL. 24, NO. 2, 2011 Original Articles Division of Epidemiology and Cancer Registry, Cancer Institute (WIA), Chennai 600036, Tamil Nadu, India R. SWAMINATHAN, V. SHANTA, S. BALASUBRAMANIAN International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon 69008, France J. FERLAY, F. BRAY, R. SANKARANARAYANAN Correspondence to R. SWAMINATHAN; iarcsurvival@yahoo.co.uk Trends in cancer incidence in Chennai city (1982–2006) and statewide predictions of future burden in Tamil Nadu (2007–16) R. SWAMINATHAN, V. SHANTA, J. FERLAY, S. BALASUBRAMANIAN, F. BRAY, R. SANKARANARAYANAN http://www.nmji.in/archives/Volume-24/Issue-2/Original-Article-I.pdf ECRR 2003. Health Effects of Ionising Radiation Exposure at Low Doses for Radiation Protection Purposes.2003(2010) recommendations of the European Committee on Radiation Risk. Ed C.Busby etal. Green Audit.p 10.p12.
Posted by at

2 comments:

  1. Ramaswami Ashok KumarMarch 7, 2022 at 10:57 PM

    Re: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/it-is-time-to-allay-fears-over-nuclear-projects-in-andhra-pradesh/article65202101.ece#comments_65202101
    Abandon Nuclear Power. Nuclear Power is posing an extreme threat to the very existence of life in the present context due to the cumulative dangers of modern civilisation. It must be abandoned now. It will make no difference to society except relieve it of an insoluble problem of incurable diseases for many generations.
    See Ramaswami Ashok Kumar. 2021. Abandon Nuclear Power. Kudankulam and cancer deaths. Blogspot.
    This is premeditated random mass murders over centuries by the government. Abandon Nuclear Power. Nuclear Power is posing an extreme threat to the very existence of life in the present context due to the cumulative dangers of modern civilisation. It must be abandoned now. It will make no difference to society except relieve it of an insoluble problem of incurable diseases for many generations. See Ramaswami Ashok Kumar. 2021. Abandon Nuclear Power. Kudankulam and cancer deaths. Blogspot.
    THE NUCLEAR DISASTERS OF SELLAFIELD ARE CORRELATED WITH INDIAN INFANT MORTALITY DURING THOSE FATEFUL YEARS-1971 TO 1978 AND 1983 TO 1984 AND IT IS FOUND THAT LIKE THE ATMOSPHERIC WEAPONS TESTS AND CHERNOBYL, THEY HAVE TAKEN AWAY THE LIVES OF MILLIONS OF INDIAN INFANTS. A STUDY OF FISH CATCH AS WELL AS OF DUGONG SHOWS THAT BOTH POPULATIONS ARE DECLINING WITH RADIOACTIVITY. DOES DOSE AS A CONCEPT OF INTERNAL RADIOACTIVITY HAVE ANY MEANING LEFT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS BY THE MEANEST?
    See also Ramaswami Ashok Kumar. 2014. THE UNACCEPTABLE DANGERS OF NUCLEAR ENERGY: KOVVADA IN SRIKAKULAM WILL NOT BE SPARED BY HUDHUD LIKE CYCLONE. Blogspot.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ramaswami Ashok KumarApril 19, 2022 at 12:42 AM

    WHO has compromised health with IAEA
    Health,WHO and IAEA


    "The point here is that all the organizations that governments depend upon for a scientific consensus argument ultimately interconnect and rely on one risk model: that of the ICRP. The ICRP is not independent of the organizations that it depends upon for its evidence, and they are not independent of it. The system is an internally consistent and epicyclically-maintained fortress of bad science, bias and false conclusions. What of that other UN organization, which might be reasonable expected to have a concern about radiation exposures and health, the World Health Organisation? In 1959 WHO was constrained into an agreement with IAEA which left the IAEA in charge of all research into the health effects of radiation. This agreement is still in force, and covers not only WHO but also FAO. At the 2001 Kiev Conference on the health effects of the Chernobyl accident, the Chair of WHO, Prof H Nakajima stated in a public interview: ‘in the research into the effects of radiation WHO is subservient to IAEA, health is subservient to the atom’. The mandate of IAEA is the development of peaceful uses of the atom, though currently it is more of an international policeman aimed at limiting the spread of nuclear weapons beyond the USA and other current nuclear states. The lack of research into the health effects of the Chernobyl accident has been blamed on the involvement of the IAEA and the emasculation of the WHO (Fernex 2001). The relevant agreement states: . . . it is recognized by the WHO that the IAEA has the primary responsibility for encouraging, assisting and co-ordinating research on, and development and practical application of atomic energy for peaceful uses throughout the world... Whenever either organization proposes to initiate a programme or activity on a subject in which the other organization has or may have a substantial interest, the first party shall consult the other with a view to adjusting the matter by mutual agreement. (Article 1, §§ 2-3, ResWHA 12 - 40, May, 28th, 1959)."

    Source:
    2010 Recommendations of the ECRR
    The Health Effects of Exposure to Low Doses of Ionising Radiation
    Edited by:
    Chris Busby, with Rosalie Bertell, Inge Schmitz Feuerhake Molly Scott Cato
    and Alexey Yablokov
    Published for the ECRR by:
    Green Audit Press, Castle Cottage, Aberystwyth, SY23 1DZ, United Kingdom
    Copyright 2010: The European Committee on Radiation Risk

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)