[Show all top banners]

_____
Replies to this thread:

More by _____
What people are reading
Subscribers
Subscribers
[Total Subscribers 1]

Rahuldai
:: Subscribe
Back to: Kurakani General Refresh page to view new replies
 Japan disaster reopens nuclear debate in Europe and US
[VIEWED 3737 TIMES]
SAVE! for ease of future access.
Posted on 03-14-11 10:31 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Note: It is not necessary to panic,  the purpose of this posting is for understanding the situation only

The immediate concern is how to contain the crisis in Japan's nuclear plants. But thoughts are also turning to the future and, in the world's two big industrial blocs, the politics of nuclear power has already changed.

In Germany, there's already been a long debate about what to do with the country's 17 nuclear power stations. Last October, Chancellor Angela Merkel's government decided, with much opposition, to extend their lives by another 12 years so that the last one is now due to be closed in 2035.

That fractious debate has now reopened. The political difficulty for Mrs Merkel is that support for the Greens had already been rising in her heartland just as important elections take place.

In two weeks, the voters of Baden Wuerttemberg go to the polls. This is her natural territory. It has been controlled by the Christian Democrats for decades but Japan's disaster may now change that.

On Saturday, a previously scheduled anti-nuclear demonstration in the region attracted tens of thousands more than expected. That evening, the chancellor met her ministers to discuss the Japanese events and announced that safety standards in Germany would be reviewed.

But her dilemma is how to answer concerns without undoing her policy.

Referendum call

In France, too, the debate has changed.


France gets 75% of its energy from nuclear power, exporting the excess and earning useful currency by so doing.

In addition, some in government want to sell French reactors to emerging economies.

Greenpeace immediately called for a reversal of this nuclear policy which France embraced in the 1970s after the "oil shock" when the price of oil jumped.

The group Sortir du Nucleaire protested by the Eiffel Tower, unfurling banners saying "Nuclear is killing the future".

Daniel Cohn-Bendit, who is a member of the European Parliament for the Green Party, told French radio that there should be a national referendum on the country's dependence on nuclear power. "It begs the question of the need for civil nuclear power," he said. "Is it not time to sound the alarm?"

This is difficult for the government because France's dependence is so great.

Anti-nuclear protesters in Paris (13 March 2011) France has 58 reactors in 19 plants and gets 75% of its energy from nuclear power

Three-quarters of its electricity is generated by nuclear power stations. The country has 58 reactors in 19 plants, second only to the United States in its use of nuclear. In addition, France has been eyeing markets in developing countries which might want to buy reactors.

French industry minister Eric Besson pointed out that France did not have the same risk of earthquake as Japan: "All French nuclear plants have been designed with seismic risk and flooding risk factored in."

But he added (in a phrase which may be a template for pro-nuclear politicians): "We don't wait for an accident to happen in Japan to raise the question over here - but this doesn't mean that we can't re-evaluate the situation."

Austrian environment minister Nikolaus Berlakovich said he would ask his fellow ministers in the European Union to approve "a stress test of nuclear plants" - similar to stress tests on banks where extreme situations are imagined by computers.

US debate
 

In the United States, too, the debate has changed. At the moment, President Obama is in pro-nuclear agreement with Republicans. He believes that nuclear power provides a relatively cheap form of energy, and one which doesn't produce global warming gases like coal, gas and oil-fired power stations do.

Even environmental groups in the United States, unlike in Europe, believe that nuclear power has a place because of its light carbon footprint.

But this was a fragile consensus and it is hard to see how it won't now come under pressure. Over the weekend, Senator Joseph Lieberman told CBS programme Face The Nation: "I think it calls on us here in the US, naturally, not to stop building nuclear power plants but to put the brakes on right now until we understand the ramifications of what's happened in Japan."

The New York Times quotes Jason Grumet, an adviser to President Obama, from the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington: "It's not possible to achieve a climate solution based on existing technology without a significant reliance on nuclear power."

The United States has recently witnessed disasters with oil in the Gulf of Mexico and coal with the mining disaster a year ago in West Virginia which claimed 29 lives, and both underlined the cost of alternatives to nuclear.

But Japan may tip back the balance of debate. As Mr Grumet put it: "The accident certainly has diminished what had been a growing impetus in the environmental community to support nuclear power as part of a broad bargain on energy and climate policy."

The problem for pro-nuclear governments is that explosions at nuclear reactors in one of the world's most advanced economies must play strongly in the public mind, whatever the assurances of safety and cool calculations of costs, benefits and risk.

The debate has changed.

source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12730393




 



 
Posted on 03-14-11 1:37 PM     [Snapshot: 67]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Japan disaster: Germany halts nuclear extension plan


Germany has responded to the Japanese nuclear crisis by suspending for three months a plan to extend the lives of its ageing nuclear power stations.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's coalition government announced last year that the country's 17 power stations would close around 12 years later than planned.

The government has faced growing calls for the extension to be scrapped.

The two oldest plants that had been due to shut in the next three months are now likely to be closed after all.

The EU has called an emergency meeting on Tuesday to review safety measures at nuclear reactors across Europe.

In a statement, the EU said it wanted to assess the Japanese situation and the EU's state of preparedness "in case of similar incidents". It said the aim was to get "first-hand information on contingency plans and safety measures in place".

The Swiss government also announced on Monday that it was suspending its nuclear plans because safety was its first priority.

Switzerland currently has four nuclear plants with five functioning reactors and the country's regulatory authorities have now frozen the regulatory process for a further three sites.

However, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said his country would go ahead with its plans to build two new plants, noting that Poland did not have the same risk of earthquakes as Japan.

Protests

The German decision to suspend the controversial extended life policy for 17 power stations came after growing political pressure.

Tens of thousands of people took part in demonstrations in Germany at the weekend against the Berlin government's nuclear policy.

They formed a 45km (27mile) human chain in the south-western state of Baden-Wuerttemberg from Stuttgart to one of the power plants affected by the nuclear extension policy, at Neckarwestheim.

German voters go to the polls in Baden-Wuerttemberg later this month, and Chancellor Merkel's Christian Democrats are faring badly in opinion polls.

After Chancellor Merkel's announcement on Monday, Environment Minister Norbert Roettgen said two plants that dated back to the mid-1970s would be shut down regardless of whether the extension was renewed in three months' time.

The Biblis A plant will be phased out by the end of May and the Neckarwestheim plant will also close in the coming months.

Senior officials from all of Germany's federal states are due to discuss nuclear issues with the chancellor and top ministers on Tuesday.


 
Posted on 03-14-11 1:45 PM     [Snapshot: 68]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Japan nuclear risks could hurt industry growth in Asia

Man and baby being scanned for levels of radiation Images of babies being scanned for radiation level in Japan could harm the industry
 

The economic impact of the explosions at nuclear plants in Japan could dampen the nuclear industry's growth prospects in Asia.

Many countries in Asia have been looking at nuclear power as a way to meet their fast-growing energy needs.

However, analysts suggest that depending on how severe the situation becomes in Japan, some Asian countries could reconsider their energy plans.

'Tipping point'

Countries including Indonesia and Malaysia have been looking into nuclear energy as a source of power for years.

"If a country is considering building a nuclear reactor, it would take a step back and say hold on a minute. What implication will [incidents in Japan] have on designs in the future and therefore economics," says Antony Froggatt, senior research fellow at Chatham House.

Extra safety requirements could mean added expense in an industry where the up-front costs of building a nuclear power plant are already very high.

Nuclear powers

Japan

  • 54 reactors
  • They provide a third of all electricity
  • Expected to supply 40% by 2017

China

  • 13 reactors
  • More than 25 under construction
  • Capacity to jump 10-fold by 2050

India

  • 22 reactors
  • Supply 2.5% of electricity
  • Aim to supply 25% by 2050

Source: World Nuclear Association

"Utilities are driven by the bottom line, if you have to build more safety barriers then you might reach a tipping point where other energy options become more cheaper and nuclear is ruled out," Mr Froggatt adds.

Mr Froggatt says now that prices of other technologies such as wind and geothermal are coming down, countries might consider delaying nuclear projects until the safety implications become clear.

But that will not be the approach everywhere in Asia.

Energy needs

In India and China, demand for energy is immense to support rapid economic growth.

Analysts say these countries are unlikely to change their plans because of the situation in Japan.

"I don't think you'll see countries that have already committed to nuclear plans change course," says Benjamin Sovacool, assistant professor of energy policy at the National University of Singapore.


"It is an integral part of their development strategy. So India and China will continue their nuclear development."

India aims to supply 25% of its power from nuclear power plants by 2050.

Currently only 2.5% of its power comes from nuclear sources.

Similarly, China has more than 25 nuclear power plants under construction, and 50 in the planning stages.

It also expects its nuclear capacity to jump 10-fold by 2050.

Damaging images

Nonetheless, public opinion of the nuclear industry is likely to shift in Asia.

"Photos of babies being tested for radiation - those are powerful images and they will be damaging," says Mr Sovacool.

"Even if we find the risks were overblown. People will remember the fear they felt."

And that fear could result in a reluctance to speed ahead with nuclear projects.

"Historically when you have major accidents there has been rise in public opposition and cancellation of projects," says Mr Froggatt.

source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12729357

 


 
Posted on 03-14-11 2:06 PM     [Snapshot: 92]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 



What worries me the most is those inexperienced Indians running all the nuclear plants. If a catastrophy similar to Japan happens in India it will effect Nepal for sure. As these Indians cannot be as equiped as Japanese on the contingency plans.

I hope this gives a good enough reason for the world to revaulate Nepal's Hydro potentials.
 
Posted on 03-14-11 2:52 PM     [Snapshot: 106]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Dharke,

Thanks for bringing this critical issue in couple of your postings. Definitely, nuclear plants crisis in Japan will give pressure to re-evaluate their energy policy to the countries producing from nuclear plants, or planning for it. I am sure people in Europe and US will take it more seriously than our neighboring countries like India and China who have plan to increase their nuclear energy production by huge percentage. I am not sure how far their plants are and will be located but there will be more risk from Indian side if the Japan scenario happens in our surroundings.


(Source: EIA)

If India re-evaluates its policy of nuclear energy we still have potential to sell our hydro power. India is still exploring hydro power potential in its neighboring countries. But now I am also concerned about failure of our hydro-projects. Although we don't get frequent earthquake like Japan we are still prone to  8.9  or higher magnitude. So what if we build 269-m mega dam in Koshi and that fails due to really big earthquake? Water load in dam itself can create big earthquake and cause the failure of dam. I hope our policy makers and engineers as well as third party involved in these kinds of projects will seriously think about this issue.          
 
Posted on 03-14-11 5:58 PM     [Snapshot: 189]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 


Building large water storage dam is long term strategy for Nepal

 

Amount of snow in the Himalayas are decreasing day by day thanks to the global/local warming because of this the running rivers will not carry as much water as they used to carry few decades ago

Because of dramatic altitude difference between hilly regions and southern plain given volume of water does not stays as long as it stays in India. So this will effect the refilling of underground  natural water reservoir. In few years time water level will go down and finally underground water reservoir may become empty ( we are pumping lots of underground water for agriculture and drink but their refilling process is slow because of aforementioned reason.  

 As ppl become richer, per capita use water increases, also in few decades hopefully there will tap in every house with running water so this needs lots of water say if per capita water use is 150 liter then Nepal will need 4.5 billion liter of water per day.

Then Nepal needs water for irrigation. Rice production per hectare in Nepal is almost 1/3 then that of US and other countries, same is true with wheat etc. So, in order to increase yield per hectare we need water

Say what will happen if there is a long term drought say of 5 yrs (not unlikely because it has happened in other countries. In that case many rivers will dry out; whatever rivers left will have low volume of water. And if we go for jatiya Rajya each rajya will block the water and keep it for their own use and the rajyas in low lying areas will have difficulty in quenching the thrust of its people.

 

To avoid this situation we need large water storage dams. Nepal needs water for drinking and irrigation purpose but underground natural reservoir is not being refilled and there is less and less snows in Himalayas.

 Third, Nepal needs water for energy production this can be done either by run off the river type of hydro power which are not efficient during winter seasons and will be useless if there is long term drought.

SO, Nepal needs to build large water storage reservoirs advantage of building these reservoirs are

1)      Water will stay in Nepali land for longer period of time; this will help refilling of localized underground water reservoir.

2)      Water will be available  for irrigation purpose and drinking water supply during the drought too

3)      Electricity production

4)      Reservoir type of hydroelectric station can be used in full capacity so that we will not run out of power during the winter and also during the drought

5)      Nepal will also be able to provide enough drinking water to its people and irrigation

6)      Selling of electricity to generate revenue

  

If Nepal does not do this and  trend of Global/local warming continues Nepal will not have enough water during winter time in 2-3 decades and during summer also within 5 decades ( my guestimation depending upon the decrees in snows in Himalayas and water volume in different rives during summer and increase in population in due course of time)

 So, once again Nepal needs to build water storage reservoir in different parts of Nepal other wise we will start fighting with each other in few decades time, this time for water.

 But there are some disadvanges of building high dams

 In case the dam collapses because of earthquake low lying areas will be flooded and many ppl will die. This can be avoided by building dams which can withstand up 9 Richter scale earthquakes (technologies available) and we can also avoid high population density in probable flood area. Lots of buildings in Japan withstand the earthquake; it was the tsunami which was devastating.

 Nepal is gifted by the nature, lots of rives flow between the high hills we just have to built the dam in one side that will help store the water between high hills. Off course we can not do that if the hills are sandy. But there are enough hard rock hills in Nepal.



 
Posted on 03-14-11 7:09 PM     [Snapshot: 212]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Dharke,


Building large water storage dam is long term strategy for Nepal

This will face a huge resistance from India, As the demand for fresh water and electricity is increasing in India...it has been eyeing all the water that flows from the himalayas to Indian Plains. For this reason alone, i think why India wants to keep all the Nepali Politicians in their deep pockets. I do not think India will allow Nepal to reserve so much water in the dam. As the water that flows through the dam could be utilized within nepal for drinking and irrigation.


 
Posted on 03-14-11 7:12 PM     [Snapshot: 219]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

BBC flash news: Japan government confirms radiation leak at [Disallowed String for - Bad word 'fuk']ushima nuclear plants. Asian countries should take necessary precautions. If rain comes, remain indoors first 24hours, close doors n windows, swab neck skin with beta-dine where thyroid area is, radiation hits thyroid first. Take extra precautions, radiation may hit Philippines starting 4pm today!

 
Posted on 03-14-11 8:44 PM     [Snapshot: 241]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

I agree with sidster regarding India's take on hydrological development work in Nepal. India has ambitious plan of river linking project and doesn't want any disturbance on it from any development work in Nepal. There is an example; India stopped World Bank from investing on Sikta Irrigation Project in Nepal claming that it will affect the water use in the downstream riparian areas. And India will keep on doing this unless they find some benefits for them as well.


(Source: http://nrlp.iwmi.org/main/maps.asp) 

However,  India does want to build mega structure in Koshi on its terms and conditions which will produce roughly 3.5 GW electricity and most importantly control every year flooding hazards in Bihar.  If this project really get implemented then Nepal will get fooled once again as it got earlier. 

I hope that our engineers will be able to construct hydropower dam that can withstand earthquake magnitude of 9 while constructing big hyrdo projects. But what we are assuming as the strongest support for our structures, the hard rock, is actually the weakest support we have. Throughout the Himalaya, our rock systems consist of large numbers of both large scale and small scale discontinuities. For example the proposed construction site for 269 m-high Koshi Dam is just 400 m upstream of Barahachettra in Dhankuta district. The whole Barahachettra area is tectonically unstable because of several small scale faults and also one of the master discotinuity systems in Nepal, Main Boundary Thurst (MBT). If you store that huge amount of water on top of highly unstable thrust system and water leaks into those thrusts no matter how strong will be that dam, there will be still high potential for huge energy release along the thrust systems which will eventually cause big earthquake and impact on dam itself. If the dam fails it will not only sweep the small part of Nepal but will cause major devastation in Bihar.    



 
Posted on 03-14-11 9:25 PM     [Snapshot: 290]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Yes Geology Tiger...one more thing i heard about the huge dams is that since we have fast current river in Nepal...they bring lots of debris with them and no matter how sophisticated dam you build the debris overpower the dam at one point. Similar to what happened to Koshi Barage.

I think what is best for us is small but multiple managable projects.

Disclaimer: I am no Hydro Electric engineer so please feel free to correct me if i am wrong.

 
Posted on 03-14-11 11:54 PM     [Snapshot: 345]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Well I want to keep this thread moving so I came up with my some of two cents;
I think, in Nepal,  there's no other way than going for some reservoir type multipurpose (hydel/irrigation) project sooner or later as it would only ensure a reliable source of energy in dry season, unlike existing run-off type projects. So, enough engineering design should be carried out while implementing these huge reservoir type schemes, and I think the existing technology available is able to withstand as such.
 Regarding, what if, scenario, Will India (China even Pak) be able to handle these kind of circumstances occuring in future, if any, and its effect to Nepal. Well, good to know that some of Nepalese are thinking about it and I think it could be a matter of discussion (from concerned authority) only if there would be some sort of political stability in near future.

 
Posted on 03-15-11 11:15 AM     [Snapshot: 426]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 


Just to make few points clear

 

1. We know that snow fall in mountains decreasing every year. Even if the snow fall is decreased by say 50%, the fate of snow fed river will be dramatic they will have much less water

2. Fate of other non snow fed rivers will not be that exciting either as we have seen the fate of Bagmati River

 

Because of above mentioned two situations (more plausible) the consequences, Nepal will face say, within 30-50 years will be as follows

 

1. Most of the water will be used for drinking and irrigation purpose

2. Less water will be left in the rivers.  As a result, natural refilling of underground localized reservoir will not be possible; therefore we end of using more and more river water.

3. Because of less water most of the land will face desertification

4. Agriculture production will go down because of irrigation problem

5. There will be in fight between different Nepali states regarding how much water will be used by which states as it is happening in India between Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh regarding the use of water of Krishna River

 

In my opinion these situation is a near possibility now. Or, may be I am too pessimistic here. If nothing like this happen Nepal is safe but what if these things really happened??

 

The solution is to retain water as much as possible within the Nepali boundary. For that we need to make big water reservoir. Use of mega dams is the only way BUT there are tow main problems here

 

  1. As pointed by GT and in many different books, Himalaya s are relatively young mountains they are not stable yet, the nature of hills are not hard rock etc.
  2. As pointed by Sidster, India indirectly creating trouble for such things like they did in Babai and Sikta for long time.

 

How to address problem no. 1

 

Here mega reservoir does not mean that we should have one or tow dams inside Nepal creating monster reservoir. Mega reservoirs mean making 15-20 mega dams creating huge reservoir.

 

Lots of people say the actual epicenter of 1934 earthquake was near mt. Everest some say it was somewhere in Bihar or UP. 1934 earthquake was of 8 Richter scale because of the technology we can solve this problem. It is possible to build the dams which can withstand 9 Richter scale earthquakes.

 

Second

 

Soft nature of Nepali hills: this can pose a real threat. BUT those studies were done long ago now I think we need to do more study. There are many high hills, are they really that weak? Or they are just weaker than the stronger, but capable of withholding pressure from mega reservoir?

They already found it is possible to make 250 m high dam in Budi Gandaki and create a 40 km long water reservoir and they are planning to start that project within 5 years (I hope so)

If the new study finds that those hills are really weak and cant stand pressure of mega reservoir we should give up the idea and start building smaller dams creating smaller reservoir. But, if those hills are capable, in my opinion we should go for mega reservoir.

 

Third

 

As pointed by sidster, debris can be problems But Debris are real problems if we make dams in low lying areas like Koshi dam or in near southern plain like in Kulekhani  ( Kulekhani already survived 40 years) But if we make high dams debris wont pose serious problem because most of the biological material will decompose in still water in due course of time, reducing the mass to negligible quantity. Boulders and soil will not create that serious problem unless the hills are really weak because of the depth of the reservoir.

 

So the real problem is only the nature of the high hills which I already said we need to do new studies for this

 

How to tackle the second problem?

 

Yes India can be real pain in the neck, like they did in Sikta but look below what Nepal can do if it really wants to something good

 

 

 

 

सिक्टा सिचाइ आयोजनाको बाध निर्माण सम्पन्न

१५ फेब्रुवरी २०११ ९:२८ बजे




विजय देवकोटा

काठमाडौं, २ फागुन

बाँके जिल्लामा निर्माणाधीन सिक्टा सिँचाइ आयोजनाको बाँध निर्माणको काम सकिएको छ ।

आयोजनाको मुख्य बाँध निर्माणको काम सकेर मूल नहर निर्माणलाई तीव्रता दिइएको सिँचाई मन्त्रालयका सचिव उमाकान्त झाले कारोबारलाई जानकारी दिए ।

हामीले हेडवक्र्स निर्माणको काम सम्पन्न गरिसकेका छौं,” झाले भने बाँध र मूल नहरको १५ किलोमिटर खण्डको कामलाई अगाडि बढाएका छौं, यो पनि यही वर्षभित्र सम्पन्न हुनेछ ।बाँकी ३० किलोमिटरको मुख्य नहरको संरचना निर्माणका लागि ठेक्का प्रक्रियामा गइसकेकाले अबको दुईदेखि तीन वर्षभित्रमा आयोजना सम्पन्न हुने उनले दाबी गरे ।

यसअघि काम सन्तोषजनक रूपमा अघि नबढेकाले आयोजना समयमा सम्पन्न हुनेमा शंका थियो । आयोजना निर्माणको जिम्मा लिएका कालिका कन्स्ट्रक्सन र चीनको सिनो हाइड्रो कर्पोरेसनले निर्माण क्षमता परिचालन गर्न नसक्नु र आयोजनामा व्यापक राजनीतीकरण हुनाले यो अगाडि बढ्न सकेको थिएन ।

सरकारले यो आयोजनालाई रकमको अभाव हुन दिएको छैन । वार्षिक बजेटमा समेत यो आयोजनालाई उच्च प्राथमिकतामा राखेर बर्सेनि बजेट विनियोजन गर्दै आएको छ । वार्षिक बजेटमा विनियोजित रकम नपुग भएमा अन्य आयोजनाबाट रकमान्तर गरेर भए पनि आयोजनालाई लगानी सुनिश्चित गरिएको छ । सरकारले यो चालू आर्थिक वर्षमा यो आयोजनाका लागि ९८ करोड रुपैयाँ विनियोजन गरेको छ । गत वर्ष यही आयोजनाका लागि सरकारले ६० करोड ३३ लाख रुपैयाँ बजेट विनियोजन गरेको थियो ।

बाँकेको अगैयास्थित राप्ती नदीमा बाँध निर्माण गरी सोही जिल्लाको ३४ गाविस र नेपालगन्ज नगरपालिकासमेत गरी ३३ हजार ७ सय ६६ हेक्टर जमिनमा सिँचाइ पु¥याउने गरी यो परियोजना निर्माणाधीन छ । यसका साथै राप्ती नदीको सोही बाँधबाट बायाँतर्फ रहेको राजकुलो सिँचाइ योजनाको १ हजार ८ सय हेक्टर जमिनमा समेत भरपर्दो सिँचाइ पु¥याउने लक्ष्य आयोजनाले राखेको छ । यसरी यस आयोजनाबाट कुल ३५ हजार ५ सय ६६ हेक्टर क्षेत्रफलमा भरपर्दो सिँचाइ सुविधा पु¥याउने यो आयोजनाको लक्ष्य छ ।

 आयोजनाको पूर्वअध्ययन संयुक्त राष्ट्रसंघीय विकास कार्यक्रम र एसियाली विकास बैंक (एडीबी) को सहयोगमा गरिए पनि यो आयोजनाको सुरुदेखि नै नेपाल सरकारको एकल लगानी रहेको छ ।

Source: http://www.karobardaily.com/news/4953

India ko local reaction

कभी भी थम सकता है राप्ती का प्रवाह

बहराइच, 4 फरवरी : भारतीय सीमा पर निर्माणाधीन नेपाल की महत्वाकांक्षी सिंचाई परियोजना सिक्टा बैराज का कार्य पूरा हो चुका है। अब इसके फाटक गिरने भर की देर है। फाटक गिरा तो राप्ती का प्रवाह थम जाएगा। साथ ही श्रावस्ती जिले के राप्ती बैराज के लिए पानी मिलना मुश्किल हो जाएगा। जिसका प्रभाव सीधे सूबे की सबसे बड़ी सिंचाई परियोजना सरयू नहर परियोजना पर पड़ेगा।

ज्ञातव्य है कि नेपाल में तीन साल पहले राप्ती नदी पर बांध बनाकर सिक्टा परियोजना की शुरूआत की थी। इस परियोजना का उद्देश्य नेपाल के मैदानी इलाकों में पानी पहुंचाना है। यहीं से होकर राप्ती का पानी श्रावस्ती जिले को चीरता हुआ गोरखपुर की ओर जाता है। राप्ती नदी के पानी का सदुपयोग करने के लिए श्रावस्ती में राप्ती बैराज बनाकर इसका पानी सरयू नहर में छोड़ा जाता है। सिक्टा परियोजना तैयार हो जाने के बाद अब आम दिनों में यहां पानी आना मुमकिन नहीं होगा, क्योंकि राप्ती में जितना पानी आता है उससे बमुश्किल ही सरयू नहर परियोजना के लिए पानी की पूर्ति हो पाती है और गर्मी आते-आते राप्ती नदी सूखने लगती है।

नेपाल की सिक्टा परियोजना शुरू होने के बाद ही सिंचाई विभाग ने इसकी रिपोर्ट उत्तर प्रदेश सरकार व भारत सरकार को भेजी थी। सिंचाई विभाग के अधिकारी बताते हैं कि बिना पानी बंटवारे के सहमति बने ही सिक्टा बैराज पर कार्य शुरू हो गया और अब यह बनकर तैयार हो गया है।

निश्चित है कि राप्ती का प्रवाह थम जाएगा और भारतीय क्षेत्र में चल रही कई सिंचाई परियोजनाएं बाधित होंगी। नेपाल ने यह परियोजना चीन के सहयोग से शुरू की है। परियोजना पर काम कर रहे नेपाल के अधिकारी बताते हैं कि सिक्टा बैराज तैयार हो गया है, नहरों पर काम चल रहा है, बस इसके औपचारिक उद्घाटन की देर है इसके बाद सिक्टा बैराज के फाटक बंद हो जाएंगे। नेपाल के अधिकारी इस परियोजना को लेकर भले उत्साहित हों लेकिन भारतीय क्षेत्र में निराशा का वातावरण है।

Source: http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/news/local/jharkhand/4_8_6159067_1.html

Nepal has right to do what international laws allows Nepal to do, India will try to disturb it but Nepal should concentrate on its right. Off course Nepal should not do what international laws don’t allow it to do in international rivers

Similarly making mega dams may not actually 100% against India for example we can collect rain waters in those reservoir during the rainy seasons, collecting these rains will reduce the volume of water reaching India during summer so they don’t have to fear about the flood during the rainy seasons, second, by building mega reservoir we will have enough water for Nepal so we can give the extra water to India in bargain price.

And even in case of disaster nuclear disaster is difficult to manage then hydropower disaster.

In nuclear power plant the spent fuel is another problem, they are also radioactive and it is very costly to transport and store them safely.

As a long term strategy Nepal needs to start study about these things immediately with a hope of completing them within 5 years there after they should act according to the findings.



 
Posted on 03-15-11 11:46 AM     [Snapshot: 424]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Well our rivers have the highest sediment flux in the world and this is a major concern for reservoir-based hydro electricity projects like Kulekhani. Kulekhani has already lost huge storage capacity due to siltation. And it is too expensive to flush out sediment from the reservoir. Perhaps the engineers involved in Kulekhani project couldn't understand the vulenarability of our mountain systems. The erosion rate of our moutains is increasing day after day due to consequences of global climatic changes. However, it is fact that we need more reservoir-based hydro electricity projects than run-of-the river type projects to meet our winter demand.

While talking about size of the hydro electricity projects, I think we shouldn't stick to any particular scale rather we should have mixed approach. We need hydro electricity projects of all different scales to fulfill different types of requirements. If we are thinking to provide electricity to one small village or any particular locality and if there is potential of small scale hydroelectricity generation, it will be lot easier and cheaper to produce electricity locally than constructing transmission line from national grid. I think this is the most efficient and environmentally friendly way to provide electricity in remote parts of Nepal.

However, only small scale hydro projects can't supply all power that we need for our industries. So we should be eyeing on some of the middle-sized cheap projects to develop ourselves, I mean ourselves without any financial involment of any other country or international financial institutions. And finally we should be also thinking about some GW-scale multi hydro projects for which we need to have good understanding with India both for the project development and sharing of resources. 

 
Posted on 03-15-11 12:29 PM     [Snapshot: 450]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 



Good to hear that Sikta project is completed despite of Indian resistance. Whatever approach (diplomacy) worked there dealing with India...we need to do the same on other new Hydro/irrigation projects.
 
Posted on 03-19-11 11:32 AM     [Snapshot: 539]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     1       ?     Liked by
 

भारतीय परमाणु भट्टिका सुरक्षाबारे नेपालमा चिन्ता

फुकुशीमा परमाणु भट्टि

जापानको फुकुशीमा भट्टिको घटनाले संसारभर परमाणु केन्द्रका सुरक्षा चिन्ता बढेको छ

जापानमा भएको परमाणु दुर्घटनापछि विशेषगरी भूकम्पको उच्च जोखिममा रहेको भनिएको क्षेत्रमा रहेका र प्रस्तावित भारतीय परमाणु भट्टिका सुरक्षाबारेको चिन्ता नेपालमा गर्न थालिएको छ।

धेरै मानिसहरुको चिन्ता विशेषगरी के रहेको छ भने जापानजस्तो प्राविधिक रुपले अग्रणी मानिएको देशमा त त्यस्तो दुर्घटना रोक्न सकिएन भने अन्यत्रको हालत के होला?

छिमेकी भारतका मानिसहरुमा पलाएको यही जिज्ञासाका कारण होला त्यहाँका प्रधानमन्त्री सिंहले केही दिन अगाडि संसदमा बोल्दै देशभरका परमाणु भट्टिहरुको सुरक्षा स्थितिको पुनरावलोकन गरिने बताए।

नेपालीहरुको चिन्ता चाहीं सात समुद्र पारिको देशमा हुने परमाणु दुर्घटनाबाट त विकिरणको खतरा हुने सम्भावना रहेको बेला छेउछाउमै त्यस्तो भए के होला भन्ने छ।

छरछिमेकको चिन्ता

प्राकृतिक प्रकोपका कारण जापानको परमाणु भट्टिमा उत्पन्न डरलाग्दो समस्याले संसारभर मच्चाइरहेको सनसनीले नेपालका छिमेकीहरुलाईपनि गाँजेको छ।

चीनले नयाँ परमाणु भट्टिको स्वीकृति दिने कार्य स्थगित गरेको छ।

दुई वर्ष पहिले विश्व समुदायसंग एउटा सम‍्झौता गरेर उर्जाको लागि परमाणु भट्टिहरुको विस्तार गर्न उत्साहित अर्को छिमेकि देश भारतमा यो घटनापछि प्रधानमन्त्री मनमोहन सिंहले सबै भट्टिहरुको प्राविधिक गुणस्तरमा पुनरावलोकन गर्न आदेश दिएका छन्।

ती मध्ये केही नेपाल नजिकैका राज्यहरुमा पर्छन्।

ती भट्टिहरुको सुरक्षालाई लिएर नेपालमा चिन्ता गर्न थालिएको छ।

भारतमा हाल सञ्चालनमा रहेका भट्टिहरुमध्ये नेपालको सीमानामा जोडिएको उत्तर प्रदेशको बुलन्दशहर भन्ने ठाउँमा रहेको नरोरा केन्द्रको दुई भट्टि त भुईंचालोको जोखिमको हिसाबले उच्चै मानिएको क्षेत्रमा छ।

हुन त सो भट्टिको संरचनाले यस क्षेत्रमा आउन सक्ने स्तरका भुईंचालो धान्न सकिने भनिएपनि सुरक्षा चिन्ता ज्यूँ का त्यूँ रहेको एकजना भूकम्पविद आमोद दिक्षितले बताए।

“यो डरलाग्दो कुरा हो। हरेक ठूलो भूईंचालोपछि भारतले कम्पन जोखिम क्षेत्रको स्तर बढाउने गरेको छ। अर्थात त्यसमा त्यति धेरै भर पर्न हुँदैन। केही गरी कल्पना गरिएको भन्दा ठूलो भुईंचालो आयो भने के गर्ने? त्यसकारण सुरक्षा त अलि बढि नै चाहिन्छ,” दिक्षितले भने।

छलफल आवश्यक


यो डरलाग्दो कुरा हो। हरेक ठूलो भूईंचालोपछि भारतले कम्पन जोखिम क्षेत्रको स्तर बढाउने गरेको छ। अर्थात त्यसमा त्यति धेरै भर पर्न हुँदैन। केही गरी कल्पना गरिएको भन्दा ठूलो भुईंचालो आयो भने के गर्ने? त्यसकारण सुरक्षा त अलि बढि नै चाहिन्छ

आमोद दिक्षित, भूकम्प विशेषज्ञ

चार सय भन्दा बढि मेगावाट शक्तिको उक्त नरोरा भट्टि बाहेक भारतले आउने केही वर्षभित्र बिहार र पश्चिम बंगालजस्ता नेपाल छेउछाउका राज्यहरुमा अझ ठूल्ठूला परमाणु भट्टिहरु बनाउने योजना गरेको छ।

जस अन्तर्गत बिहारको रजौली र पश्चिम बंगाल हरिपुर मा गरी हजारौं मेगावाटका हुने बताइएका छन्।

भूकम्पविद दिक्षितका अनुसार भारत तथा अन्य छिमेकी देशहरुसंग कमसेकम वैज्ञानिकहरुको तहमा प्राकृतिक प्रकोपबाट हुनसक्ने खतराबाट जोगिने उपायबारे छलफल चलाउन ढिलो हुन लागिसक्यो।

“कमसेकम छरछिमेक र प्रभाव पर्न सक्ने मुलुकहरु जस्तै भारत, पाकिस्तान, नेपाल, बंगलादेशबीच कुनै किसिमको संगठित छलफल हुनुपर्छ। नेपालकै विज्ञान मन्त्रालय वा सरकारले यसबारे केही न केही गर्नुपर्छ,” उनले बताए।

त्यसो त नेपालका सीमावर्ती राज्यहरुभन्दा पर रहने गरी भारतले थुप्रै त्यस्ता भट्टिहरुको योजना बनाएको छ।

ती मध्ये एक हो महाराष्ट्रमा प्रस्तावित जाइतापुर।

जापानको घटनापछि परमाणु उर्जाप्रति असन्तुष्ट समूहले जाइतापुरको विरोध थप चर्काएका छन्।

भारतभित्र र संसारभरीनै केही दिन यता जीवन्त बनेको परमाणु उर्जा केन्द्रहरुका सुरक्षाबारेका नयाँ बहसहरु नेपालीहरुको निम्ति पनि निकै चासोका विषय बनेका छन्।

http://www.bbc.co.uk/nepali/news/2011/03/110319_nuclear_safety.shtml
 


 
Posted on 03-24-11 7:33 PM     [Snapshot: 621]     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 
 


Please Log in! to be able to reply! If you don't have a login, please register here.

YOU CAN ALSO



IN ORDER TO POST!




Within last 7 days
Recommended Popular Threads Controvertial Threads
मन भित्र को पत्रै पत्र!
TPS Work Permit/How long your took?
Another Song Playing In My Mind
Does the 180 day auto extension apply for TPS?
Travelling to Nepal - TPS AP- PASSPORT
NOTE: The opinions here represent the opinions of the individual posters, and not of Sajha.com. It is not possible for sajha.com to monitor all the postings, since sajha.com merely seeks to provide a cyber location for discussing ideas and concerns related to Nepal and the Nepalis. Please send an email to admin@sajha.com using a valid email address if you want any posting to be considered for deletion. Your request will be handled on a one to one basis. Sajha.com is a service please don't abuse it. - Thanks.

Sajha.com Privacy Policy

Like us in Facebook!

↑ Back to Top
free counters