A Nuclear Powered Bangladesh

[Electrequiem]

Story: IAEA Approves Bangladesh Nuclear Program

Energy-starved Bangladesh has been approved by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to set up a nuclear power station.

...

"Bangladesh was in the top of the list of eight developing countries which were approved to set up nuclear power plants," Tapan Chowdhury, adviser to the interim government and head of the energy ministry, told reporters on Sunday without giving details.

He said an IAEA delegation would arrive in Bangladesh next week to examine Bangladesh's plan to generate electricity from the proposed nuclear power plant.

This is a great news for Bangladeshi. If this dream is etched into reality, it can be a boon to further developments of Bangladesh and it's infrastructures.

[AsifTheManRahman]

Given the safety standards that are assumed in factories and plants in Bangladesh, this could turn out to be a major hazard. I really hope I'm wrong.

[Electrequiem]

Originally Posted by AsifTheManRahman
Given the safety standards that are assumed in factories and plants in Bangladesh, this could turn out to be a major hazard. I really hope I'm wrong.

Hopefully no safety hazards will be triggered ...with IAEA's support ... and maybe, a little help from our nuclear powered neighbors

[Ganguly da]

this is good news, hopefully it will be well guarded from religious fanatics and overzealous military generals.

[Pundit]

Originally Posted by Ganguly da
this is good news, hopefully it will be well guarded from religious fanatics and overzealous military generals.

....and aggressive foreign powers, right?

But you have hit upon an important point nevertheless...considering the security needs and maintenance discipline required, who else to guard it but the military..under meaningful civilian authority.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by Pundit
....and aggressive foreign powers, right?

now who on earth could that be?

beshi ponditi kortesen akhon...

[Kabir]

A few days back, I read this article about how safe nuclear power plants are. Turns out that after 9/11, many nuclear power plants in NA have been shielded properly for attacks of the sorts of 9/11.

I'm not a big fan of nuclear power plants, but will accept that to make the gap b/w us and other nations smaller. This is the norm, and my or your liking or disliking will not matter. If it did, NA would've been nuclear power plant free by now.

[ialbd]

a very inpiring news for many, although it might sound like a dangerous toy for BD (where management gets a big question mark). I know some expatriates are particularly interested to associate themselves with such projects....

[ammark]

To my knowledge, safe secure nuclear power is wayyy cheaper and efficient than Gas/Coal/Oil fired power plants. for example, most of the electricity in France is produced in Nuclear Plants, and some of this electricity is even exported.

With the lone Hydroelectric Plant in BD having serious trouble due to lower water levels, and most other Gas fired plants having one sort of breakdown or the other, I cant be too optimistic about the economic and industrial efficiency of any such nuclear power plants in BD.

If safety and security is the issue, then the debate is pretty hard headed. Maybe I can refer you guys to Scott Sagan & Kenneth Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons, 2nd Ed New York: W.W Norton, 2003

[Alien]

Originally Posted by ammark
To my knowledge, safe secure nuclear power is wayyy cheaper and efficient than Gas/Coal/Oil fired power plants. for example, most of the electricity in France is produced in Nuclear Plants, and some of this electricity is even exported.

With the lone Hydroelectric Plant in BD having serious trouble due to lower water levels, and most other Gas fired plants having one sort of breakdown or the other, I cant be too optimistic about the economic and industrial efficiency of any such nuclear power plants in BD.

If safety and security is the issue, then the debate is pretty hard headed. Maybe I can refer you guys to Scott Sagan & Kenneth Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons, 2nd Ed New York: W.W Norton, 2003

Isn't it more expensive? Uranium or Plutonium whichever they use costs more than coal and stuff.

[ammark]

Originally Posted by Alien
Isn't it more expensive? Uranium or Plutonium whichever they use costs more than coal and stuff.

Initial investment costs are high, then security, safety and waste disposal becomes the main cost bearing issue. However afaik, once production starts very little uranium/plutonium are required for continual production. In contrast with Oil/Gas, it is not reliant on an exhaustive resource whose price fluctuates daily.

[Arnab]

Yeah, this is never going to happen. Sorry.

[gatekeeper]

Originally Posted by Arnab
Yeah, this is never going to happen. Sorry.

I'm afraid you are right. Though going nuclear is probably the only way out as far as our power problems, our MURUBBIs will never let it happen.

[oracle]

I think there is no way out. Nuclear power will be more and more an option that cannot be discarded.

[PoorFan]

Originally Posted by oracle
I think there is no way out. Nuclear power will be more and more an option that cannot be discarded.

Exactly my feelings, BD should start her move on this regard sooner than later. BD has not enough potential on gas, oil or hydraulic power plant to cover up its fast increasing demand, certainly not in current days nor in future. I see no choice but start shifting to nuclear power plant.

And no way it means we will have to depend 100% on nuclear power plant, rather more or less 30% is enough I guess.

[Rabz]

Funny how the report did not forget to mention that by 2011 the whole BD could go in a total blackout!!

What do you expect from an indian report, had to had a pinch somewhere.

[shujan]

Originally Posted by Sydney
Funny how the report did not forget to mention that by 2011 the whole BD could go in a total blackout!!

What do you expect from an indian report, had to had a pinch somewhere.

Heck! All Bangladesh is already in blackout. Specially in summer hot season. Electricity is more scarce then our Test win!

[Rahik]

Originally Posted by shujan
Heck! All Bangladesh is already in blackout. Specially in summer hot season. Electricity is more scarce then our Test win!

I returned from Bangladesh not but a month or so ago and although the situation with the electricity is bad, it is not as bad as being "scarce". Dhaka city have electricity nearly 24/7, although some blackouts do ocurr. Blackout is mainly an issue in the rural cities and villages and can last anything between five minutes to an hour; in some cases up to five hours or more. The blackouts are daily and ocurr on set times and are a nuisance more than a hindrance.

I heard that a new plant was to be added to the grid although when is uncertain. Perhaps in time for the next visit.

[Hatebreed]

It's about time Bangladesh has an answer to its energy problem. Obviously there are risks involved, but with proper guidance and monitoring from the international community, I believe we can achieve a safe and clean nuclear powered Bangladesh. I can't see us building nuclear weapons, not anytime soon. It's waste disposal that concerns me the most, because clumsiness will lead to major catastrophe. I don't want to see corrupt politicians cut corners and put the environment and humans lives at risk.

[Special 1]

Given the GEology of Bangladesh, Nuclear power plants do not mae sense at all. Most areas are prone to earthquakes for starters. Secondly, since bagladesh is a low lying delta its gonna be hard to find a place to dispose off the waste (the problem becomes bigger with sea level rise). Also, the level of awareness within the general public is too low for them to understand the safety standards of nuclear power plants. So, I guess it will be wise not to do so. And finally, Nuclear power plants are not the way to go, publicly provided utility is not a model that bangaldesh needs to follow. Micro solar power units (although it is expensive and has possible health problems) is where bangladesh is headed.

[Sumon77]

Originally Posted by Special 1
Given the GEology of Bangladesh, Nuclear power plants do not mae sense at all. Most areas are prone to earthquakes for starters. Secondly, since bagladesh is a low lying delta its gonna be hard to find a place to dispose off the waste (the problem becomes bigger with sea level rise). Also, the level of awareness within the general public is too low for them to understand the safety standards of nuclear power plants. So, I guess it will be wise not to do so. And finally, Nuclear power plants are not the way to go, publicly provided utility is not a model that bangaldesh needs to follow. Micro solar power units (although it is expensive and has possible health problems) is where bangladesh is headed.

Micro solar power unit is not a solution regarding our HUGE and growing demand. and we dont have that much potential on wind energy also. so only possible long term solution can be nuclear plant. earthquake is not an issue i guess, then Japan wouldnt have had nuclear plant as its main power source. Also, i dont see why general public have to aware of safety, as its authorities duty to keep it safe, ppl have nothing to do with it.

[Special 1]

Originally Posted by Sumon77
Micro solar power unit is not a solution regarding our HUGE and growing demand. and we dont have that much potential on wind energy also. so only possible long term solution can be nuclear plant. earthquake is not an issue i guess, then Japan wouldnt have had nuclear plant as its main power source. Also, i dont see why general public have to aware of safety, as its authorities duty to keep it safe, ppl have nothing to do with it.

Well, micro power plants are not a solution, but it is a part of it. the presense of micro power units will relieve the pressure on our grids. Also, if i recall most of the electricity is lost due to system loss. Nuclear power plants have been taken off line in the US. only 1 out of the 400 + ( i might be wrong here) are working, the rest have been decommisioned. There are always risks involved. There are other potential sources like geothermal, biogas, ethanol, biodeisel, hydro powered plants in BAy of bengal. Nuclear power plants are very risky in popualted countries. Imagine one mistake, and about 300 million people will have to pay for it.

[shaad]

Originally Posted by Sumon77
Micro solar power unit is not a solution regarding our HUGE and growing demand. and we dont have that much potential on wind energy also. so only possible long term solution can be nuclear plant. earthquake is not an issue i guess, then Japan wouldnt have had nuclear plant as its main power source. Also, i dont see why general public have to aware of safety, as its authorities duty to keep it safe, ppl have nothing to do with it.

Sumon77, I have posted previously on this matter in an earlier thread. Note that earthquakes are indeed an issue. The Japanese government is looking into whether it should shutdown seven modern reactors like the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa reactor that was responsible for the recent radioactive waste leak caused by the earthquake in July 2007.

Also keep in mind that we are a densely populated small riverine nation with considerable groundwater. If any radioactive waste finds its way into the water then it could spread quite easily. We would be hard put to contain it. Given such potential worst-case scenarios, don't you think the general public should be aware of the risks and have some say in the matter?

[PoorFan]

Originally Posted by shaad
... I have posted previously on this matter in an earlier thread. Note that earthquakes are indeed an issue. The Japanese government is looking into whether it should shutdown seven modern reactors like the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa reactor that was responsible for the recent radioactive waste leak caused by the earthquake in July 2007.

I think your information on Kashiwazaki nuclear power plant is misleading a bit here. Allow me to explain few things so far I know and with my limited understanding.

Earthquake is an issue or not : Earthquake can damage a nuclear power plant, hence its an issue no doubt. Any kind of terror attack, disastrous mismanagement could be an issue too in the same way. The point here with Kashiwazaki power plant is earthquake, and as we all know Japan is a heaven of earthquake and experiencing major one time to time even before her history began. Yet Japan choose to build so many nuclear power plant for her own interest, and more importantly operating successfully so far without major accident or problem. Japan has enough technology, know how to deal with earthquake and nuclear power plant, hence in that sense not an issue as Sumon pointed out.

Considering shutdown Kasiwazaki : To me its totally a question mark, I mean so far there is nothing such local news I came to know yet. May be an bureaucrat type of comment at that moment ... 'possibility of shutdown is also in our sight' type of thing I guess.

So far they has suspended the operation of their 7 reactors, and now inspecting the damage and its effect. For example if you take a look at their press release ( the link bellow ) on 11th Sep. on reactors ventilation inspection, two crack found on No1 reactor ventilation only, and rest has no problem at all. There is a table on 2nd page of that PDF report you can check it on your own, and note that the reactor 6 and 7 is out of inspection since their ventilation was set up on roof of the reactor and no indication of damage was found in earlier inspection. Their conclusion of this inspection is, no indication of radioactive waste leak has found after inspecting the surface and the area of that crack ventilation.

Press release on 11th Sep. ... ( unfortunately in Japanese )
Press release lists so far.

So far there is no proof has been found yet that suggest radioactive waste leak to outside area of the nuclear plant, which could damage public health. Though there are some minor damage that found in radiator system etc. inside the plant according to the local news and Kashiwazaki power plant press release. Also note their press release says they already fixed those minor damage, and I am sure after finishing their inspection, and the report to the authority of the government, they will be allowed to resume their operation pretty soon.

Also keep in mind that we are a densely populated small riverine nation with considerable groundwater. If any radioactive waste finds its way into the water then it could spread quite easily. We would be hard put to contain it. Given such potential worst-case scenarios, don't you think the general public should be aware of the risks and have some say in the matter?

Well the experts, analysts and modern technology may find a better solution on this regard I guess. For example we can choose few hilly places that we have, such as Rangamathi, Sylhet or Mymenshing. Japan and Korea are repeatedly rejecting the idea of rejecting nuclear power plant, saying no alternative natural resource available for them. I think we are on the same boat if not now but in near future. First we need proper research and analysis on feasibility, positives and nagetives, cost effectiveness etc. on setup nuclear power plant, rest I hope expert foreign company from developed country will take care of implementation, management and security system, needless to say under supervision of IAEA.

[shaad]

Originally Posted by PoorFan
I think your information on Kashiwazaki nuclear power plant is misleading a bit here. Allow me to explain few things so far I know and with my limited understanding.

Poorfan, thank you for the comments and the links to articles.

Earthquake is an issue or not : Earthquake can damage a nuclear power plant, hence its an issue no doubt. Any kind of terror attack, disastrous mismanagement could be an issue too in the same way. The point here with Kashiwazaki power plant is earthquake, and as we all know Japan is a heaven of earthquake and experiencing major one time to time even before her history began. Yet Japan choose to build so many nuclear power plant for her own interest, and more importantly operating successfully so far without major accident or problem. Japan has enough technology, know how to deal with earthquake and nuclear power plant, hence in that sense not an issue as Sumon pointed out.

And my point is that despite all this, there were radioactive leaks, apparently more so than were originally reported (see this BBC report).

Now, I trust the IAEA's report that there was no "significant" damage to the reactors. I have far less faith in TEPCO's (the company that owns the plant) press releases that you cite, given that they have had a scandal-ridden history of falsifying reports and concealing safety incidents at their nuclear plants. e.g. an unexpected criticality event in 1978. The fact remains, though, that there was a leak of radioactive materials, and it might also partly have been a consequence of human error. Granted, this was a small leak; but all you need is one big leak for hell to break loose everywhere.

And it's not just earthquakes, or this particular plant. See, for instance, this recent leak from a light water reactor in Fukui prefecture, or the recent shutdown of three reactors in Tokaimura, Ibaraki prefecture on safety worries, as well as a number of minor accidents over the past few years.

Now, this is in Japan, where one expects to see a considerable degree of professionalism. And yet, such incidents occur there, not to mention the cover-ups. Are we totally confident that such incidents will not occur in Bangladesh, where we often see shortcuts taken, improper reporting, etc.?

Look, I am quite aware of our power issues in Bangladesh. And nuclear power might well be the solution (though I think we should also look at distributed power sources in addition to major power plants), but in the rush to implement it, I don't think we should skimp on considering possible worst-case scenarios. So far, most of the articles and comments both on this thread and on our news media have been rather complimentary and supportive; I would like to see a more hard-headed analysis focusing more on potential problems, evacuation scenarios, surveys during construction and operation, procedures for hiring, training, and evaluation of operators, etc.