By Lawrence Pherliam Sumer
Uranium is one of the most important minerals in the world today but also the deadliest metal on earth. Very few countries in the world possess it. At present, nuclear energy is used to generate around 13% of the world’s electricity, with almost no greenhouse gas emissions, unlike the fossil fuel power plants. Nuclear power plants are also a better option than hydro power plants as they can run for many months without interruption, providing reliable and predictable supplies of electricity and thus ensure we do not face constant power cuts by MeECL during the hot summer months. No wonder, recently one of our senior most government officers did suggest speeding up uranium mining in the state in order to counter our constant power outage. That indeed seems like the best bet at the moment especially when electricity is vital to our modern life and our future demand will only increase more rapidly.
But right from the inception of this project way back in the year 2000 we witnessed a series of opposition from the local NGOs. When this controversy was simmering the then Chief Minister of Meghalaya DD Lapang announced a high level committee to examine all issues related to the project (ST, July 24, 2003). Later, a series of movements such as rallies, strikes were observed especially when UCIL sponsored delegation consisting of the Local Council Members visited the Jaduguda mines to ascertain the human effects arising out of uranium mining and how do we forget the independent report of Mr. Ardent Basaiawmoit and his team. The resistance once again flared up in 2006 when the then KHADC, CEM, Mr. HS Shylla submitted his recommendation to CM D D Lapang on April 11, 2006 in favour of the proposed project (ST, April 13, 2006). Once the environmental clearance was granted for this project in December 2007, another spate of movements began. In 2009, the Congress led Meghalaya State Government, keen to begin the project activities by UCIL as early as possible and to keep itself away from the whole controversy began considering exempting the Land Transfer Act from the uranium rich belt of Mawthabah so that UCIL can start setting up its processing unit there without any clearance required from the District Council and the State Government (Indian Express, 11th Aug, 2009).
On August 24th 2009, the State Government of Meghalaya agreed to lease land to the UCIL for 30 years in the West Khasi Hills uranium rich belt for “pre-project” developmental work, which it said, should not be linked to mining (ST, 24th Aug 2009) This was nothing though but a strategy by the Government to fool the public as Stage I (pre-project activities) is to lead to Stage II of the project plan for construction of mines and plant. Now does all the public outrage and opposition we have seen so far make sense? I think it is not just about the end result – health issues we should be worried about but also the expertise of India’s handling of radioactive wastes which is in question.
In 2005 and 2006 plans were announced to invest almost US$700 million to open new mines in India including the Kyelleng-Pyndengsohiong, Mawthabah (KPM) mining project in our State but work is not expected to start along this belt before 2017. When we already have a humungous influx issue at hand, do we still need another vexed project that will most likely alter our history forever? On one hand India is well established in nuclear power for civil use. Its civil nuclear strategy has been directed towards complete independence in the nuclear fuel cycle, necessary because it is excluded from the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) due to it acquiring nuclear weapons capability after 1970. As a result, India’s nuclear power program has proceeded largely without fuel or technological assistance from other countries. On the other this independency has also resulted in a major compromise as far as meeting the standards of international norms is concerned. In August 2012 a parliamentary report from the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) on the AERB pointed out serious organisational flaws and numerous failings relative to International norms. The most fundamental issue highlighted by the report was the unsatisfactory legal status and authority of the AERB. Despite India’s international commitments, awareness of best practice and internal expert recommendations, the report said, “the legal status of AERB continued to be that of an authority subordinate to the central government, with powers delegated to it by the latter.” The CAG report emphasized the need to make the regulator independent of industry and government and insulated from commercial or political interference. The AERB had failed to prepare an overall nuclear radiation safety planning policy as required in 1983, and had failed to set up radiation safety directorates in 35 administrative areas to ensure the safe use of radiation in medical and industrial facilities, as required by a 2001 Supreme Court order. It had undertaken only 15% of the recommended level of inspections at industrial radiography and radiotherapy units, relative to IAEA norms, and had not achieved cost recovery from licensees. There was no detailed inventory of radioactive sources to help ensure safe disposal, and no “proper mechanism” to check the safe disposal of radioactive wastes.
According to the World Nuclear Association Nuclear fuel can be used in a reactor for many years but the used fuel that remains after this time must be stored and then either recycled to make new fuel or carefully disposed of. Therefore with such a poor track record in handling radioactive wastes, can we be assured that UCIL will handle uranium resources in our state efficiently? Or would they be least bothered about the consequences thereafter as long as India’s demand for nuclear energy is met? Well, all the citizens of the state are stakeholders here and not just the land owners of those areas since mining of this mineral can create a catastrophe of sorts. Huge amounts of ore would need to be mined to produce small amounts of uranium and as a result our landscape will also be changed forever. With uranium mining comes a variety of health issues from leukemia to congenital defects. According to Nobel Peace Prize nominee Dr. Helen Caldicott “often when people mine uranium, radon in the form of gas is inhaled into the terminal bronchi which quickly converts by radioactive decay to lead which induces lung cancer.” With too many hazards outweighing the positives of uranium mining, maybe Mr. Ardent Basaiawmoit is correct in stating “the current EC of KHADC will not allow uranium mining to take place” (ST, 16th July 2014). At the end of the day let us introspect and take into consideration all factors (not just the money factor the government is interested in with Rs 209 crores already signed with UCIL for the first phase), keeping in mind “a healthy tomorrow” for our children.
(The writer is a Shillong-based entrepreneur)