Page | 0

A COST BENEFIT

ANALYSIS

HARIPUR NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The idea that the growing demand for energy worldwide can be met with energy

from nuclear power

Submitted by- GROUP 1

ABHISHEK KU. GAUTAM-14CE10001

ADITYA PARIK-14CE10002 AMIT RAJ KUMAR-14CE10005

AMIT SAHOO-14CE10006 ANUKUL JHA-14CE10007

ASHISH YADAV-14CE10009 ASHWANI KUMAR-14CE10010

BHIM SINGH-14CE10011

Page | 1

ABSTRACT

Energy is the backbone of development. For any developing country like India,

meeting its energy requirements efficiently has always been a challenging task.

Moreover, dependence on imported fossil fuels also causes insecurity of energy

supply. To meet the growing energy demands the government needs to take

some major steps in the energy sector. Nuclear power plants are of primary

focus in order to meet the energy demands because of the vast amount of energy

which can be harnessed from the nuclear power plants if used with proper

precautions.

Keeping in mind the energy sector of India, this report gives an cost benefit

analysis of Haripur Nuclear power plant which was proposed in 2006 but was

not completed due to public opposition. Various costs and benefits were

identified and were analyzed on the basis of their NPVs. The result of the

analysis shows that the nuclear power plant would be beneficial in most of the

cases and would result in the increased welfare of the Indian society. Apart from

various direct benefits like energy and employment, it also has various

environmental advantages associated with it.

However, due to various risks and some serious disadvantages, exact degree of

welfare can‟t be predicted on the basis of cost benefit analysis. The government

as well as the concerned organization should be well aware of the accidental

risks as well as terrorist risk.

But it is clear that with prior planning and precautions, Nuclear power plants

would result in increased welfare of the society.

Page | 2

Table of contents

Abbreviations____________________________________________________3

1. Introduction___________________________________________________4

1.1. Problem statement___________________________________________4

1.2. Methodology_______________________________________________4

2. Energy sector__________________________________________________5

2.1. General characteristics________________________________________5

2.2. Indian energy sector_________________________________________7

2.3. Characteristics of nuclear power energy__________________________8

3. Analysis_____________________________________________________11

3.1. Project description__________________________________________11

3.2. Factors to consider in developing a NPP_________________________13

3.3. Methodology of accessing cost benefit analysis___________________16

3.4. Cost analysis______________________________________________17

3.5. Benefit analysis____________________________________________23

3.6. Final cost benefit analysis_ ___________________________________27

4. Recommendation______________________________________________28

5. Conclusion___________________________________________________28

6. Sources______________________________________________________29

Page | 3

Abbreviations

NPV = Net Present Value

CBA = Cost Benefit Analysis

CO₂ = Carbon dioxide

NO = Nitric oxide

SO₂ = sulfur dioxide

U-233 = Uranium-233

GDP = Gross Domestic Product

approx. = approximately

sq. = square

km = kilometer

MWe = Mega Watt electric

Wh = Watt hour

kWh = kilo Watt hour

MWh = Mega Watt hour

GWh = Giga Watt hour

NPCIL = Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited

CIL = Coal India Limited

USA = United States of America

TAPS = Tarapur Atomic Power Station

KGS = Kaiga Generating Station

Page | 4

1. Introduction

The primary objective of energy policy of the government is to meet the various

energy requirements of the industries as well as of the citizens efficiently. In

order meet the demand of sustainable development and to control the pollution

level, alternative source of energies must be considered. In the search of

potential alternative source, the major focus always lies upon nuclear energy.

According to various survey results, In most industrially developed countries,

Nuclear power plants are most economically efficient way of producing energy.

This is in turn makes the nuclear power plants a major part of the economy. The

report tries to analyze the various costs and benefits associated with a particular

proposed nuclear power plant at Haripur, West Bengal. Although the project

was stopped due to various public oppositions, the report proves the plant is

economically beneficial. The report thus gives a detailed insight into the project.

1.1. Problem Statement

The main goal of the report is to perform a cost benefit analysis of the Haripur

Nuclear power Plant which was started in 2006 but did not materialize and the

plan is currently suspended. The approach is generally economic but the report

tries to summarize the overall impact of the project on the society.

1.2. Methodology

In order to analyze the various costs and benefits, first the cost and benefits

were identified and listed. Then various data of existing nuclear power plants

were collected from sources like articles, websites, newspapers etc. and the

costs and benefits were monetized. The various coats were also compared with

the costs of existing methods of energy generation like use of coal and fossil

fuels. Accidental risks were also taken into account in the analysis. The sources

of all the data taken into account are mentioned in the report.

Page | 5

2. Energy Sector

2.1. General Characteristics

Most of today‟s societies are extremely dependent on energy and electricity.

There are two primary energy sources: non-renewable fossil fuels and

renewable. Climate change concerns, high oil prices, fear of shortages of fossil

fuels, large subsidies for fossil fuels and increasing government support towards

clean energy drive renewable energy legislation and incentives. In this part of

the paper, the stress was put on nuclear energy and fossil fuels because both of

them were relevant for the analysis.

Renewable sources come from natural resources which are easy to replenish

such as sun, wind, water, geothermal heat, and biomass. They are sustainable

which means that the needs of the current population are satisfied without

endangering needs‟ satisfaction of the future society. Renewable energy is

experiencing a continued to grow in all end-use sectors (power, heat and

transport)

Nuclear power is considered a clean energy because it does not pollute the

environment in the way fossil fuels do. However, the fuel (uranium in most

cases or thorium) is not renewable, extraction diminishes its deposits inside the

Earths. The crucial problems with NPPs are the breakdowns, leakages or

meltdowns. In the most recent one, in 2011, a magnitude 9.0 earthquakes and

the consequent tsunami triggered meltdowns in three reactors at Tokyo Electric

Power‟s Fukushima Daiichi NPP (Pernick R., Wilder C., Winnie T., 2012).

Although they were brought under control, the accident made an impact on the

nuclear energy future because people became even more unwilling towards it.

Currently, Japan is taking steps to change course toward renewable energy

production. In Europe, for example Germany or Belgium shut down their

reactors.

Fossil fuel sources are coal, lignite, petroleum or gas, which are the remains of

the decomposition of plants and animals millions years ago. The most important

problem with these energy sources is the greenhouse gas and other pollutant,

like e.g. dust emission. One of the key characteristics of this sector is also

unjustified in most cases by government subsidies. Generally regardless of the

Page | 6

energy sources, the sector is characterized by significant fluctuations in energy

prices, growing demand for energy from developing countries, striving for

efficiency both in production and usage, major system failures, and rising

pollution of the environment. Due to these features, a new approach to energy

policy was required, so the EU set targets for environmental commitments.

There is the need to diversify energy sources and the need for new investment

replacing depreciated power system so that it will not be environmentally

harmful (meaning minimum emissions of CO₂, NOx, SxOy, dust and metal).

(Source: 2a)

NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE (VARIOUS PROCESSES SHOWN)

Page | 7

Source: (Google images: http://pixshark.com/nuclear-energy-graphs.htm)

2.2. Indian Energy Sector and NPP

Nuclear Power in India

Nuclear energy is the fourth largest source of energy for India. India has a

flourishing and largely indigenous nuclear power program and expects to have a

nuclear capacity of 14,600 MWe on line by 2020. It aims to supply 25% of

electricity from nuclear power by 2050.

At 5% growth in power demand, the country can sustain with coal reserve for

not more than 45 years.

India's plans of becoming Energy independent by a chain of three stage

conversion of Thorium to U233 and eventually Electricity. If India does succeed

in it, India won't require importing enriched Uranium 235 from other countries

India has 21 nuclear reactors in operation in 7 nuclear power plants, having an

installed capacity of 5780 MW and producing a total of 30,292.91 GWh of

electricity while 6 more reactors are under construction and are expected to

generate an additional 4,300 MW. India has a total of 16 operational plants with

a capacity to generate around 3,900 MW, which is about 2.8% of the total

electricity generated.

Page | 8

(Source: 2b)

(Source: www.moef.nic.in)

2.3. Characteristics of Nuclear Energy

Nuclear physics is very technical, but the basic process for producing electricity

with nuclear power is as follows:

The reactor core produces heat and radioactivity in a process called fission,

commonly known as atom-splitting. Inside the reactor core is uranium nuclear

fuel

Energy is generated when U-235 in a critical amount undergoes fission. When a

U-235 atom is struck by a neutron, it breaks into fragments known as fission

products (consisting of other atoms near the middle of the table of atomic

numbers) and also releases neutrons which strike other U-235 atoms, thereby

maintaining a chain reaction.

Each event of fission releases about 200-million electron volts (2c) of heat which

can be used to drive a steam power plant.

The heat from controlled fission reactions is used to produce steam from water,

either directly as in the boiling water reactor (BWR), or indirectly as in the

Page | 9

pressurized water reactor (PWR), which contains a steam generator. The steam

drives a turbine that powers a generator. The generator produces electricity that

is distributed to the power grid.

There are objections to the sole use of U-235 because of its scarcity and the

large amounts of energy required to separate it from U-238. Much importance is

attached to converting other materials, U-238 and Th-232, into fissionable

materials by means of the breeder reaction. In such a case, the neutrons from the

fission of U-235 are used to cause a radioactive transformation of U-238 or Th-

232 to Pu-239 or U-233 respectively, which are then fissionable.

It is worth noting here that NPPs need much less fuel than the coal-fuel plants,

one pound of U-235 is equivalent to 1400 tons of coal in its energy production,

the fission of 1 gram of U-235 releases 2.28 x 104 kWh of heat, which is

equivalent to the heat of combustion of 3 tons of coal (Hubbert, 2006).

Is Nuclear Power “Greener” Than Traditional Energy Sources Such As

Fossil Fuels?

There is a good deal of debate on this issue. One advantage of nuclear energy

production is that it generates very few (or no) harmful greenhouse gases.

Additionally, nuclear energy doesn‟t produce two of the harmful chemicals

responsible for acid rain – sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides.

Not dependent on WEATHER: Another advantage to nuclear energy is that it

is not contingent upon weather or other external factors. This gives nuclear

energy a leg up over many other types of renewable energy such as solar, wind,

or wave power, whose production is often governed by weather patterns,

amount of sunlight, etc.

Nuclear energy production, however, still involves the mining of uranium,

building of power plants, and other processes that do produce harmful carbon

emissions. Additionally, nuclear energy does not generate nearly as much

energy/heat as does the burning of traditional fossil fuels. Nuclear power plants

also tend to be wildly expensive.

Fear Factor: Final factor to take into consideration is the safety of nuclear

power plants. Though there is always a “fear factor” involved in anything

containing the word “nuclear,” it is important to note that, as technologies and

safety precautions improve, serious nuclear power plant incidents are

increasingly rare.(Source: 2d)

Page | 10

(Source: NPCIL)

Will nuclear energy be a viable source of renewable energy in the coming

years? The answer at the moment appears to be “time will tell.”

Page | 11

3. Analysis

In the following chapter we are going to discuss cost benefits analysis. Which

will help us to know Haripur power plant will build or not economically.

3.1. Project Description

In 2006 government of India signed an agreement with Russian government for

setting out five nuclear power plants in country. Department of atomic energy

started searching about the suitable sites for the nuclear power plants they

visited number of places in Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Orissa and west Bengal.

Haripur in west Bengal was selected as one of the suitable site. Different types

of tests were conducted on the soil of Haripur, geographic data was collected,

flood data was collected and other water facilities were examined there.

Russian company Rosatom had taken the project of development of nuclear

power plant. It was reported that power plant will have six nuclear reactors with

maximum capacity of 1650MW hence approximately 10000MW of electricity

output was expected from this nuclear plant. West Bengal government had

decided to acquire 1013 acres (3.6 sq. km) of land area of Haripur and this land

was primarily used by poor farmers for agricultural and fishing uses.

3.1.1. Background and Conflict

Haripur was finalized for the suitable site for the nuclear power plant. Local

villagers and some other social and environmental activists started raising their

voice against the nuclear power plant. In November 2006 officers from

department of nuclear energy and local administrative were stopped by the

protestors .They were not allowed to enter the Haripur village. Slowly that

protest was converting into a violent protest. Finally after a long protest

Government of west Bengal refused permission to a proposed 10,000MW

nuclear power plant in 2011.

3.1.2. Site of the NPP and its use

Haripur is under the Magilaput gram panchayat contained in sub division of

Purba Medinapur which is a district of west Bengal and it occupies 6 km sq.

Page | 12

area. It is 156 km from the Kolkata and 30 km from the Haldia port. Its

geographical location lies in between 21°41.964′ N to 21°43.232′N latitude and

87°45.845′E to 87°48.884′E longitude. Haripur falls in Contai sub division and

The Contai Municipality has population of 92,226 of which 49,031 are males

while 43,195 are females as per report released by Census India 2011 around

80,000 people will be affected by the formation of plant also area near Haripur

is also very populated as contain municipality has population around 1 lakh.

(Source: 3a)

3.1.3. Ecology of Haripur

The southern part of Haripur is richer with 6 types of mangroves and mangrove

associated 6 marshy species. The northern eastern and western part of Haripur

contain various types of mesophytes(plant need moderate water),

hydrophytes(plants grow inside the water) and xerophytes(can survive in very

less water).simultaneous growth of these plants in a area is very rare because

they all need different conditions, which indicates that Haripur is very rich in

plant diversity. About 286 angiosperm species under 218 generations and 77

families of different economic purposes have been investigated from Haripur.

Page | 13

3.1.4. Livelihood of local people

People of Haripur are primarily dependent on agriculture and fishing. Apart

from agricultural uses large area is also used for dry fish farms.

The workers are involved with carrying, selling, sorting, drying, weighing,

packing, storing and transporting dried fish. This area gives very large revenue

from fishing. There are salt factories along the seaside near Haripur. Some

people are engaged in this work.

Our main motive of doing the project is that judge the every condition in

different situation.

There are certain basic conditions that must be compiled while designing

nuclear power plant example in terms of nuclear safety and radiological

protection of safe operation. Any project should be take account the need to

ensure safety protection during construction, commissioning, operation,

including repair, upgrading, decommissioning of the facility as well as in the

event of an accident.

(Source: 3a)

3.2. Factors to consider in developing a NPP

Source: NPCIL

Page | 14

In developing a nuclear power plant, different economic and environmental

aspects are kept in mind, these are:

3.2.1. Low local population

Haripur is very populated and the area near the Haripur is also very populated as

we have seen about contain town which is very close to Haripur. It was

estimated that around 80 thousand people will be affected by this power plant.

3.2.2. Low air traffic

There are significant air traffic above the Haripur or nearby areas but this traffic

can be controlled or its route can be shifted.

(Source: http://www.mapsofindia.com/ )

3.2.3. Proximity of Seismic zones

Haripur falls in the zone 4 of the seismic this zone is called high damage risk

zone from this point of view nuclear power plant should not be installed there

otherwise it may lead to the Fukushima Daiichi kind of accidents.

Page | 15

(Source:http://www.dianuke.org/statement-demanding-the-scrapping-of-nuclear-power-plants-in-

india-pbkms/ )

Favorable geology for foundation stability: Stability conditions and favorable

conditions of soil are the basic of the any structure. From the government data it

is clear that land is suitable for the nuclear power plant formation.

3.2.4. Low probability of tsunamis and flooding:

This area falls in very low tsunami probability range

(source: http://wbdmd.gov.in/Pages/Tsunami_Mapping.aspx )

Page | 16

3.2.5. Low Environmental Loss

Haripur is rich in plant diversity. From the statistical data, it was found that

Haripur has 286 types of angiosperm species. Out of 286 species, 29 species

are purely aquatic, 44 species are marshy of which 6 species are

mangroves and the rest 113 species are terrestrial. Hence, nuclear power plant

formation will completely destroy the diversity.

(Source: 3b)

3.3. Methodology of assessing costs and benefits

For the Cost benefit analysis of any project, it is important to make it clear

whose cost and benefits are going to be considered. The costs and benefits can

be considered for the local people, or the state population or the nation. The

costs could also have been considered with respect to the Government. But this

would have been unreasonable as the Government need not make profits. It‟s

the citizens‟ profits that the government needs to take care of.

In this cost benefit analysis we will take the costs and benefits of the Indian

citizens as a whole. However, naturally most of these will converge to the

citizens in and around Haripur (or we can say West Bengal).

All the capital costs and the operational and maintenance costs will obviously

be affecting all the citizens of India as it is the tax payer who is eventually going

to spend money on the NPP. However, some costs like the loss of livelihood of

the people of Haripur is not a national level cost. However in the end all the

costs are on the citizens. It should be noted that the costs of building extra

infrastructure to create roads for transport to the NPP, the power distribution

stations, etc. are not considered in the cost benefit analysis as they are indirect

costs of the plant and they provide their own benefits and costs themselves. Another aspect of any cost benefit analysis is deciding the timeline of the

analysis. In our analysis we are going to take one year as the time period to

assess all the costs and benefits. The reason for taking a year as the timescale is

because of the variable nature of all the parameters like tariffs, tax rates, money

value, etc. Predicting the future value of these parameters and then using it to

base the whole project can be a risky treatment of the case. Further it has been

found through various researches that a project which is feasible for a year with

Page | 17

known real life values of the parameters will generally remain feasible in the

future.

In every CBA, the capital investment and the return of the investment differ by

a significant time. Due to this the value of the money will change significantly.

So whatever return we get in the future as promised to us today will have a

lower value in the future than it had today. However in case of a nuclear plant,

the returns (like taxes, salaries of employees, tariffs, etc.) are not fixed and they

too increase numerically with time to maintain their value. So we can shift all

the benefits to today‟s time and use their present values to do the analysis, even

though in reality we will get the benefits after many years. Naturally the

question will arise in the minds of the reader about how the one-time costs will

be incorporated into the analysis. We remedy this by dividing the one-time costs

throughout the life of the NPP.

Benefits like the development of the area around NPP are variable benefits

which takes significant amount of time to reach their peak and also depend on

the location of the plant. Thus it cannot be predicted from previous data. Hence

we are not going to include it in our analysis.

One more benefit which can be quite significant but also quite variable is the

security of supply that nuclear power provides. The fluctuations in coal prices

can lead to quite drastic effects on the GDP of a nation. However, similar

fluctuations in prices of nuclear fuels has very little effect on the production and

hence the GDP. Thus by preventing GDP to fall, nuclear power provides a lot of

monetary benefit. However, fluctuation in the cost of fossil fuels is very

unpredictable and thus monetary benefit from security of supply is

unpredictable too.

3.4. Cost analysis

3.4.1. Pre development cost

Land: according to NPCIL, every reactor needs a land of 2 sq km area. In

other hand as we know nuclear power plant radiate radioactive substance

which effect on human cell for preservation of human cell and its bad effect

upon human a buffer zone is considered theoretically the circular region of

Page | 18

radius 1.6 km is minimum requirement.

Total effected area (including buffer zone)=area of buffer zone + area occupied by reactor By assuming area as a circular,

Total area = 2*6+22/7*((1.6+1.9)^2-1.9^2)=39 sq. km

Displacement cost: As we know the population density of that particular region

is 1100 people per sq. km.

Total no of people required to displace = 1100*39 = 42900 people (3c)

If Rs. 50000 is provided as compensation to these people, then

Total displacement cost = 42900*50000 = Rs. 2145 million .

This displacement cost is a onetime cost and so has to be normalized for a

year. We do this by distributing this cost throughout the lifetime of the plant

which is taken as 40 years (for more info, see ref.).

So normalized displacement cost for a year = 2145/40 = Rs 53.6 million.

Deforestation: For construction of one nuclear reactor we need 2 sq km so we need to cut the tree of that particular reason. Assuming total number of tree

in one sq km area is 1000 trees and benefits by each tree including fruits, wood

and oxygen is in a whole year is about Rs 10000

Total loss = 6*2*1000*10000 = Rs 120 million.

Agriculture: a total of 1013 hectare agriculture land (3c) will be affected by nuclear reactor including buffer zone.

According to a farmer One hectare land give us a average benefits of Rs 25000. total loss= 1013*25000 =Rs 25.3 million.

Fishing: The region in which we are going to construct the nuclear reactor containing some part of fishing land. There are many people living in that

particular area directly dependent on fishing as a business he earn money by

fishing and use this money for other daily need things .The reason that khoti is

famous for fishing business fully belongs to that particular reason that‟s why it

will get damage due to construction of nuclear power plant.

Page | 19

Over that particular region, 4800 people (3c) get directly income from

fishing business.

In fishing season (September to February), every member earns an average

income or Rs. 2000 per month and in other months Rs. 1000 per month. (3c)

Total loss to the people = 4800*{2000*6+1000*6} = Rs 86.4 million.

Hence total Pre development cost = Rs. (53.6+120+25.3+86.4) millions

= Rs. 285.3 millions.

3.4.2. Construction cost: Total expected capacity of Haripur nuclear reactor is 10000 MW. Construction cost is $5339/kW. (3d)

Construction cost = 10000*1000*5339*60 = Rs 3203 billion.

This construction cost too is a onetime cost and hence needs to be

normalized in a similar way as before. The expected life of a NPP = 40 years. (3e)

Hence normalized construction cost = 3203/40 = 80.1 billion = 80100 million.

Hence the total capital invested in the concerned plant is

= Pre development cost + normalized construction cost

=285.3 + 80100

= 80385.3 million

3.4.3. Operating & maintenance cost

It is the total cost during operation of nuclear power plant it includes fuel,

maintenance cost management cost etc.

Fuel cost : We use uranium as a fuel in nuclear reactor. The capacity of Haripur nuclear power plant is 10000 MW. 1 kg of uranium gives 360

MWh electricity. Total cost of 1 kg uranium is $1880. (3d)

Fuel cost = 10000*365*24*1880*60/360 = Rs 27.4 billion.

Maintenance & waste management: Nuclear power plant produces different kinds of nuclear waste during

operation. Waste characteristics depend on the reactor type, but the common

Page | 20

need for operator is the optimization of waste quantity and type. We can help

to significantly reduce the waste volumes and waste management costs at

nuclear power plants by optimizing the whole process from waste collection to

final disposal. We also provide services to assess long term safety for nuclear

waste in geological repositories. Maintenance cost is the annual cost associated

with the operation, maintenance, administration, and support of a nuclear

power plant. Included are costs related to labor, material & supplies, contractor

services, licensing fees, and miscellaneous costs such as employee expenses

and regulatory fees.

These costs are together represented as $11.8/MWh. (3f)

Hence total such costs = 10000*24*365*11.8*60 = Rs. 62 billion.

3.4.4. Decommissioning cost:

Nuclear decommissioning is the process whereby a nuclear power plant site is

dismantled to the point that it is no longer requires measures for radiation

protection. The presence of radioactive material is dangerous hazard to natural

environment, time-intensive.

Decommissioning is an administrative and technical process. It includes clean-

up of radioactive material and progressive demolition of the plant. Generally

process is done once in a year. Once a facility is fully decommissioning, no

radiologic danger should persist.

Decommissioning costs are estimated to be 0.1 US cents / kWh (3f)

= Rs. 0.065/kWh.

Hence decommissioning costs for one year

= 0.065 * 10000 * 1000 * 365 * 24

=Rs. 5694 million.

3.4.5. Nuclear accidents:

It includes leakage of radioactive material, refueling accident, fire, earthquake

etc. Nuclear accident is a very dangerous factor which creates effect on human

environment. Probability of nuclear accident is very low but it is very harmful.

For dealing with nuclear accident we are going through the previous all accident

of whole India. Some of them are given below:

Page | 21

Nuclear power accidents in India (3g)

Cost

Date Location Description

Fatalitie

s (in millions

2006 US$)

Operators at

the Tarapur atomic 78

power station find The on line hours of unit

that the reactor had

1&2 in 1990 were 7772

10 Sep

Tarapur,

been leaking

and 7827 hrs (source IAEA

Maharashtra,

radioactive iodine at

0

1989

PRIS. Repairs lasting more

India

more than 700 times

than one year from 10 Sep

normal levels.

1989 can not yield such on

Repairs to the reactor

line hours. surely

take more than a

something is wrong.

Year

Fast Breeder Test

Reactor at

4 May

Kalpakkam,

Kalpakkamrefuelling

accident that

0

300

1987

India

ruptures the reactor

core, resulting in a

two-year shutdown

Almost 100 kg

radioactive sodium at

a fast breeder reactor

22 Oct Kalpakkam, leaks into a 0

30

2002

India

purification cabin,

ruining a number of

valves and operating

systems

Page | 22

2 Feb Kota, The Kota atomic N/A 280

Above data of previous 52 years shows the total losses by nuclear power plant

accident is Rs 54600 million.

Total losses per year = Rs 1050 million.

Cost

Date Location Description

Fatalitie

s (in millions

2006 US$)

1995 Rajasthan, power station leaks

India radioactive helium

and heavy water into

the Ranapratapsagar

river , necessitating a

two-year shutdown

for repairs

The Narora atomic

power station suffers 220 The cost data is not on

Bulandshahr,

a fire at two of its

31

comparable basis. 2400 or

Uttar

steam turbine blades,

Mar

0

so US 2006 dollars for

TMI

Pradesh,

damaging the heavy

1993

and 220 for NAPS unit 1 is

India

water reactor and

wrong.

almost leading to a

meltdown

A malfunctioning

13

Tarapur,

tube causes the

Tarapur Atomic

2

May

Maharashtra,

0

Power Station to

1992

India

release 12 curies of

radioactivity

Page | 23

3.5. Benefit Analysis

NOTE: For all power related calculations, a capacity factor of 0.83 (for year

2014) is being taken as quoted in an article "Nuclear Power in India" of World

Nuclear Association website (3h).

3.5.1. Environmental benefits

Nuclear power generation is a very clean source of energy and it generates

almost no greenhouse gases. Further the electricity generated by it saves large

amount of fossil fuels like coal and natural gas used up in the same amount of

electricity generation.

Fossil Fuel Savings

The fossil fuel which is facing depletion to the highest level is coal and so we

can safely assume that all the energy produced by the plant is replacing

equivalent coal quantity.

All India specific coal consumption in thermal power stations during 2009-10

was 0.75 kg/KWh generated. (3i)

The full capacity power generated by Haripur Nuclear Power Plant is

10000MW.

To generate the capacity factor reduced amount of energy in a year, amount of

coal required would be 0.83*10000 *1000 KW*24 hrs*365*0.75= 54531

million Kg=54531 kilotons.

Average Cost of 1 ton of coal as provided by CIL is Rs. 1400. (3j)

Hence money saved in buying 5453 kilotons of coal is 1400*5453*1000=Rs.

76342 millions.

Note that we are not subtracting nuclear fuel here as it has already been

considered in cost analysis and so will eventually get eliminated from the cost of

coal.

Thus Economic Output of plant through coal savings= Rs. 76342 millions.

Page | 24

Almost zero emissions of greenhouse gases

As of 2010, India average emission (3i) from a coal powered power plant of

various greenhouse gases are as follows:

CO₂: 0.94 kg/kWhr SO₂: 3.84 kg/kWhr

NO: 0.004 kg/kWhr

Hence due to a coal powered power plant of 10000 MW, the respective

emissions are as follows:

CO₂ = 0.94 kg/kWh * 0.83 * 10000*1000 kW * 24 * 365 hr.

= 68346 kilotons.

SO₂ = 3.84 kg/kWh * 0.83 * 10000*1000 kW * 24 * 365 hrs

= 279198 kilotons.

NO = 0.004 kg/kWh *0.83 * 10000*1000 kW * 24 * 365 hrs

= 291 kilotons.

From the amount of CO₂, SO₂ and NO emitted, we can understand the positive

impact that replacing some part of coal power usage with nuclear fuel has.

Although in many countries, carbon credits are used as a way to give a cost to

CO₂, carbon tax is used in India.

Hence CO₂ emissions will be monetized using the carbon tax levied by

Government of India. This tax is applied on CO₂ producing fossil fuels which in

turn increases their prices when bought. This in turn acts as a discouragement to

overuse of fossil fuels which are quickly depleting and also leading to climate

change. The current carbon cess (tax) as declared in the Indian Budget 2015-

2016 ₹ 200/ ton (3k) of coal used. This is converted to carbon tax on CO₂ using

the CO₂ emissions equivalent factor (3k) which is 1.782 (ton CO₂/ton of coal

used). Thus ₹ 200 is cost of 1.782 ton of CO₂.

Thus cost of 1 ton of CO₂ comes out to be ₹ 112.

So cost of emission of 68346 kilotons of CO₂= ₹ 112 *1000*68346

Page | 25

= ₹ 7654 million.

Similar to carbon tax, certain emission allowances are applied on SO₂ and NO

emissions. Till 2008, these emissions had a very high allowance price per short

ton (more than $500 per short ton). However due to improvements in efficiency

in energy extractions, the quantity of these emissions have reduced manifold and

thus the allowance prices have fallen down too.

Their values are fairly constant now and are as follows (as of 2011):

SO₂ = $2.12 = ₹ 137 per short ton (3l)

NO = $15.89 = ₹ 1029 per short ton (3l)

1 ton = 1.10 short ton.

Hence cost of emissions of 279198 kilotons of SO₂

= 279198 * 1000 * 137 * 1.10 = ₹ 42075 million.

Hence cost of emissions of 291 kilotons of NO

= 291 * 1000 * 1029 * 1.10 = ₹ 329 million.

Hence total economic Output by the plant through Greenhouse emission Control

is ₹ 50058 million.

3.5.2. Employment Benefits

Lots of employment avenues open up due to a nuclear plant. During the

construction phase even as much as 3500 jobs are created during peak

construction times.

When a nuclear plant of 10000 MW capacities is functioning fully,

approximately 5000 core plant permanent jobs are created. Also for the

operation and maintenance of the plant, various other jobs for transportation of

raw materials and other needs are created. The number of these jobs is estimated

to be three jobs for each core job (3m).

The total plant jobs created are estimated using a simple factor decided by the

analysis of Harker and Hirschboeck (3m). This factor is 0.5 Jobs/MW.

Page | 26

The plant we are concerned with has a capacity of 10000 MW and so the

number of jobs it creates is 5000.

There are 15000 indirect jobs created due to the 5000 plant jobs.

Now due to lack of average salaries of other local jobs, we are going to assume

its average being equal to average of permanent in-plant jobs.

Average salary in the plant = 300000 per annum (approx.) (3n) =Average salary

of other local jobs.

Economic Output of the plant through salaries = 20000*300000= ₹ 6000

million.

3.5.3. Electricity Generation

"The tariff of electricity as of 2012 generated by nuclear power per unit ranges

from 94 paise per KWh in case of the first nuclear power station (TAPS 1&2 at

Tarapur in Maharashtra) to 304 paise per KWh in case of the latest station (KGS

3&4 at Kaiga in Karnataka)."

-- Government of India: DAE- Lok Sabha Unstarred question 5724 (3o)

Now for our current calculations let us take the average tariff of electricity as

standard for a year. So tariff is taken as 199 paise.

Electricity generated in kWh in a year

= 0.83 * 10000 * 1000 kW * 24 hrs * 365 = 72708 million kWh

Hence plant‟s economic output from tariff of electricity

= 72708 million kWh * 1.99/kWh = ₹ 144688 million.

Page | 27

3.6 Final Cost Benefit Analysis

COST BENEFIT

(All figures in million rupees ) (All figures in million rupees )

1. Pre development cost : 1. Environmental Benefits :

a. 53.6 for displacement+ 120 a. Fossil Fuel Saving : 76342

for deforestation +25.3 for b. Greenhouse (CO₂) Emission

agricultural losses + 86.4 control : 50058 million

for fishing losses =285.3

b. Construction Cost : 80100

Total capital cost = 80385.3

2. Operation Cost : 2. Employment Generation :

a. Fuel : 27400 6000

b. Maintenance & Waste :

62000

3. Decommissioning : 5694 3. Electricity Generation : 144688

4. Nuclear accident losses :

1050

Total : Rs 176529.3 million Total : Rs 200746 million

Page | 28

4. Recommendation

The given figures indicate that the establishment of nuclear power plant is

economically as well as environmentally very profitable if proper measures are

taken to prevent any possible accident.

Nuclear power plants have become integral part of the economy and growing

energy needs and need of sustainable development are paving the way for

establishment of more nuclear power plants throughout the world.

5: Conclusion

With the day by day increasing demand for energy, it is required to take measures

to meet the energy needs for the increasing population. Nuclear energy if used

properly can easily fulfill all the energy needs of the humans without any

significant damage to the environment. Government„s energy policy should put

emphasis on promoting competition to make energy market more efficient.

Nuclear energy might provide clean and competitive energy future all over the

world. Moreover if the energy and climate strategies are integrated, this would

reinforce the idea of sustainable development.

In the report various advantages and disadvantages are mentioned and monetary

value of some of them is used for the cost benefit analysis. In the cost, various

failure chances with their probabilities are used for quantification.

Since there can be other power sources with almost same economical inputs, much

emphasis can be put on development of more nuclear power plants only if proper

measures are taken to prevent any nuclear accident because of the serious human

life threats associated with the failure of a nuclear plant.

Page | 29

6: Sources

2a = Master_thesis_Rozylow_Marta 2013 cost benefit analysis of NPP)

2b = world-nuclear.org , Quora , Google)

2c = http://energy.about.com )

2d = justenergy.com )

3a = http://purbamedinipur.gov.in/

http://www.census2011.co.in/ ,

http://www.nagarikmancha.org/

3b = http://ijbio.com/index.php/ijb/article/view/766/734

3c = http://www.nagarikmancha.org/images/1401-Haripur-

Land%20for%20Nuclear%20plant.pdf

3d = http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Economic-Aspects/Economics-of-Nuclear-Power/

3e = http://www.leonardo-energy.org/blog/life-expectancy-nuclear-power-plants

3f = http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-Fuel-Cycle/Nuclear-Wastes/Decommissioning-

Nuclear-Facilities/

3g = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List of nuclear power accidents by country

3h=http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-G-N/India/

3i=http://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/conference/ei20/session5/mmittal.pdf

3j=http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/global-coal-prices-inche-closer-to-

cils-cheer-to-ipps-115011600744_1.html

3k=from carbon subsidy to carbon tax: India's Green Actions (http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2014-

15/echapvol1-09.pdf)

3l=http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=4830#

3m=http://www.nei.org/corporatesite/media/filefolder/policy/papers/jobs.pdf

3n=http://www.npcil.nic.in/main/career_pay_structure.aspx

3o = Government of India: DAE- Lok Sabha Unstarred question 5724 (per unit cost of Fossil

Fuel Savings