There is no denying that India needs nuclear power to fuel its rapid development, given its paucity of fossil fuels. And considering that we have the world’s largest reserves of thorium, the 3-stage n-programme too is eminently desirable. However, this does not mean we should play down the ‘deadly’ nature of Pu.

I would urge Mr. Parthasarathy to read the U.S. Department of Energy documentation on the effects of the Pu dust that leaked from the Hanford n-facilities in the U.S. for over four decades from the 1940s (made public thanks largely to the efforts of former U.S. Energy Secretary Hazel O’Leary), and how the U.S. Department of Health is still monitoring — and indeed paying compensation to — tens of thousands of families that have suffered the horrific effects of Pu poisoning even though they lived hundreds of kilometres away from Hanford.

Similar stories, but with less transparency, may be found on the Pu contamination from the Chelyabinsk-Mayak n-plants in Russia, and the Sellafield n-facility (earlier called Windscale) in Britain.

The article is also rather oblique in presenting the truth when it states that ‘Pu, in its most common chemical form, is not very soluble in water…’! The fact is the most common form of Pu on earth is metallic Pu — this is because Pu does not exist in nature! Pu is man-made; it is created by irradiation of uranium in n-reactors. Indeed, Pu metal is not soluble in water…but its salts are!

For instance, plutonium nitrate solution may contain up to 300 gm Pu in a litre of water…making it incredibly dangerous to mix two flasks of the solution together, lest the combined volume should exceed the critical mass of Pu. Remember the Tokaimura disaster?

Besides, none other than the Atomic Energy Reguatory Board is on record that just 0.1 microgram of Pu is enough to overdose a human being. This means that 100 grams of Pu could indeed kill one billion people if ‘properly’ delivered!

In the end, perhaps we must find the answer in the prophetic words of two very great scientists who were part of the Manhattan Project. The first, a nuclear chemist, wrote:

“What will come of plutonium depends on how mankind chooses to use it…Perhaps it would be better if uranium and plutonium did not exist. But that is not a viable option. Therefore the most sensible solution is to learn how to make use of them. All nations, to differing degrees, have an energy problem that will grow more acute, so we need to solve the difficulties of managing these materials, of containing their poisonous nature…Can man, who now holds his destiny in his own hands, act with enough wisdom, patience and understanding to choose the right path? I think he can…”

The second, a theoretical physicist, wrote: “Uranium burning stations, plutonium breeders…will always remain dangerous to human beings. I look forward to a world where men no longer depend on fossil fuels — not on coal, wood, oil — nor uranium or hydrogen. It may take a long time, but man must break the bad habit of using whatever happens to be lying around to meet his growing energy needs. In the end, he will be compelled to stop his wanderings into such thickets of danger and to turn back to the source of all energy. He must turn to the Sun…”

The nuclear chemist was Dr Glenn T Seaborg, discoverer of plutonium. And the physicist was Otto R Frisch, who with Lise Meitner discovered nuclear fission.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail