The proposed Jaitapur Nuclear Power Project in Maharashtra would be the largest nuclear power plant in the world. It plans to construct 6 European pressurized reactors, each producing 1650 megawatts of power for a total of 9,900 megawatts. The project faces significant opposition due to environmental and safety concerns in the seismically active region. Critics argue the project threatens the unique ecosystem of the Western Ghats and Konkan coast, and that India's regulatory system is not strong enough to ensure nuclear safety.

1. Jaitapur nuclear
power plant

2. Brief about the project
o Jaitapur Nuclear Power Project is a proposed 9900 MW power project
of Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL) at Madban village
of Ratnagiri district in Maharashtra.
o If built, it would be the largest nuclear power generating station in the
world by net electrical power rating.
o On December 6, 2010 agreement was signed for the construction of first
set of two third-generation European Pressurized Reactors and the supply
of nuclear fuel for 25 years in the presence of French President Nicolas
Sarkozy and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
o French nuclear engineering firm Areva S.A. and Indian state-owned
nuclear operator Nuclear Power Corporation of India signed this
multibillion valued agreement of about $9.3 billion.
o This is a general framework agreement along with agreement on
'Protection of Confidentiality of Technical Data and Information Relating to
Nuclear Power Corporation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy' was
also signed.

3. o It is purposed to construct 6 European pressurized reactors
designed and developed b Areva of France each of 1650 megawatts
thus totalling to 9900 megawatts
o These are third generation pressurized water reactors (PWR)
o Estimated cost of project is around 1000000 crore (US $ 18.2 billion)
o This type of reactor is not currently operational anywhere in the
world
o Though the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission had
expressed concerns about the safety of the computer system in this
reactor but Finland has ordered one such reactor none the less
o The cost of building the plant is about Rs. 20 crore /Mwe capacity
compared with Rs. 5 crore /Mwe for coal power station
o The cost of electricity from this power plant will be below Rs. 4 per
kilowatt hour
o The Jaitapur project in Ratnagiri district of Maharashtra has been in
the public eye in recent months due to a host of controversies that
surround the project.

4. Location

5. Jaitapur as location
o The proposed Jaitapur Nuclear Power Project
is located at the west coast with an average
elevation of 90 feet
o This project will spread over 968 hectares of
land
o Jaitapur is on the Arabian Sea coast in
Ratnagiri district on the south-western part of
Maharashtra, India
o The district is the part of the Konkan in
Western Ghats. It is known as one of the best
ports from Neolithic era.

6. Technical and Economic Reasons
for Selection of Jaitapur Site
o The Site Selection Committee recommended setting up
a nuclear power plant at Jaitapur, based on the
suitability of meeting criteria like which include
availability of land vs. population density, available
source of cooling water , seismicity, safe-grade
elevation at site (flood analysis etc), environment
aspects and proper access for transportation of
heavy/over-dimensional equipment to plant site.
o The Jaitapur site is not considered earthquake-prone.
As per seismic zoning map of Government of
India, Jaitapur site falls within zone III. The longitude
and latitude of the land covered for Jaitapur nuclear
power project are given below:
Latitude of JNPP site: 16° 34’ 38” N to 16° 36’ 29” N
Longitude of JNPP site: 73° 19’ 02” E to 73° 20’ 48” E

7. •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
NPCIL intends to establish a Nuclear Power Park by installing 6x1650 MWe
PWR category NPPs at this location in a phased manner
Required land is available for establishing the NPP and the residential
complex at Jaitapur.
land being acquired for JNPP (site and residential complex) admeasuring
around 938.026 ha is rocky with poor fertility and barren with small
patches of agriculture.
The land is non forest and is privately owned.
There is no physical displacement of any family from the proposed land
being acquired for the project (site and residential complex).
Abundant sea water is available for Condenser Cooling and desalination
plant.
The project site is far away from urban area.
The population density on land within 10 km around the site is estimated
to be about 150 persons / sq. km considering approx.
50% of the area falling into sea
The average elevation of the site is about RL +24.5 m above mean sea
level while the safe grade elevation is +7.0 m with respect to Chart Datum
(as per the study of CWPRC, Pune)

8. Need for this project
o Nuclear power is green and clean source of energy
o very much necessary for India to complement the electricity
production in the country which is mostly by thermal power
plants (with 63.95% share)
o The present share of nuclear power in total generation of
electricity in the country is only 2.83% as on 31st July 2008
o India is poised to go largely for peaceful use of nuclear energy
in generating electricity, which resulted in the waiver from
Nuclear Supplier Group, enabling India to have nuclear trade
o India, thus, aims at increasing the share of nuclear energy to
reach from the present 4120 MWe to 23000 MWe by the end
of XIIth National Plan.
o The electricity generated by Jaitapur Nuclear Power Park
(JNPP) will be supplied to the beneficiary states in westerns
region with possibility of inter regional transfer.

9. Importance to region &
country
• power plants do not generate conventional
pollutants.
• The radio-nuclides generated from nuclear power
plants are handled, processed and disposed off
carefully within the limits, which are specified by
Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) of India.
• Nuclear power in India has been established to be
safe, reliable, clean & environment friendly and
economically compatible with other sources of
power generation of the NPP units in India.
• much needed electricity with minimal environmental
impact and with comparable cost of electricity
generation.

10. Terms Of Reference Proposed
by NPCIL
a) Assessment of the present status of Air,
Noise, Water, Land, Biological, Marine and
Socio-economic components of environment
including biodiversity and also parameters of
human interest and health up to 25 km
radius from the project site.
b) Identification of potential impacts due to
proposed Nuclear Power Park, residential
complex and desalination plant (proposed to
be installed at plant site) on various
environmental components including

11. c)Prediction of significant impacts due to proposed
nuclear power plant, residential complex and
desalination plant (proposed to be installed at
plant site) through identification, calibration and
validation of appropriate
mathematical/simulation models.
d) The database collected during the status survey
should be utilized and additional data should be
generated if required for calibrating the
prediction models for the future dose/pollution
level scenarios so as to enhance the reliability of
the prediction.

12. e) Evaluation of impacts through appropriate
evaluation technique and preparation of
environmental impact statements based on
the identification, prediction and evaluation of
impacts.
f) Delineation of Environmental Management
Plan (EMP) outlining preventive and control
strategies for minimizing adverse impacts
during construction and operational stages of
the proposed project.

13. g) Formulation of environmental quality
monitoring programs for construction and
operational phases to be undertaken by the
project proponent as per the requirements of
the statutory authorities.
h) Radiological Risk assessment and emergency
preparedness plan

14. •
Environment impact
assessment as any
Environmental impact can be defined
alteration of environmental conditions, which
could be either adverse or beneficial, caused or
induced by the set of project activities. Therefore,
the present Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) is also based on three sequential elements:
• Identification of Impacts based on baseline status
of environment
• Prediction of Impacts due to proposed project
activity and identification of mitigation measures
• Delineation of Environmental Management Plan

15. • The EIA of proposed JNPP site has been carried
out through Reconnaissance survey and
assessment of baseline status of three seasons by
identification, prediction and evaluation of
impacts under each environmental component
viz. air, noise, water, land, biological and socioeconomic environment.
Identification of the Environmental Parameters:
• Air Environment
• Water Environment
• Land Environment
• Biological Environment
• Noise Environment
• Socio-economic Environment

16. Issues
• Social impact
• Environment
• Human rights

17. Other issues
•
•
•
•
Earthquake zone
Nuclear safety
India’s weak regulatory environment
Lack of transparency

18. Threat to unique ecosystem
• The Jaitapur is located in a seismically sensitive region.
• It comes under Zone IV as per the earthquake hazard zoning
of India.
• This zone is called the High Damage Risk Zone.
• According to Greenpeace, “Over the past 20 years alone,
there have been three earthquakes in Jaitapur exceeding 5
points on the Richter scale.
• The Konkan region’s rich natural resources are already under
severe threat on account of several “development” projects
along the Western Ghats.
• Water discharged from the plant will be 5 °C hotter than the
ambient sea temperature. But “even a 0.5 °C of continual
thermal stress will lead to mortality of marine species.”
• The BNHS has also mapped 407 hectares of mangrove
vegetation around a 10 km-radius of the nuclear plant.

19. • The report also holds that the Environmental
Impact Assessments (EIAs) conducted in the
region by the government are flawed “almost
without exception.”
• Dr. D R Gadgil also laments the utter
disrespect shown by the state agencies for
civil rights in pushing for these “development”
projects.
• The EIA report wholly ignores the serious
environmental problems posed by nuclear
power, including potentially catastrophic
accidents and routine radioactivity exposure
through effluents and emissions.

20. THE INDIAN ENVIRONMENT
(PROTECTION) ACT, 1986
An Act to provide for the protection and
improvement of environment and for matters
connected therewith.
• Environment
• Environmental pollutant
• Environment pollution
• Handling
• Hazardous substance
• Occupier
• Prescribed

21. Social Impact Assessment and
R&R (rehabilitation &
resettlement) Action Plan
• NPCIL had submitted a request to the office of
the District Collector, Ratnagiri for acquisition of
land admeasuring approximately 975 hectares in
October, 2005, which includes land for site as well
as for residential complex.
• Notifications under the Land Acquisition Act of
Maharashtra State and joint survey of the
proposed land, finally total land of 938.026
hectares with a break up of 692.311 hectares
from Madban & Warilpada for Project Site and
245.715 hectares from the village Mithgavane,
Karel & Niveli for residential complex is being
acquired.

22. Nuclear Liability Act 2010
• it is a highly debated and controversial Act
• The Act aims to provide a civil liability for nuclear
damage and prompt compensation to the victims
of a nuclear incident
• through a nofault liability to the operator,
appointment of Claims Commissioner,
establishment of Nuclear Damage Claims
Commission and for matters connected therewith
or incidental thereto.
• This is one of the last steps needed to activate
the 2008 Indo-U.S. civilian nuclear agreement as
the United state nuclear reactor manufacturing
companies will require the liability bill to get
insurance in their home state.

23. • After this Act was passed, India became a
member of the international convention on
liability in the civil nuclear arena.
• The Act effectively caps the maximum amount
of liability in case of each nuclear accident
at 500 crore (US$91 million) to be paid by the
operator of the nuclear plant
• and if the cost of the damages exceeds this
amount, Special drawing rights up to 300
million will be paid by the Central
Government.
• The Act made amendments in the Atomic
Energy Act 1962 allowing private investment
in the Indian nuclear power program

24. • The issue of an accident is sensitive in India,
where a gas leak in a Union Carbide factory in
Bhopal city killed about 20,000 people in 1984
in one of the world's worst industrial disasters.
• The Act came into force from 11 November
2011.

25. Facts of the Jaitapur Nuclear
Power Project
1
Power generation
1. First stage: 1650 MW x 2 = 3,300 MW
2. Completion: 1650 MW x 6 = 9900 MW
2
Reactors
1. 6 European Pressurized Reactors (EPRs) of 1650 MW each
(India’s installed capacity: 4780 MW). In first phase, 2 reactors
will be operated
2. Total 4 EPRs in world under construction: 2 in China, 1 in
Finland (Olkiluoto), 1 in France (Flamanville); none
operational, none proven
3
Expected date of
2018
commissioning of first 2
reactors
4
Land requirement
938 Ha land in Madban and Jaitapur, of which 938 Ha already
Procured

26. 5
Investment
USD 25 billion (Kakodkar’s interview
in Sakal (05 Jan 2011))
Our estimate @ USD 6.5 million per
MW, works out to USD 64.36
billion = Rs. 283,140 Crores (ref
needed)
6
Fuel supply
25 years by France, this is less than the
operating life of the plant,
35 years (AREVA claims it is 60 years)
7
Type of fuel
Fuel will be 5% enriched uranium oxide
or uranium-plutonium
Oxide
8
Joint venture
1. Areva (France) and Nuclear Power
Corporation of India
(NPCIL) for EPRs (Areva is Supplier)
2. Department of Atomic Energy will
sign a separate agreement
for supply of nuclear fuel.

27. 9
Required manpower
6,000
to
8,000
(during
construction); i.e. Rs. 35 to 46
Crores/job.
At this level of investment, each
job is equivalent to a factory.
(However, operations needs only
800 highly skilled personnel)
10
Exclusion zone
1.6 km radius from the centre of
reactor
11
Expected electricity
generation (9,900 MW)
12
Nuclear waste
69.4 billion units per annum @ 80%
PLF and best assumptions
1. The waste will be buried in
cement-concrete based blocks
2. Waste will be under surveillance
for 30 years
13
Cooling Water
1. The plant will suck in 5,200 Cr
lit. of water every day from the sea
& throw it back into sea at a higher
(+50C) temperature

28. 14
Affected land owners
2355
15
Possible objections from
1. A critical component in Areva's
Japan and Australia
architecture is "extra-large
forgings", is only available in Japan.
2. Japan has consistently demanded
India's signature to the
nuclear
non-proliferation
treaty
(NPT), which New Delhi has
refused
3. Australia has recently refused to
supply uranium fuel, citing
NPT
16
Cost of electricity
Not revealed

29. Debate
• Environmental effects of nuclear power and
geological issues have been raised by anti nuclear
activists of India
• The public hearing became controversial as the
EIA report was not delivered for study to 3 of the
4 Gram panchayat (local village bodies) a month
in advance
• A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has also been
filed against the government's civil nuclear
program at the apex Supreme Court.
• The PIL specifically asks for the "staying of all
proposed nuclear power plants till satisfactory
safety measures and cost-benefit analyses are
completed by independent agencies"

30. Opponents
• According to the Earthquake hazard zoning of India,
Jaitapur comes under Zone III. This zone is called the
moderate Risk Zone and covers areas liable to MSK VIII
• The presence of two major creeks on the proposed site
has been ignored while clearing the site
• Moreover jaitapur is located on plateau probability of
tsunami reaching jaitapur is quite less
• It is not clear where the nuclear waste emanating from
the site will be dumped. The plant is estimated to
generate 300 tonnes of waste each year.
• Government of India is not fully transparent with its
own citizens
• the government also manipulating notification of the
area from high severity earthquake zone to
moderate seismic severity zone

32. Protests
•
Many protests have been carried out by local people against the proposed
nuclear power plant. On 29 December 2009, 12 January 2010, and 22 January
2010.
•
When the government authorities visited Madban for distribution of cheques
in lieu of compulsory land acquisition, the villagers refused to accept the
cheques.
•
Government officials were shown black flags, denied any co-operation in
carrying out their activities. 72 people were arrested on 22 January 2010 when
people protested against the compulsory land acquisition.
•
On December 4, 2010, protests became violent when over 1500 people were
detained from among thousands of protesters, who included
environmentalists and local villagers.
•
Members and leaders of the Konkan Bachao Samiti (KBS) and the Janahit Seva
Samiti were also detained.
•
On April 18, 2011, one man was shot and killed by police and eight were
injured after protests turned violent

33. News articles
• France in talks with India on nuclear law
implications, Oct 29, 2013
• Jaitapur: Govt promises speedy payment of
compensation, Sep 7, 2013
• Committed to Jaitapur Nuclear Power
Project, India tells France, January 10, 2013
• Pune man files PIL against nuke project,
January 21, 2012
• State needs N-plant to meet power demand,
says CM, Dec 2, 2011

34. • Public court's 'verdict' on nuke plant in
August, May 22, 2011
• Jaitapur protests intensify, policemen injured
in stone-pelting, Apr 18, 2011
• Govt to review safety at nuclear plants,
March 15, 2011
• Fukushima gives boost to nay-sayers in
Jaitapur, Mar 24, 2011
• Jaitapur to be a reality: CM, Dec 15, 2010

35. Konkan thumbs down nuclear
plant
• KONKAN villagers waved black flags and
shouted protests at the public hearing for
the Jaitapur nuclear power plant on May
16.
• Over 1,000 villagers who turned up for the
hearing in Madban village in Ratnagiri
district stalled the proceedings saying it
was illegal.
• They did not get time to study
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
report – said the villagers

36. • Three villages did not receive the report at all.
• The district officials accepted their mistake and
the public hearing was allowed to proceed under
protest.
• The report overlooks the impact of the project on
fishers and marine ecology
• Sakri Nate and Tulsunde are important fishing
ports 4 km from the project site.
• About 11,000 fishers use these ports for fishing.
• Amjed Borkar of Maharashtra Macchi-mar Kruti
Samiti, the fishers’ association in Ratnagiri,
said NEERIdid not contact fishers.
• NPCIL spokesperson Ranjit Raj Kakde said there
was no question of the EIA report being flawed
as NEERI is a professional organization.

37. Compensation to farmers
• Meeting between prime minister Manmohan Singh and chief
minister Prithviraj Chavan in the presence of Union environment
minister Jairam Ramesh over the controversial nuclear power
project, the highest-ever compensation is on the cards for Jaitapur’s
farmers.
• It has been proposed to acquire 938 hectares for the 10,000 mw
nuclear power project in Jaitapur.
• According to Land Acquisition Act, the farmers are eligible for Rs.
50,000/- to Rs.2.5 lakh per hectare. But, in view of the massive
agitation launched by local farmers, it was proposed to enhance the
amount to ` 8-10 lakh.
• Now, it has been proposed to offer ` 20-22 lakh.
• In addition, NPCIL will provide each family member a job or an
additional compensation of ` 5 lakh.

38. Jaitapur plant at present
• Meeting between prime minister Manmohan Singh and chief
minister Prithviraj Chavan in the presence of Union environment
minister Jairam Ramesh over the controversial nuclear power
project, the highest-ever compensation is on the cards for Jaitapur’s
farmers.
• It has been proposed to acquire 938 hectares for the 10,000 mw
nuclear power project in Jaitapur.
• According to Land Acquisition Act, the farmers are eligible for Rs.
50,000/- to Rs.2.5 lakh per hectare. But, in view of the massive
agitation launched by local farmers, it was proposed to enhance the
amount to ` 8-10 lakh.
• Now, it has been proposed to offer ` 20-22 lakh.
• In addition, NPCIL will provide each family member a job or an
additional compensation of ` 5 lakh.

39. jaitapur nuclear project in
India: The next Fukushima?
• The French nuclear industry, supported by a
group of European commercial banks
• is lining up to build two European Pressurised
Reactors (EPRs) in India. Jaitapur in
Maharastra state, the only part of the whole
Indian coast officially classed as a ‘highrisk’
earthquake zone has been chosen as the site.

40. • The project has a planned second phase that
would add four more reactors, becoming the
largest nuclear power plant in the world.
Despite the EPR being celebrated by the
nuclear industry as the safest reactor in the
world.
• The reactor design itself also has several
alarming parallels to Fukushima nuclear
power plant that continues to be a major
disaster following the earthquake and
subsequent tsunami of 11 March, 2011.

41. • In October 2009 NPCIL announced it was in
talks with a group of French banks on a loan of
$3.2 bn US dollars. The group consists of: BNP
Paribas France; Calyon, part of Crédit Agricole
France; HSBC Bank United Kingdom; Natixis
France; and Société Générale France. Hindu
Business Line, “Jaitapur nuclear plant will cost
Rs 1-lakh cr”, Hindu Business Line, 15 October
2009.

42. conclusion
• Most decision makers and investors talk about sustainability and
corporate social responsibility, yet the entire nuclear cycle blatantly
contradicts this. Radioactive contamination routinely occurs
throughout the fuel chain, from uranium mining to processing,
reactor operation to the management of nuclear waste.
• A severe accident of a typical pressurized water nuclear reactor, due
to technical or human failure, could affect many millions of people,
causing tens of thousands of victims and forcing the evacuation of
areas as large as Belgium.
• The nuclear industry has spent the past decade trying to convince
the public and decision makers that, despite its downsides, nuclear
power is needed to tackle the climate crisis. The industry promised
to have learned from past disasters, and that it would offer a clean,
safe, cheap and reliable source of energy. None of these claims is
true.

43. • The 2010 International Energy Agency (IEA) energy scenario
clearly shows that, even if the world were to build 1,300
new reactors and quadruple nuclear power generation by
2050, greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced by less
than 4%. Given the long planning and construction
schedules required, this would come far too late to meet
the imperative to significantly decline greenhouse gas
emissions by 2020 and thus prevent climate chaos.
• In addition, implementing the IEA scenario would require
$10 trillion US dollars for reactor construction, massively
increase the amount of nuclear waste that we and future
generations will have to deal with, and create enormous
proliferation hazards. A single reactor typically produces
several hundred kilograms of plutonium every year – an
amount sufficient for dozens of nuclear of nuclear weapons.