KARACHI, Dec 18: While environment watchdogs and independent nuclear scientists fear that the Karachi Nuclear Power Plant poses a threat to the city, those running the nuclear plant insist that since Kanupp observes all international safety protocols, it is safe to continue to run the plant which has completed 30 years of safe operation.

Kanupp is in the process of applying for renewal of licence to the Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority (PNRA) for continued operation for 15 years beyond its nominal design life of 30 years. It has also carried out a site survey for the installation of another nuclear power plant.

In a visit to the country’s first nuclear power plant, which was commissioned in 1971, reporters were briefed on the steps Kanupp scientists have taken to ensure that no accident occurs at this nuclear power plant which is situated 15 miles west of Karachi on the Arabian Sea near a famous picnic spot called Paradise Point.

The general manager of the Karachi Nuclear Power Complex, M. Qamarul Hoda, contended that the decision to operate Kanupp beyond 30 years was based on technical considerations after evaluating the major plant equipment and the safety systems and after ensuring that life extension did not add to the associated risk to the people living around it and in Karachi.

“The review has been done both internally and by the PNRA, an independent government body. The operational safety performance reviews conducted by external organizations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency, World Association of Nuclear Operators and Candu Owners Group (COG) have confirmed that the plant meets original safety criteria and targets. Besides, the plant has carried out quite a few safety upgrades as required by the PNRA. One should also bear in mind that Kanupp is not just a power plant producing electricity. It is a training base for human resource development in the nuclear field which is so essential for the nuclear power programme of the country,” he explained.

Kanupp has a pressurized heavy water reactor which was constructed on a turnkey basis with the assistance of Canada. After the nuclear explosion by India in 1974, western countries imposed embargoes on Pakistan in 1976. Canada stopped supplying fuel, heavy water, spare parts and all kinds of technical assistance for the plant. A self-reliance programme was initiated by the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission to ensure safe and continued operation of Kanupp. Starting with the development of indigenous fuel, a number of facilities for manpower development, spare parts fabrication, in-service inspection, computer control and instrumention support were set up around Kanupp.

Mr Hoda denied that taxpayers’ money was being spent to run Kanupp. He pointed out that Kanupp was a self-financing establishment of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission. “Kanupp meets its expenses through the revenues generated by sale of electricity to the Karachi Electric Supply Corporation. The government does not provide any funds either for its operation and maintenance costs or renovation. Nevertheless, Kanupp has invested millions of dollars since 1990 in extensive inspections, overhaul and replacement of major equipment, retrofits and safety improvement through its own resources,” he explained.

However, the detractors of Kanupp remain unconvinced. They question the wisdom of continuing the operation of a nuclear power plant which has completed its design life. They assert that Kanupp has outlived its usefulness because the amount of electricity it generates is not enough to meet a fraction of the power demand of Karachi.

Well-known scientist Pervez Hoodbhoy, who works at the physics department of the Islamabad-based Quaid-i-Azam University, told Dawn that older plants were generally less safe than newer ones for two reasons. “Forty years ago, when Kanupp was designed by Canadian engineers, there was much less understanding of plant safety and issues related to terrorism, loss of coolant accidents, etc. A second reason is that plants emit neutrons which, over years of operation, weaken the metal and concrete in the surrounding structures. The IAEA may have given permission, but safety standards are different for developing and developed countries. A reactor like Kanupp would not be allowed a licence to operate in the US,” he said.

Mr Hoodbhoy was particularly concerned about the proximity of Kanupp to the city. “Pakistan lacks a safety culture. The people who run Pakistan’s nuclear plants may be a little more careful than those who drive on our roads, but the concern with safety is surely much less than in more organized cultures. The majority of nuclear accidents that have occurred globally have been because of operator error. Given that Kanupp is going to be turned on again, all we can do is hope for the best. It is totally impossible to have any kind of workable emergency plan for evacuating a city like Karachi, which is so chaotic even without emergencies,” he said.

PAEC scientists pointed out that the decision to extend the life of Kanupp had not been taken overnight. “The PAEC decided as early as 1990 to extend the life of Kanupp and started serious work to achieve this objective. In 1992, Kanupp started a ‘Safe Operation of Kanupp’ project with the assistance of IAEA and COG of Canada for identification and resolution of safety issues. Nearly 30 IAEA expert missions visited Kanupp under this project and most of their recommendations have now been implemented. At the same time, Kanupp also started a ‘Technical Upgrading Project’ for replacement of obsolete computers, control and instrumentation. The obsolete mechanical equipment such as compressors, chillers, pumps, etc have also been replaced under a ‘Balancing, Modernization and Rehabilitation’ project,” they explained.

The PAEC scientists added that since the start of its commercial operation in 1972, Kanupp had mostly been operating at lower than its rated power with the result that its actual full power operation so far was only about 12 years. “This is one of the reasons why the PAEC decided to operate the plant beyond its design life after necessary renovation. Operation of nuclear plants beyond design life is not a new idea. Operating life of several nuclear power plants in the world is being extended by 15-20 years and even more,” they said.

They asserted that a Chernobyl-type event was not possible at Kanupp primarily because of the fundamental difference in design of the reactor. “The basic CANDU reactor characteristics, the shutdown systems and the effectiveness of the containment system have confirmed that the Chernobyl accident was not relevant to CANDU. The Chernobyl event resulted primarily because of an unstable, unconfined reactor coupled with incompetent staff operating the reactor,” they said.

When contacted, the country office of the International Union for Conservation of Nature expressed concerns about the great dangers associated with nuclear power generation. “Radiation released into the environment can lead to the contamination of soil, air, rivers and oceans, and cause cancer and other diseases in people. In order to prevent such fallout, the large quantities of low and intermediate level wastes produced by nuclear power plants require a disposal route. The highly radioactive spent fuel rods have to be isolated from the biosphere for hundreds of thousands of years. However, even after 50 years of trying, safe and effective disposal of radioactive waste remains the biggest problem associated with operating nuclear power plant like Kanupp,” an IUCN representative told Dawn.

However, PAEC scientists insisted that air and water released from Kanupp were free of such contaminations as heavy metals, organic compounds and acid gas. “Radioactive releases in any form are closely monitored and are consistently less than three per cent of those permitted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Furthermore, all the used fuel is kept on-site and stored in water-filled bays. Water keeps the fuel bundles cool and provides an effective radiation shield because it absorbs the energy from the bundle. The used fuel can be stored safely for the entire operating life of the plant,” they explained.

Dr A.H. Nayyar of the Quaid-i-Azam University told Dawn that Kanupp had had accidents in the past. “Kanupp has had accidents during the 30 years of its life. Though, fortunately, no major accident occurred. So, it is not true that the reactor has had a blemish-free record. Add to it the agedness, and the probability of accident now becomes larger. The PAEC has always been secretive about the mishaps, dutifully reporting them to international watchdog bodies, but never telling the Pakistani public. That mindset has not changed,” he said.

The PAEC scientists admitted that Kanupp had had accidents in the past, such as the outbreak of a fire, rupture of a pipeline, spillage of moderator. They added that those accidents had not been of serious nature and that was why they had not been made public.

Kanupp deputy plant managers Safder Habib and Waqar Butt, and senior managers Tariq bin Tahir and Shamshad Ahmad also briefed the reporters about the working of the nuclear power plant.