2/ science and technology development and their impacts on everyday life.
3/ Disaster and disaster management.
4/ Environmental pollution and degradation
5/ role of external state and non state actors and creating challenges to internal security.
6/Distribution of major resources.
1/ The " right of recourse " is only for initial 5 years.
A/ The life of a nuclear plant is 60 years. The failure of nuclear plant might come towards the last part. In that case compelling suppliers only for 5 years is meaningless.
1/ It gives us light about energy related issues fulfilling topic 1.
Q/ The southern coast of India is said to be deposit golden sand-- why?
You are president of a NGO working for protection of environment. You are a nuclear scientist. A nuclear power plant is going to establish in your region. A public outcry is already in out.
A/ Domiasiat is the largest sandstone type uranium deposit in khasi hills in arunachal.
B/ A peculiar type of bacteria exist here.
B/ electricity energy; hydro n renewable energy; thermal; nuclear energy..
C/ Electricity energy; thermal; nuclear; hydro and renewable energy.
A/ Tummalapalle; chitrial; peddagattu; rohil
B/ rohil; chitrial; tummalalpalle; peddagattu.
A/ Rare earth materials are very rare in earth.
B/ They are 17 materials found in periodic table like scandium and yttrium and difficult to extract.
C/ Extracting rare earth materials causes huge scale environment pollution and china and Malaysia are the example of it.
A/ monazite is a rare earth material found in southern coast sand of india.
B/ it is mixed up with thorium.
C/ India has rare earth material treaty with japan
D/ Rare earth materil is used from mobile to laptop.
E/ singhbhum in bihar has
Kakrapara -- gujrat
Raeathbhata -- Rajasthan
Narora-- uttar pradesh.
The nuclear liability law caps the compensation to be paid by operator to the victims at a very minimum level. It breaches indian and international law on various grounds---
Protection of environment comes under the ambit of article 21 as it is related with right to life. A healthy environment is necessary for healthy life. The supreme court in Oleum gas leak case clearly mentions that an enterprise with hazardous process of producing any chemical or any hazardous substances that viable the integrity of environment is solely responsible to the compensation. From this point of view capping of the compensation amount of the nuclear operator and rest to be paid by the government violates the rule of Supreme court.
The Indian law provides for full compensation to any victim. This capping system violates this principle also.
Both indian law and international law says that it is the polluter who have to pay the ultimate price. Both law even says that an enterprise has to pay not only the compensation to victim but also to the price for environmental regeneration. In Indian council for enviro legal action Supreme court applies this principle that only the polluter will pay. From this point of view also; capping of compensation amount by the enterprise violates indian and international law.
The damaged caused by a nuclear accident is enormous and it cant be fulfilled by a minimum capping amount as provided in India's Nuclear Liability Law.
One section of society accuse that pushing the enterprise only to liability without nuclear supplier is to attract the foreign investment in nuclear field. In india; the enterprise is government controlled. So; ultimate responsibility remains with the government.
Besides these; to fulfill the rest compensated amount by the government; government might have to increase the the tax on its citizens.
The convention of supplementary compensation for nuclear damage act (CSG) doesn't mention about any cap as a condition to entry into the nuclear suppliers group and no other country who are part of this convention has provided such cap.
1/ The bill provides a ground to sue the nuclear supplier if it is proved that any incident has been occured due to the negligency of nuclear supplier group. It prevents the foreign nuclear companies to invest in indian nuclear field.
According to this clause the operator can claim any liability from manufacturer and supplier in case of nuclear accident if it is written in the contract. But here the operator is Nuclear Power Corporation of India which itself is a government owned enterprise. So; in that case; to cope up with current situation government can put up a new bill or mayvamend the existing bill that might go against the victims.
Thr clause 35 of the nuclear liability law provides that only nuclear damage claim commissioner can run the trial of operator or responsible person liable to the accident without any provision of civil court. It is contrary to the counterpart of US where accused are tried under civil court. It also conflicts with indian law.
From international front
As said by foreign nuclear companies and the US government the section 17 (b) and 46 of the Nuclear Liability Law that provides strict legal action against the nuclear suppliers in case of default of any mechanism or equipment is neither mentioned in CSG treaty nor mentioned in law of the countries who are party to the convention.
After the Bhopal gas incident the domestic problems that might atise by such hazardous industry should be concerned effectively. A proper compensation system considering the propensity of such huge loss caused by nuclear accident and with inclusion of a longer time period to file suit can mitigate the problem. The inclusion of civil court in the trial process will add transparency and also will be in resonance with indian law.
1/ The nuclear liability law of india conflicts with the indian as well as international law-- exemplify.