What's new

Nuclear energy can play instrumental role in achieving Agenda 2030: Momen

Black_cats

ELITE MEMBER
Dec 31, 2010
10,032
-5
14,469
Nuclear energy can play instrumental role in achieving Agenda 2030: Momen

http://unb.com.bd/m/category/Bangla...tal-role-in-achieving-agenda-2030-momen/17554

O7CTg5q3Gfuyet1e2dl4VRrzys7ZcmuPszISzre9.jpeg

May 01, 09:24 PM 203 Views

Dhaka, May 1 (UNB)- Permanent Representative (PR) of Bangladesh to the UN Ambassador Masud Bin Momen has said nuclear energy can play an instrumental role in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.

“We can use the potentials of nuclear energy to bring tremendous benefits to the humankind such as meeting the energy needs, medicinal science, research, water management and food security etc. So, nuclear energy can play an instrumental role in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.”

Momen said this at the 3rd session of the Preparatory Committee meeting for the 2020 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapon (NPT) at the UNHQs on Tuesday, said a press lease on Wednesday.

In this context Ambassador Masud also said that Bangladesh has already started Construction of its first nuclear power plant to solve the growing energy needs of Bangladesh.

59295864_2351181528472762_2854358711424516096_n.jpg


Mentioning Bangladesh’s continued commitment under the guidance of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to the full implementation of the NPT, he said, “This commitment emanates from our constitutional obligation and the vision of our Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman to work towards ‘relaxation of tension, limitation of armaments and the promotion of peaceful coexistence in every part of the world.”

He recalled that Bangladesh had signed all the major multilateral disarmament treaties including the Treaty on Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the Chemical Weapon Convention, the Biological Weapons Convention, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and the Arms Trade Treaty.

Ambassador Momen raised his concern about the threats of nuclear weapons and fissile materials falling in wrong hands. He urged the nuclear weapon states to fulfill, in good faith, their obligations under Article VI of the NPT, and fulfill their commitments surrounding the 2000 and 2010 outcomes of the NPT Review Conferences.

The Preparatory Committee meeting for the 2020 Review Conference of the Parties to the NPT commenced on 29 April at United Nations Headquarters in New York and will end on 10 May 2019. It is the third and final session prior to the 2020 Review Conference. The NPT Review Conference in 2020 will mark 50th anniversary of the Treaty's entry into force.
 
Nuclear power in a densely populated area prone to flooding is super risky. The Fukushima disaster happened because the plant got flooded out by a tsunami. It also costs 5X more then a NG power plant. I would advise against it.
 
Nuclear power in a densely populated area prone to flooding is super risky. The Fukushima disaster happened because the plant got flooded out by a tsunami. It also costs 5X more then a NG power plant. I would advise against it.
It will be done in an island in Bay of Bengal, away from human habitation and with sufficient protection. All our probable nuclear plants in future will be build in remote Islands. So, risks are very minimal.
 
[QUOTE="So, risks are very minimal.

No nuclear plant is without risk. You have to assume it can have a problem. Any one within a 50 mile radius of any plant would be at risk, not just the island its on. That can be a huge chunk of Bangladesh.
 
No nuclear plant is without risk. You have to assume it can have a problem. Any one within a 50 mile radius of any plant would be at risk, not just the island its on. That can be a huge chunk of Bangladesh.
Risks are indeed minimal in newer generation nuclear reactors. Both Fukushima and Chernobil was old designed reactors. Plus, Bangladesh is not as earth quake prone as Japan. So, building nuclear plants in remote islands is quite a safe option for Bangladesh.
 
Fukashima disaster was caused by flooding from the tsunami. It survived the earthquake with no issues. Take a look at the radiation and fallout maps of Fukashima. Ocean winds generally blow inland. This cylcone that's approaching Bangladesh, which direction is it going? In land? Where would any fallout land from a coastal plant? In land? I'm not sure where this remote island you speak of is. Most islands and the Bangladesh coast are close to populated areas or are very low lying and would flood easily.
 
Fukashima disaster was caused by flooding from the tsunami. It survived the earthquake with no issues. Take a look at the radiation and fallout maps of Fukashima. Ocean winds generally blow inland. This cylcone that's approaching Bangladesh, which direction is it going? In land? Where would any fallout land from a coastal plant? In land? I'm not sure where this remote island you speak of is. Most islands and the Bangladesh coast are close to populated areas or are very low lying and would flood easily.
I think these concerns will be taken care of properly.
 
The Fukushima disaster happened because the plant got flooded out by a tsunami.
1. fukushima plant didn't have the safety features a modern plant would have/ require
2. fukushima plant's emergency procedure was to flood the reactors with seawater to prevent meltdown
3. from the first earthquake... the plant cooling station failed
4. from the tsunami the control panel for plant operations was damaged and the already overheating reactors could not be flooded to prevent meltdown

btw, the reactors in the BD's plant is designed to not reach critical stage in the first place.... so there's no possiblity of meltdown... there is risk of radioactive leak, which is being bypassed with engineering... and all the spent fuels will be handled by russia for 30 years
so a big win for us
people who are agaisnt nuclear power generations are full of misconceptions and there's always an answer to their argument
 
1. fukushima plant didn't have the safety features a modern plant would have/ require
2. fukushima plant's emergency procedure was to flood the reactors with seawater to prevent meltdown
3. from the first earthquake... the plant cooling station failed
4. from the tsunami the control panel for plant operations was damaged and the already overheating reactors could not be flooded to prevent meltdown

btw, the reactors in the BD's plant is designed to not reach critical stage in the first place.... so there's no possiblity of meltdown... there is risk of radioactive leak, which is being bypassed with engineering... and all the spent fuels will be handled by russia for 30 years
so a big win for us
people who are agaisnt nuclear power generations are full of misconceptions and there's always an answer to their argument
No need to argue. look at the statistics. There have more then 100 serious nuclear accidents since the 1950's. "Safe designs" have been around for a very long time. Yet the accidents continue. My piont remains. You must consider the possibility of a serious accident. For densely populated areas, the risks begin to out weigh the benefits.
 
No need to argue. look at the statistics. There have more then 100 serious nuclear accidents since the 1950's. "Safe designs" have been around for a very long time. Yet the accidents continue. My piont remains. You must consider the possibility of a serious accident. For densely populated areas, the risks begin to out weigh the benefits.
wrong, many of the modern safety futures have only been started to roll out recently and this field will continue to grow wether you like it or not... through fusion reactors etc
plus fukushima has been cleaned up and radiation level is pre disaster... only goes on to show Japan's capability
there's always a possibility of accident in regards to anything really. that's why proper safety/ maintenance procedures exist
 
wrong, many of the modern safety futures have only been started to roll out recently and this field will continue to grow wether you like it or not... through fusion reactors etc
plus fukushima has been cleaned up and radiation level is pre disaster... only goes on to show Japan's capability
there's always a possibility of accident in regards to anything really. that's why proper safety/ maintenance procedures exist
I like nuclear energy, just not in densely populated areas. Hope for the best, plan for the worst. Why is nuclear power dieing out globally? Cost benefit numbers don't work any more. You can put so much safety features into a nuke plant, that it is no longer cost competitive. Read about Vogtle plant in the usa. It bankrupted Mitsubishi power division. Cost are now up to $25 bill for two units with all the new safety you talk about. How many NG plants can be built for $25 bill?
 
I like nuclear energy, just not in densely populated areas. Hope for the best, plan for the worst. Why is nuclear power dieing out globally? Cost benefit numbers don't work any more. You can put so much safety features into a nuke plant, that it is no longer cost competitive. Read about Vogtle plant in the usa. It bankrupted Mitsubishi power division. Cost are now up to $25 bill for two units with all the new safety you talk about. How many NG plants can be built for $25 bill?
my friend, remote examples you bring up aren't the norm...
why is battery becoming more popular? when in fact it's far more polluting and inefficient?
our world is run by people who're looking for profits...
sure a 12 billion dollar plant is well .... expensive...
but the amount of electricity that can be generated is far more than the building cost
besides the plant is not being made in urbanised area... it's quite remote still... most of population density is in dhaka... where as roopur is quite far... and was planned to be site for the plant from pakistan times.
the area is not prone to any disasters... tsunami or earthquake
but those are being counted on anyways.
the area can howver be attacked militarily... so they're buying up air defence systems to keep that area protected
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom