Introduction

Global energy demand continues to climb as the industrialized world’s energy use rises, millions pull themselves out of poverty in developing countries, and the world population expands. Thus, the debate over the energy supply of the future intensifies. This debate is complicated by ongoing global climate destabilization as a result of green house gas (GHG) emissions produced largely from combustion of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) for energy. These scientific findings and economic threats have catalyzed commitments by many industrialized countries to curb GHG emissions, which in turn have created an enormous need for large-scale sources of energy alternatives to the polluting and potentially dwindling economic supplies of fossil fuels. Nuclear technology is often proposed as a solution or as part of the solution for a sustainable energy supply. In fact, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recommended nuclear power as a key mitigation technology that is currently commercially available. The term sustainability, however, has numerous meanings that range from the light (pale) green definitions that normally refer to near-term financial sustainability to dark green long-term multi-faceted descriptions of sustainability. Here the concept of just sustainability, which includes what has been called the equity deficit of environmental sustainability, will be used as if these requirements are met so will those of the other weaker definitions.

This conception of sustainable development focuses equally on four conditions:

• improving our quality of life and well-being
• On meeting the needs of both present and future generations (intra- and intergenerational equity)
• On justice and equity in terms of recognition, process, procedure and outcome
• On the need for us to live within ecosystem limit.

Advantages

• Nuclear power generation does emit relatively low amounts of CO2. Nowadays global warming because of the greenhouse gases is a hot topic. The contribution of nuclear power to global warming is relatively little. This is a great advantage of nuclear power plants. Otherwise we have to reconsider that the water used in the cooling towers produces H2O vapors, which is the number 1 greenhouse gas. H2O causes about 2/3 of the greenhouse effect. This is because of a positive feedback mechanism. If  the earth warms up, there will be more H2O vapors in the air, which reinforce the greenhouse effect.
• Nuclear power plants already exist and are available worldwide. So in comparison to, for example, nuclear fusion, the technology does not have to be developed first. Also other new technologies (wind energy, solar energy, …) are still in its infancy.

• Coal-fired power plants, like this one emit pollutants that can contribute to climate change, decreased air quality and acid rain. Compared to coal, nuclear power production results in very little atmospheric pollution. In 2010, massive fossil fuel emissions brought the air quality in Hong Kong dangerously low; residents were advised to remain indoors for safety. Nuclear power plants won’t create smog like this.
• While nuclear plants are somewhat expensive to build, a single facility can provide massive output for years. When this picture was taken in 2000, nuclear power accounted for almost 20 percent of all the city lights you see within the United States.
• Reliable nuclear technology is already developed. No new innovations are needed to create nuclear reactors that are relatively safe and efficient. Above, the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation opens a new research reactor in 2007.

Disadvantages

• Raw Material

Uranium is used in the process of fission because it’s a naturally unstable element. Unfortunately, this means that while the uranium is being mined, transported and transformed into the contained pellets used in the fission chamber it is at risk of splitting on its own. This releases harmful radiation into its surroundings, and can be harmful to those handling the material. Runoff from the uranium mines poses a dangerous health risk and possible contamination to water tables.

• Water Pollutant

Nuclear fission chambers are cooled by water. This water is then turned into steam, which is used to power the turbines. When the water cools enough to change back into liquid form, it is pumped outside into nearby wetlands. While measures are taken to ensure that no radiation is being pumped into the environment, other heavy metals and pollutants can make their way out of the chamber. The immense heat given off by this water can also be damaging to eco systems located nearby the reactor

• Radioactive Waste

One of the main worries people have about nuclear power is what to do with the radioactive waste that is generated by the reactors and secondly, what is the safety impact of storing this waste. However, even though no long-term solution has been found to eliminate the problem of waste management, the problem is much smaller than is commonly perceived. As can be seen below, the amount of deaths linked to radioactive waste over the long term are insignificant, especially when compared to the deaths caused by coal and solar power.

Deaths per 1,000 MW plant per year of operation due to waste:

One of the reasons for this low death rate is that the quantities of radioactive waste generated by a reactor are not large. In fact, the waste produced by a nuclear reactor is equivalent to the size of a coin per person, per year (Lauvergon 2003). It has even been calculated that “if the United States went completely nuclear for all its electric power for 10,000 years, the amount of land needed for waste disposal would be about what is needed for the coal ash that is currently generated every two weeks” (Cohen 1990). Worldwide, 40,000 tonnes of waste are generated annually, 15,000 tonnes being spent fuel and the 25,000 remaining tonnes, low level radioactive materials such as protective clothing or shielding (Cohen 1990).

• Reactor Safety

The reputation of nuclear power as an unsafe energy source is grossly unfair and due mainly to the Chernobyl catastrophe. It is possible to see that of all major electricity sources, nuclear is by far the source with the lowest number of fatalities, with the possible exception of renewables (for which figures aren’t available). Additionally, these figures don’t take into account premature deaths caused by pollution. If included, this would place traditional energy sources even further behind nuclear power in terms of safety.

• Proliferation Risks

The necessary raw material needed to construct a nuclear weapon is highly enriched uranium or plutonium. Enrichment technology can be used to produce highly enriched uranium. Reprocessing – certainly when the fuel has only been used in the reactor for a short time – could be used to separate out plutonium suitable for use in a nuclear weapon. International agreements have been concluded (the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Additional Protocol) to make trading in nuclear material and technology and the distribution of the know-how required to construct nuclear installations subject to international supervision. This means control of the peaceful use of nuclear energy technology and security of nuclear fuel. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) pursues initiatives to eventually bring all enrichment and reprocessing installations under international supervision. At the moment, the situation is not yet adequate.

• Emissions

While greenhouse gas emissions have a potential worldwide impact through global warming and climate change, SOx, NOx and particulate matters have regional or local impacts.

• Complexity in Operation

This source of energy has a load factor of 80% and future reactors will be able to produce electricity 90% of the time. This is second only to fossil fuels. However, nuclear power does face a problem. It takes 24 hours to get a plant up and running. This means that nuclear plants cannot easily adjust to fluctuating demand. This is why nuclear plants tend to be turned on constantly except during maintenance when other sources, usually fossil fuels, tend to be used to adjust for demand.

Among the risks associated with nuclear energy are the threat of terrorism and proliferation, and one point of discussion is therefore whether expansion of nuclear energy in the Netherlands would pose greater security risks than in the current situation, with only a single nuclear power station.

There are three types of terrorism threat:

• The use of explosives to disperse radioactive material; this is sometimes referred to as a “dirty bomb”. Construction of a dirty bomb does not require any material from the nuclear fuel cycle. Radioactive material is also present outside the nuclear energy sector, for example at hospitals. Security measures for the fuel cycle must therefore be aimed at preventing material falling into the hands of terrorists.
• Acquisition of a nuclear weapon by a terrorist organisation. The size and complexity of the necessary equipment means that it is no simple matter for a terrorist organisation to develop and construct a nuclear weapon. Security for nuclear installations must be aimed at minimising the risk of terrorist attacks.
• An attack on a nuclear installation, storage site, or transport of radioactive material with the intention of causing radioactive substances to be released, thus contaminating the surrounding area. Security systems that close down the reactor automatically in the event of operator error also restrict the potential threat arising from any terrorist takeover of the power station. Designers of nuclear installations and transport containers also take account of the possibility of terrorist attacks. The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has proposed that there should be explicit design requirements for new nuclear power stations as regards resistance to attack using an airliner.

Historical context

• The emergence of agricultural Price Policy in India was in the backdrop of food scarcity and price fluctuations provoked by drought, floods and international prices for exports and imports. This policy in general was directed towards ensuring reasonable food prices for consumers by providing food grains through Public Distribution System (PDS) and inducing adoption of the new technology for increasing yield by providing a price support mechanism through Minimum Support Price (MSP) system.
• In recognition of the importance of assuring reasonable produce prices to the farmers, motivating them to adopt improved technology and to promote investment by them in farm enterprises, the Agricultural Prices Commission (renamed as the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices in 1985) was established in 1965 for advising the Government on agricultural prices policy on a continuing basis.
• The thrust of the policy in 1965 was to evolve a balanced and integrated structure to meet the overall needs of the economy and with due regard to the interests of the producers and the consumers. The first Commission was headed by Prof M L Dantwala and in its final report the Commission suggested the Minimum Support Prices for Paddy.

Minimum Support Price (MSP):- is a form of market intervention by the Government of Indiato insure agricultural producers against any sharp fall in farm prices.

• The minimum support prices are announced by the Government of Indiaat the beginning of the sowing season for certain crops on the basis of the recommendations of the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP). 
• MSP is price fixed by Government of India to protect theproducer – farmers – against excessive fall in price during bumperproduction years.
• The minimum support prices are a guarantee price for their produce from the Government that this will be the minimum price at which their product will fetch.
• If the market price is above,MSP,the farmer can obviously sell it at the marketIn case the market price for the commodity falls below the announced minimum price due to bumper production and glut in the market,government agencies purchase the entire quantity offered by the farmers at the announced minimum price.

  The major objectives are to support the farmers from distress sales and to procure food grains for public distribution.

  As of 2015-16, Minimum support prices are currently announced for 24 commodities,which includes food grains like Wheat,paddy etc and non-food crops like raw cotton,raw jute etc.

• A pilot project under the Direct Payment Deficiency System (DPDS) for paying MSP guarantee for the cotton farmers has been initiated at Hinganghat taluka of Maharashtra in 2015. Under this system, the farmers will directly get the amount which is the difference between the Minimum Support Price (MSP) and the market price, should the market price fall below the MSP. For availing of the benefit, farmers would have to present proof of cotton sold at Agriculture Produce Market Committee yards, plus other papers such as ownership document, yield estimation and other details. If the pilot is successful, the DPDS would be rolled out in all cotton growing regions, as per the present decision. DPDS is essentially a mode of direct benefit transfer to cotton farmers.

  Then there is this concept ofPROCUREMENT PRICE, which is the price at which government procures food grains for buffer stocking and PDS purposes through FCI.

• Consider the situation where,in the wake of an imminent food shortage that may occur, the traders are willing to procure food grains in advance,driving up the market price.

• When the market prices are much higher than the MSP,the farmer will obviously be willing to sell it in the market.
• But the government,still, needs to procure food grains on its own to meet its distribution commitments inPDS at subsidised rates(issue price) and to create the buffer stock,necessary to intervene from supply side in case there is food deficiency and high food inflation.
• Therefore the government so as to fulfil these commitments,declares a Procurement price which is > or = to the MSP.

  The major difference between MSP and PP is that while PP is forfood grains only, MSP is for 24 crops which includes both food grains and non-food grains.

Method of Calculation

• In formulating the recommendations in respect of the level of minimum support prices and other non-price measures, the CACP takes into account a comprehensive view of the entire structure of the economy of a particular commodity or group of commodities.
• Other Factors include cost of production, changes in input prices, input-output price parity, trends in market prices, demand and supply, inter-crop price parity, effect on industrial cost structure, effect on cost of living, effect on general price level, international price situation, parity between prices paid and prices received by the farmers and effect on issue prices and implications for subsidy.
• The Commission makes use of both micro-level data and aggregates at the level of district, state and the country.

Supply related information – area, yield and production, imports, exports and domestic availability and stocks with the Government/public agencies or industry, cost of processing of agricultural products, cost of marketing – storage, transportation, processing, marketing services, taxes/fees and margins retained by market functionaries; etc. are also factored in.

Report of National Commission for Farmers (NCF) had recommended that MSP should be at least 50% more than the weighted average cost of production. However, this had not been accepted by the Government.
Procurement at MSP

• Farmers are made aware of the procurement operations by way of advertisements like displaying banners, pamphlets, announcement for procurement and specification in print and electronic media.
• Some States have taken steps to pre-register farmers for ensuring procurement from them through a software system.
• Keeping in view the procurement potential areas, procurement centres for MSP operations are opened by Government agencies, both Food Corporation of India (FCI) and State Government, after mutual consultations.

• Procurement centres are opened by respective State Govt. Agencies/ FCI taking into account the production, marketable surplus, convenience of farmers and availability of other logistics / infrastructure such as storage and transportation etc. Large number of temporary purchase centres in addition to the existing mandis and depots/godowns are also established at key points for the convenience of the farmers.
• The Govt. agencies also engage Co-operative Societies and Self Help Group which work as aggregators of produce from farmers and bring the produce to purchase centres being operated in particular locations/areas and increase outreach of MSP operations to small and marginal farmers. These Co-operative Societies are in addition to the direct purchases from farmers.
• Co-operative societies/Self Help Groups are engaged in many States like Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Jharkhand and Rajasthan. Whereas, in some states like Punjab and Haryana, the Government of India has permitted the State Governments to engage locals for procurement of food grains from the farmers on payment of commission. These steps have been taken by Government of India so that Govt. agencies can procure maximum food grains directly from farmers by expanding out- reach of MSP benefit to farmers.

• Food Corporation of India (FCI) is the designated central nodal agency for price support operations for cereals, pulses and oilseeds.

Since the grant of diwani for Bengal, Bihar and Orissa in 1765, the major concern of the East India Company’s administration in India was to collect as much revenue as possible. Agriculture was the main basis of economy and the main source of income and hence, although the nawabi administration was retained with Muhammad Reza Khan acting as the Naib Diwan for the Company, several land revenue experiments were introduced in haste to maximise extraction.

In 1772, Warren hastings  introduced a new system, known as the farming  system. European District Collectors, as the nomenclature suggested, were to be in charge of revenue collection, while the revenue collecting right was farmed out to the highest bidders. About the periodicity of the settlements, a number of experiments were made.

But the farming system ultimately failed to improve the situation, as the farmers tried to extract as much as possible without any concern for the production process. The burden of revenue demand on th peasants increased as a result and often it was so onerous that it could not be collected at all. The net outcome of this whole period of rash experimentation was the ruination of the agricultural population. In 1784, Lord Cornwallis was therefore sent to India with a specific mandate to streamline the revenue administration.

Up to 1793 A.D., The East India Company continued to follow the revenue farming system in Bengal Presidency. In 1782, Sir John Shore Committee was appointed to draft a new land revenue policy. The policy was approved by Michael Dundas, The President of Board of Control and William Pete the P.M. of England.

Permanent Settlement

The Permanent Settlement or Zamindari Sysem was introduced by Lord Corniwallis in 1793. In Bengal, North Cauvery Delta in Madras Presidency and Varanasi division. It covered altogether 19% of the total cultivable land under company rule.

Terms and Conditions of the System

• Zamindars were recognized as owner of the lands. Zamindars were given the rights to collect the rent from the peasants.
• The realized amount would be divided into 11 parts. 1/11 of the share belongs to Zamindars and 10/11 of the share belongs to East India Company.
• The Zamindars were also given Judicial powers
• The Sunset Law come into force in the event of Zamindars becoming defaulters.
• The system was introduced for a period of 10 years.

Effect of the system

• The effects of this system both on the zamindars and ryots were disastrous. As the revenue fixed by the system was too high, many zamindars defaulted on payments. Their property was seized and distress sales were conducted leading to their ruin. The rich zamindars who led luxurious lives left their villages and migrated into towns. They entrusted their rent collection to agents who exacted all kinds of illegal taxes besides the legal ones from the ryots.
• This had resulted in a great deal of misery amongst the peasants and farmers. Therefore Lord Cornwallis’ idea of building a system of benevolent land-lordism failed. Though initially the Company gained financially, in the long run the Company suffered financial loss because land productivity was high, income from it was meagre since it was a fixed sum. It should be noted that in pre- British period a share on the crop was fixed as land tax.

Ryotwari Settlement

The Ryotwari experiment was started by Alexander Reed in Baramahal in 1792 and was continued by Thomas Munro from 1801 when he was asked to take charge of the revenue administration of the Ceded Districts. Instead of zamindars they began to collect revenue directly from the village , fixing the amount each village had to pay. After this they proceeded to assess each cultivator or ryot separately and thus evolved the Ryotwari System. It created individual proprietary right in land, but it was vested in the peasants, rather than in the zamindars.

Effects of System

• It raised the revenue income of the government, but put the cultivators in great distress.
• In many areas no surveys were carried out and the tax of a ryot was assessed on an arbitrary basis, based on village accounts.
• The cultivating peasants were, therefore, gradually impoverished, and increasingly indebted and could not invest for the extension of cultivation.
• The Ryorwari system did not also eliminate village elites as inter mediaries between the government and the peasantry. As privileged rents and special rights of the mirasidars were recognised and caste privileges of the Brahmans respected.

Mahalwari System

Mahalwari system was introduced in 1833 during the period of William Bentick. It was introduced in Central Province, North-West Frontier, Agra, Punjab, Gangetic Valley, etc of British India.The Mahalwari system had many provisions of both the Zamindari System and Ryotwari System. In this system, the land was divided into Mahals. Each Mahal comprises one or more villages. Ownership rights were vested with the peasants. The villages committee was held responsible for collection of the taxes.

Effects of the Land Revenue Policy

• Land become a Commodity for the first time in Indian history
• Property rights in the land created for first time
• New rural classes were formed- The absentee landlords, money lenders and age earning working class.
• Commercialisation of agriculture encouraged. As a result , shortage of food crops took place causing famines. The 1832 Ganjan famine(Orissa) and 1875 deccan famine were the worst famines.
• The revenue policy was the single most important cause for all the major civilian rebellions in modern India, against the British.