Haripur’s Unfinished Promise

The proposed nuclear project could open new avenues for Bengal’s industrial growth, but its future depends on addressing local concerns and national priorities together.

India’s proposed Haripur Nuclear Power Project in West Bengal represents more than an unfinished chapter in the country’s nuclear programme. It brings together three critical questions: the aspirations of local communities, Bengal’s need for fresh industrial investment, and India’s search for long-term energy security. As the country moves towards its target of 100 GW of nuclear power capacity by 2047, Haripur deserves a fresh, evidence-based assessment—not automatic revival, but not indefinite neglect either.

Approved in principle in 2009, the project envisaged six Russian-assisted reactors of 1,000 MW each, with a proposed capacity of 6,000 MW. Yet construction has not begun. In a parliamentary reply on March 12, 2025, the government confirmed that land acquisition had not been initiated by the West Bengal government. The project’s immediate obstacle, therefore, is not reactor technology but the absence of the political and administrative conditions necessary for implementation.

Opposition to Haripur has centred on land acquisition, displacement, agricultural livelihoods, fishing communities and the ecological character of the coastal region. These concerns cannot be dismissed as resistance to scientific progress. For families whose lives are rooted in land and local economic activity, a large infrastructure project raises legitimate questions about compensation, rehabilitation, employment and their future.

Transparent Assessment

Any reconsideration must begin with meaningful consultation, transparent environmental assessment and credible rehabilitation arrangements. Residents should not merely be informed of decisions; their concerns must influence how those decisions are made. National energy priorities cannot be an excuse for overlooking local interests.

There is another dimension to the debate. West Bengal has faced longstanding challenges in industrial investment and employment generation. Many workers and educated young people migrate in search of better opportunities elsewhere in India. A major nuclear power project, if developed, could stimulate construction, engineering services, transport, housing, infrastructure and ancillary industries. Local enterprises and skilled youth could benefit from sustained investment.

The economic impact, however, would depend on deliberate planning. Local recruitment, technical training, supplier development and opportunities for small businesses must form part of the project’s development framework. Construction jobs alone would not guarantee lasting prosperity. A well-integrated industrial ecosystem could create benefits extending beyond the plant itself, while supporting the wider regional economy.

Haripur should therefore be evaluated not only in terms of land required and electricity generated, but also in terms of the development opportunities it could create and how fairly those opportunities would be shared.

India’s nuclear programme has accumulated decades of experience in reactor operation, supported by trained personnel, established operating practices and regulatory oversight. The capabilities of Indian scientists, engineers and operating personnel deserve recognition. The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) provides regulatory oversight, while continuous safety assessment remains essential to every nuclear installation.

Haripur’s political and socioeconomic difficulties should not be confused with doubts about India’s ability to operate nuclear reactors safely. At the same time, the operational record of the national programme cannot replace a site-specific assessment of environmental suitability, emergency preparedness and local conditions. Technical safety and social acceptability are distinct questions; both must be addressed on their own merits.

The global energy situation reinforces the strategic case for examining nuclear power seriously. Geopolitical conflicts, volatile fossil-fuel prices and disruptions to maritime routes have exposed the vulnerability of international energy supply chains. The International Energy Agency has documented the severe consequences of disruptions affecting oil and liquefied natural gas flows through the Strait of Hormuz.

For an import-dependent economy such as India, nuclear power can strengthen electricity security by providing dependable, low-carbon generation without the continuous bulk deliveries of coal or gas required by fossil-fuel plants. Nuclear fuel can be procured and stockpiled in advance, although the nuclear industry also faces international dependencies involving fuel processing, specialised components and technology.

Russia remains a significant partner, as demonstrated by Kudankulam and the original Haripur proposal. The United States, following the 2008 civil nuclear agreement, opened new avenues for technological cooperation, while the United Kingdom and other partners can contribute specialised expertise. India’s 2008 Nuclear Suppliers Group waiver enabled civilian nuclear commerce, although India remains outside full NSG membership. International cooperation will remain important as the country expands its nuclear capacity.

Public Responsibility

The SHANTI Act, 2025, marks a significant change by permitting wider private participation under a new legal framework. Indian companies could contribute capital, manufacturing expertise and project execution capabilities. Yet private investment cannot, by itself, resolve land disputes, secure state cooperation or establish public confidence.

Haripur’s future should be examined jointly by the Centre and the West Bengal government, with updated feasibility studies, transparent environmental assessment and meaningful community participation. The authorities must also clarify the project’s current status and the conditions under which it might be reconsidered.

India needs nuclear power as part of a diversified energy strategy, but every proposed site must meet economic, environmental and social requirements. Haripur’s lesson is clear: energy security and regional development should reinforce one another. The objective must be to build not merely a power station, but a project whose benefits are credible, whose safety is rigorously maintained and whose local communities have a genuine stake in its future.

(The writer is a former scientific officer with the Department of Atomic Energy. Views

personal.