India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Fantastic!
Disha, achieving 50% nuke power by a 2050 is tough.. 30% l8kely, with another 30% alternative.
I want 40 -50% using Thorium.
Disha, achieving 50% nuke power by a 2050 is tough.. 30% l8kely, with another 30% alternative.
I want 40 -50% using Thorium.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
It's reported in the press that the Jaitapur power purchase proposal is about twice as expensive as other sources @ Rs. 6.50/kwh vs. other sources @Rs.3.20-3.50/kwh. Therefore I conclude that a central subsidy to make up the difference would be required.Amber G. wrote:May be good if you can provide some basis for the above statement .. (eg links which does some quantitative comparison - how much subsidies? what is current prize per Kwh etc)vera_k wrote:Since coal and oil are cheap, nuclear is not feasible without putting a price on carbon or subsidies from central government.
Jaitapur's nuclear discontentOf course, the BJP-led government in Maharashtra will have to clarify if it is prepared to clear the Jaitapur project at the per unit tariff of Rs 6.50, even as its undertaking, MahaVitaran, has struck long-term power purchase agreements for the availability of power at Rs 3.20-3.50 per unit.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Kudankulam unit 1 started & promptly shutdown
the next day. Completely unacceptable performance by our nuclear establishment.
the next day. Completely unacceptable performance by our nuclear establishment.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
It had minor steam leak and will restart on sunday.SSridhar wrote:Kudankulam unit 1 started & promptly shutdown
the next day. Completely unacceptable performance by our nuclear establishment.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Unit 1 of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project was shut once again following a problem in the turbine on Thursday night. It was on January 30 that the unit resumed power generation after being shut for seven months. It will take at least three more days before the reactor restarts, site director S Sundar told TOI.
"A minor steam leak in the feed water system in the turbine building is being attended to. The unit had to be shut at 10.35pm on Thursday and parts of the turbine have been taken out for service," Sundar said. "The unit reached 750MW on Thursday and we were hoping to reach the full capacity when we found the problem in the turbine building. The leak was founded in the 14 milli metre impulse line," he said.
If power from unit 1 is consistently available, the state power utility Tangedco can stop private power purchase or stop some of its own thermal units, said Tangedco officials. "While power from unit 1 costs Rs 4.01 per unit, tariff for private power purchase is around Rs 5.50 per unit. But, due to the infirmity of unit 1 of the KNPP reactor, there is uncertainty," said a Tangedco official on the condition of anonymity. "Power from unit 1 has become so infirm that we consider it on a par with renewable energy like wind," the official said.
Though commissioned in December 2014, unit 1 has worked only for four months in all. Hence, its capacity utilisation is the lowest among all reactors. Until January, it was only 22%.
"A leak in the steam pipeline cannot be the exact reason for shutting a nuclear reactor. It is not radioactive and a leak in the 14mm impulse line is not so dangerous to shut a reactor. There is definitely some other problem to the unit 1," said former Atomic Energy Regulatory Board chief A Gopalakrishnan. There is no transparency and officials should come out with the proper truth for shutting the reactor, he said.
People's Movement Against Nuclear Energy (PMNAE) chief S P Udayakumar alleged that the plant did not work continuously even after it re-started on January 30. "The Nuclear Power Corporation is not coming out with the truth on the problems in the unit. Each time it is shut we hear about various problems. Neither officials nor political party leaders are asking questions about the problems," Udayakumar told TOI.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
^^^ Here we go again. The Kundankulam Nuclear Power Plant after a 7 month shutdown yet again grinds to halt within a week of re-start.
Looks like Russia has saddled us with a problem child for which we have been made to pay through the nose while enduring long delays.
An earlier article dating back to 2014 from Page 86 of this thread.
Looks like Russia has saddled us with a problem child for which we have been made to pay through the nose while enduring long delays.
An earlier article dating back to 2014 from Page 86 of this thread.
arun wrote:Going by the frequent outages at the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant, looks like the Russians have sold us a lemon.
Weblink:Power outages at Kudankulam nuclear plant dangerous: Study
Laxmi Ajai Prasanna, TNN | Oct 29, 2014, 12.25AM IST
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: According to a study based on analysis of grid data, there have been 21 power outages at Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP) from Oct 22, 2013, to Oct 22, 2014. Of these 21 outages, 14 are "scrams'' or trips caused by faulty equipment or poor oversight, or both, and, according to experts, can be potentially catastrophic.
The first part of the study published in academia.edu, an online research community, points out that the maximum permitted trip rate -- calculated per 7,000 reactor hours -- is 0.37 for reactors across the world. Alarmingly, in Kudankulam (in its 4,701 hours of operation), the trip rate is projected at 20.8 per 7,000 reactor hours. In the US, a plant with 25 scrams during a 7,000-hour period is issued a "red" citation and will be forced to shut down.
The study was conducted by a team of researchers led by Cochin University of Science and Technology (CUSAT) scientist M J Joseph, Society of Science Environment and Ethics (SoSEE) chairman V T Padmanabhan and Dr R Ramesh, a medical practitioner, who has authored books on the geology of Kudankulam and is a member of Doctors for Safer Environment.
The main reason for the 'scrams' is old equipment, including reactor pressure vessels, turbines and polar cranes at KKNP, all imported from post-Chernobyl Soviet Union.
"Trip rate for KKNPP is 20.8 per 7,000 reactor hours, which is too high and can trigger an explosion leading to a nuclear disaster. It is due to the use of old equipment imported after Chernobyl nuclear disaster when the erstwhile Soviet Union cancelled the VVER-1000 reactors, a Russian version of the Pressurized Water Reactor," Prof Joseph said.
CUSAT scientist Prof M Sabir said, "If substandard materials are used in a nuclear reactor and if quality checks are not maintained, obviously chances of a disaster are high". He said that an earlier study conducted by scientists from CUSAT, Bremen University, Sussex University and based on official documents from Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd and their Russian counterparts had concluded that major equipment at KKNPP like the reactor pressure vessel and polar crane are outdated.
"Though China discarded such equipment after initial imports, India continued importing such equipment for KKNPP," Prof Joseph said.
Incidentally, a turbine generator system imported from Russian firm Silmash was involved in eight of the 14 trips reported at KKNPP. Three other trips and the pipe burst accident on May 14 this year (officially known as "warm water incident") were related to the feed water system. Both the feed water system and the turbine are located in the same auxiliary building.
According to the scientists, what could hamper remedial measures is the secretive manner in which relevant information is treated. At KKNPP, all documents related to functioning of the nuclear reactor are property of the Russian firm Atomstroy, which exports all nuclear power machinery.
Officials of the Department of Atomic Energy and AERB were unavailable for comment.
TOI
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 542
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
If the nuclear establishment starts hiding problems, instead of being transparent as to the reason for shutting it down, they are doing nobody any favors, especially themselves and their own credibility in the long run. What will be at risk is public support for the three-stage program. short sighted. There needs to be someone responsible to give out the correct version of what's wrong before the PMANEs and GreenPeaces start spreading disinformation to push their own agenda. ![Confused :-?](./images/smilies/icon_confused.gif)
![Confused :-?](./images/smilies/icon_confused.gif)
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Is it a Russian problem or a problem of our own making? This must be found out as there are divided opinions.arun wrote:Looks like Russia has saddled us with a problem child for which we have been made to pay through the nose while enduring long delays.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
isn't the situation being tailor made for the PMANEs and GreenPeaces by providing them fertile ground to spread their conspiracy theories??ThiruV wrote:If the nuclear establishment starts hiding problems, instead of being transparent as to the reason for shutting it down, they are doing nobody any favors, especially themselves and their own credibility in the long run. What will be at risk is public support for the three-stage program. short sighted. There needs to be someone responsible to give out the correct version of what's wrong before the PMANEs and GreenPeaces start spreading disinformation to push their own agenda.
such secrecy is not needed unless the rumors are true.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 131
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
^
Better to keep quite about such things, because dumb NGOs and paid media will misuse information. Many other nuclear programs in other countries have been sabotaged this way. I am glad they are keeping information tight, even if 7 months is rather disappointing.
Better to keep quite about such things, because dumb NGOs and paid media will misuse information. Many other nuclear programs in other countries have been sabotaged this way. I am glad they are keeping information tight, even if 7 months is rather disappointing.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 542
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Does not compute. The choice is between only seeing the NGO/presstitute disinformation in the media if there is no official account of what went wrong and what is being done about it. Does not have to be immediate but must be timely enough to cut down any dissinformation campaign before they acquire legs.chakra.in wrote: Better to keep quite about such things, because dumb NGOs and paid media will misuse information.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
No doubt that establishment ought NOT to hide problems and should be transparent. (I am NOT suggesting that they are, or they are not).
I also do not have the details on what exactly happened, or better understanding, at least at present, how serious (or not serious) the problem is. So will invite others to add but please do not repeat CT type items.
As a scientist and a concern citizen, let me remind that it is important to note:
- People like A Gopalakrishnan and S P Udayakumar, have demonstrated from the past behavior, to me at least, that they have little credibility or integrity. To me, their lack of basic honesty, and use of innuendos, and half lies instead of hard facts, reminds me of a Bidwai or Pankaj Misra (or "scholars who wrote letters about warning PM's visit to Silicon Valley) "analysis" about BJP's government.
(They are ignorant about even the most basic science, yet talk like experts)
- MSM media, which should do some basic checking and point out blatant inaccuracies, are not careful or responsible. The will repeat silly items.
- The audience (or citizen) have a responsibility to be informed and educated and should take items which do not sound right with grain (or truck load) of salt.
For example:
I simply do not understand, why TOI runs to these experts and these experts alone.
I also do not have the details on what exactly happened, or better understanding, at least at present, how serious (or not serious) the problem is. So will invite others to add but please do not repeat CT type items.
As a scientist and a concern citizen, let me remind that it is important to note:
- People like A Gopalakrishnan and S P Udayakumar, have demonstrated from the past behavior, to me at least, that they have little credibility or integrity. To me, their lack of basic honesty, and use of innuendos, and half lies instead of hard facts, reminds me of a Bidwai or Pankaj Misra (or "scholars who wrote letters about warning PM's visit to Silicon Valley) "analysis" about BJP's government.
(They are ignorant about even the most basic science, yet talk like experts)
- MSM media, which should do some basic checking and point out blatant inaccuracies, are not careful or responsible. The will repeat silly items.
- The audience (or citizen) have a responsibility to be informed and educated and should take items which do not sound right with grain (or truck load) of salt.
For example:
The completely discredited Gopalakrishnan - Note that he has NO additional information, he is NOT related in ANYWAY to the reactor, is abusing his "former expert" title to BS and propagate a CT that he is "convinced" there is something sinister. It is not surprising that he is joined by S P Udayakumar, whose only claim to fame is scare people or cause violence.
"A leak in the steam pipeline cannot be the exact reason for shutting a nuclear reactor. It is not radioactive and a leak in the 14mm impulse line is not so dangerous to shut a reactor. There is definitely some other problem to the unit 1," said former { Reminds me of "RETIRED" title attributed to Paki expert's nonsense} Atomic Energy Regulatory Board chief A Gopalakrishnan. There is no transparency and officials should come out with the proper truth for shutting the reactor, he said.
I simply do not understand, why TOI runs to these experts and these experts alone.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 542
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
"nothing sensational happened" never sells media stories..not that the ToI and their ilk have many takers these days, but absolutely agreed that ex-AERB Gopalakrishnan and PMANE's SPU are up to no good at all. They are puppets or otherwise ill-motivated people who want India to roll back its local nuclear program, like MV Ramana and others in the same category.AmberG wrote:I simply do not understand, why TOI runs to these experts and these experts alone.
The problem is that the ToIs and the ignorant people in the media will work hard to give their version of the story credibility, as they have done many times before.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
AmberG., all excellent points.Amber G. wrote:
I simply do not understand, why TOI runs to these experts and these experts alone.
For the above query on 'why'., there is a good reason 'why' TOI is called TOI-LeT (Times of India Lashkar-e-Tayyiba).
I looked at the source and decided my time is not even worth commenting on the TOI article. There are lot of innuendoes and half-truths., akin to if Sun were to collapse today, we all will face a catastrophe.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
To be honest, I do not know how good and timely the official account is in this case.ThiruV wrote:Does not compute. The choice is between only seeing the NGO/presstitute disinformation in the media if there is no official account of what went wrong and what is being done about it. Does not have to be immediate but must be timely enough to cut down any dissinformation campaign before they acquire legs.chakra.in wrote: Better to keep quite about such things, because dumb NGOs and paid media will misuse information.
It should be good. Nothing should be hidden or even non-transparent.
Give credit to ordinary people, in general they will be able to see through good information and disinformation.
(and I believe it is responsibility of every one to be educated in this way)
***
To put the things in perspective, a few months ago, In my own state (Ohio - Oak Harbor Nuclear plant) A nuclear plant some what similar to Kudankulam was shut down over a weekend due to a steam leak.
That made the news, and details came out ("lowest emergency catagory", no radiation leaked etc)
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission told utility will need to determine the leak’s cause. Officials also asked to report if it was isolated an incident or if other pipes have weakened. ityadi..
All reported in news paper(s), but there were No Gopalkrishnan type quotes.
Last edited by Amber G. on 06 Feb 2016 23:11, edited 1 time in total.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 542
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Exactly the kind of responsible reaction is required from the media. But what are the chances of evil clowns like Barkha Dutt, or any of the editors of papers like Chindu or Indian Express actually giving publicity to good information? They are all masters at giving their opinion of such reports rather than the contents of the reports.AmberG. wrote: That made the news, and details came out ("lowest emergency catagory", no radiation leaked etc)
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission told utility will need to determine the leak’s cause. Officials also asked to report if it was isolated an incident or if other pipes have weakened. ityadi..
All reported in news paper(s), but there were No Gopalkrishnan type quotes.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
http://www.financialexpress.com/article ... /208970/[b] via Financial Express
Rosatom has been actively building up its network of regional offices. Do you plan to establish a representative office in India?[/b]
Rosatom is now actively expanding its global footprint. The State Corporation is opening its regional offices. Rosatom is expanding its branch network to strengthen its global footprint in accordance with its long-term development strategy of increasing the foreign orders portfolio up to $190 billion. This is the ambitious but achievable goal of the State Corporation for the next 5 years.
What is the current status of the Kudankulam nuclear plant construction project and is there any progress with the construction of power units 3 and 4?
Currently, the NPP Kudankulam project includes the construction of six power units with VVER-1000 type reactors. The first unit of Kudankulam NPP was commissioned in 2013 according to the latest safety requirements. By the beginning of the scheduled preventive maintenance (SPM) the nuclear plant had already generated 6873 million units of electricity, and the turbine generator had been in operation for 9267 hours. Thus, the installed capacity of the Indian nuclear power plants reached 5780 MW. This is the world’s first nuclear power plant, which has implemented and successfully operated “post-Fukushima” tightened security measures. The generation tariff for Kudankulam NPP is maintained at the level set by the Indian government in 2010-2011 without any escalation. This rate is considered to be one of the most competitive in India. The first SPM has now successfully completed, the turbine is running, and the unit is expected to be connected to the grid within a few hours. The second unit assembly is finished. The hot run stage is completed. The physical launch is scheduled by the Indian party for mid-2016.
During the recent visit of the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Russia it was announced that the signing of the MFA for the construction of units 5 and 6 is planned in Q1 2016. What is the status of this project?
The technical and commercial proposal for the installation of Kudankulam power units 5 and 6 has already been provided to the Indian party. Atomstroyexport JSC and the Indian Nuclear Energy Corporation are currently involved in detailed discussions of the project and the Master Framework Agreement with regard to the Indian party requirements concerning further enhancement of the project safety and localisation.
In the same visit, it was announced that an agreement has been reached on allocation by the Indian party of one more site for a Russian design nuclear power plant apart from Kudankulam NPP which is already under construction. What is the progress in this area?
Apart from the Kudankulam NPP, Russia and India are considering the possibility of building a number of other nuclear power plants. These are all practical steps to implement the most important document signed on December 11, 2014 – “Strategic Vision of Strengthening Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy between the Russian Federation and the Republic of India”. An agreement has been reached on the allocation by the Indian party of one more site for the construction of six new nuclear reactors of Russian design. We hope to get more detailed information about the site from the Indian party as soon as possible.
The company has signed the production localisation program in India for Russian designed nuclear plants. What does this program envisage?
During the visit of the Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi to Moscow an Action Program was indeed signed between the State Corporation Rosatom and the Atomic Energy Department of the Government of India on the localisation of production in India for nuclear power plants of Russian design. The Action Program includes areas of cooperation in the field of joint machinery production, especially the production of equipment which can be supplied to nuclear power plants, as well as cooperation in the field of joint development, mastering and technological support of the implementation of end-to-end production technologies of products for heavy and power engineering industries.
Rosatom has been actively building up its network of regional offices. Do you plan to establish a representative office in India?[/b]
Rosatom is now actively expanding its global footprint. The State Corporation is opening its regional offices. Rosatom is expanding its branch network to strengthen its global footprint in accordance with its long-term development strategy of increasing the foreign orders portfolio up to $190 billion. This is the ambitious but achievable goal of the State Corporation for the next 5 years.
What is the current status of the Kudankulam nuclear plant construction project and is there any progress with the construction of power units 3 and 4?
Currently, the NPP Kudankulam project includes the construction of six power units with VVER-1000 type reactors. The first unit of Kudankulam NPP was commissioned in 2013 according to the latest safety requirements. By the beginning of the scheduled preventive maintenance (SPM) the nuclear plant had already generated 6873 million units of electricity, and the turbine generator had been in operation for 9267 hours. Thus, the installed capacity of the Indian nuclear power plants reached 5780 MW. This is the world’s first nuclear power plant, which has implemented and successfully operated “post-Fukushima” tightened security measures. The generation tariff for Kudankulam NPP is maintained at the level set by the Indian government in 2010-2011 without any escalation. This rate is considered to be one of the most competitive in India. The first SPM has now successfully completed, the turbine is running, and the unit is expected to be connected to the grid within a few hours. The second unit assembly is finished. The hot run stage is completed. The physical launch is scheduled by the Indian party for mid-2016.
During the recent visit of the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Russia it was announced that the signing of the MFA for the construction of units 5 and 6 is planned in Q1 2016. What is the status of this project?
The technical and commercial proposal for the installation of Kudankulam power units 5 and 6 has already been provided to the Indian party. Atomstroyexport JSC and the Indian Nuclear Energy Corporation are currently involved in detailed discussions of the project and the Master Framework Agreement with regard to the Indian party requirements concerning further enhancement of the project safety and localisation.
In the same visit, it was announced that an agreement has been reached on allocation by the Indian party of one more site for a Russian design nuclear power plant apart from Kudankulam NPP which is already under construction. What is the progress in this area?
Apart from the Kudankulam NPP, Russia and India are considering the possibility of building a number of other nuclear power plants. These are all practical steps to implement the most important document signed on December 11, 2014 – “Strategic Vision of Strengthening Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy between the Russian Federation and the Republic of India”. An agreement has been reached on the allocation by the Indian party of one more site for the construction of six new nuclear reactors of Russian design. We hope to get more detailed information about the site from the Indian party as soon as possible.
The company has signed the production localisation program in India for Russian designed nuclear plants. What does this program envisage?
During the visit of the Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi to Moscow an Action Program was indeed signed between the State Corporation Rosatom and the Atomic Energy Department of the Government of India on the localisation of production in India for nuclear power plants of Russian design. The Action Program includes areas of cooperation in the field of joint machinery production, especially the production of equipment which can be supplied to nuclear power plants, as well as cooperation in the field of joint development, mastering and technological support of the implementation of end-to-end production technologies of products for heavy and power engineering industries.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Debate raging in the UK over Trident SSBN modernisation/continuation. The US Def. Sec,Ash Carter has just said that the UK needs trident to play an ":outsized" role in global affairs as the US's most important mil ally!
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/oct/ ... david-owen
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/oct/ ... david-owen
Trident replacement plan no longer credible, says former foreign secretary
Lord Owen casts doubt on government's nuclear defence policy and criticises MoD over access to archive documents
The decision to replace an unaffordable Trident missile system calls into question Gordon Brown's stated commitment to nuclear disarmament, a former Labour foreign secretary says.
In a sweeping attack on the government's defence policy, Lord Owen describes the estimated £15bn-£20bn cost of replacing Trident in its 2006 white paper as "no longer credible".
Abandoning Trident and instead having a number of cruise missiles equipped with nuclear warheads would be cheaper and more flexible, making it easier for the UK to contribute to disarmament measures over the coming decades, Owen said. The option is favoured in some quarters of the Ministry of Defence and is being considered by the Liberal Democrats.
Owen, a former minister for the navy, was appointed foreign secretary in 1977. In 1983 he left Labour to help set up the Social Democratic party. His book, Nuclear Papers, is published by Liverpool University Press.
"If we are to start, in 2010, the process of genuinely contributing to the elimination of nuclear weapons, it will not be credible if the British government commits to a new UK ballistic deterrent similar to Trident," he writes.
He adds: "Unless we learn to focus our defence budget far better than in the last decade Britain will look increasingly like a toothless lion.That will diminish our influence and power in the UN security council far more than moving to a non-ballistic cruise missile minimum nuclear deterrent."
Owen also claims the MoD recently withdrew documents on British nuclear weapons policy of the late 70s that were previously available at the National Archive. The ministry did so after Owen alerted it to their existence when asking for comments on them.
Sir Bill Jeffrey, the top civil servant at the MoD, has admitted the papers were available until recently. "They were recalled for re-review because we believed they might contain sensitive material which had been released in error," he told Owen.
One significant report on nuclear weapons policy drawn up by senior officials in 1978 is still withheld – though a commentary on it for the chiefs of staff has been published, albeit with passages redacted.
Owen accuses the government of imposing an arbitrary and illogical policy towards the disclosure of official documents. Those that have been released show that Britain's nuclear deterrent, the pre-Trident Polaris system, did not have the capability that ministers were told that it had. They also show that crucial information about the costs of the system was withheld from the then chancellor, Denis Healey.
Papers the MoD are holding back concern arguments in Whitehall over Owen's proposal that nuclear warheads could be put on cruise missiles and deployed on smaller submarines rather than on a more expensive Trident fleet equipped with long-range ballistic missiles.
Owen challenges the government's repeated claims that money spent on Trident has no impact on the defence budget. "The nuclear deterrent has never been ringfenced within overall government expenditure: its extra costs have always come out of the overall defence budget," he writes.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6117
- Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
http://www.newsweek.com/india-nuclear-s ... oll-426134
Indian nuclear matrials security.
Unlike Anglo-American nuclear weapons which are not subject to loss, theft and hijack.
Indian nuclear matrials security.
Unlike Anglo-American nuclear weapons which are not subject to loss, theft and hijack.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Power generation resumes in KKNPP - The Hindu
Power generation in the first 1000-MW reactor of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP) resumed on Sunday evening after it suffered a breakdown earlier this month.
After attending to the problem, the generation resumed at 6.35 p.m. and subsequently it got synchronised. After resuming, the plant initially generated 160 MW, KKNPP sources told The Hindu .
The generation came to a halt at 10.35 p.m. on February 4 following a minor steam leak in the secondary line of the turbine. After a long gap, the first reactor commenced operation on January 30, generating 300 MW which later went up to 730 MW. The generation was suspended for a planned shutdown on January 31, the sources added.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
That was 6th February when KKNPP restarted after a 7 month shutdown. It remained shutdown for more than a month and restarted last week. Now, the latest.SSridhar wrote:Kudankulam unit 1 started & promptly shutdown
the next day. Completely unacceptable performance by our nuclear establishment.
Power generation at KKNPP unit stopped again
Electricity generation in the first reactor of Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNPP) was stopped again on Tuesday evening following leak in a secondary circuit tube.
“While the primary circuit system is working exceptionally well, the unforeseen leak in the secondary circuit tube forced us to stop power generation around 6.40 p.m. on Tuesday,” the sources said.
Following the seven-month-long maintenance carried out in the reactor and the allied systems following the scheduled annual fuel outage, the reactor started generating power on last January 30. However, the generation had to be stopped last Saturday following the leak in the pipe carrying steam.
Though it was reportedly rectified, the problem has resurfaced to hit power generation once again.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Site excavation for 3rd, 4th reactors begins at KKNPP - The Hindu
Excavation of the site for the third and fourth reactors of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNPP) commenced on Wednesday.
In a simple ceremony held on Wednesday in the presence of the site director, KKNPP, R.S. Sundar, station director (units 3 and 4) P.A. Pillai and Chief Engineer M.S. Suresh, excavation of site commenced.
As the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), proponent of the project, has proposed to construct six reactors on the sprawling KKNPP site, it commenced the work on constructing the third and fourth reactors even as the first reactor reached the power generation phase and the second unit is waiting for enriched uranium fuel loading.
On completing the excavation before January 2017, the ‘First Pouring of Concrete’ for the third and fourth reactors will take place within a year from now.
“As we have gained the much-needed experience on constructing the 1,000-MW VVER Russian reactors during the construction of the first two units, we have planned to complete the construction on an outlay of Rs. 39,747 crore and keep the new units ready for commissioning by 2022,” said a senior official of KKNPP.
Anti-people
Meanwhile, S.P. Udhayakumar of the People’s Movement Against Nuclear Energy, told reporters in Coimbatore, that the work to build the third and fourth reactors at KKNPP was anti-people.
The anti-nuke supporters would protest to prevent the construction of the two additional reactors, which if commissioned, would affect the life of people who lived in the reactor’s vicinity.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
How India will protect nuclear liabilities of US firms
A $48-billion (Rs 3.26 lakh crore) penalty claimed by the US government from Volkswagen for cheating on diesel-car emissions is about 200 times as large as the $225 million (Rs 1,500 crore) insurance pool set up by Indian insurance companies to compensate US nuclear companies for mishaps in India.
If a US nuclear company were to build a reactor in India that suffered a catastrophe, and people were to die in India, the US Government’s position seems to be that American suppliers shouldn’t face civil or criminal liability. The US believes the Indian civil nuclear liability law, which calls for both penalties, is unduly harsh. Rather than say so directly, US officials keep repeating that the “Indian law is inconsistent with the international liability regime.”
The Indian civil nuclear liability law holds the equipment supplier responsible for any incident caused by the supplier or its employees. The Indian liability law differs from those of other countries because it was drafted keeping in mind the 1984 Bhopal tragedy–where despite 5,000 deaths and effects across generations, no one was held criminally liable.
The penalty demanded in the Volkswagen case is about 100 times the compensation of $470 million–($907 million in 2014 dollars)–paid by US firm Union Carbide after the Bhopal Gas tragedy, which also left 70,000 people maimed or injured. Volkswagen’s cover-up caused no injuries or deaths.
Although the Indian government wants to protect US nuclear companies against the Indian liability law, critics argued that these companies are using India’s eagerness to avoid any liability, if something goes wrong.
India wants to build more nuclear power plants in an attempt to reduce the share of coal in electricity generation. Increasing the use of nuclear power is also a part of the country’s strategy to tackle climate change.
India currently has 5,780 mega watts (MW) of nuclear power in operation and plans to add another 17,400 MW of capacity, making it possibly the largest market for nuclear power after China, and a financially lucrative prospect for Western firms faced with limited domestic sales.
However, the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, caused by an earthquake, followed by a tsunami, has heightened concerns of nuclear safety and accident costs. The fallout of that disaster will also make it hard to change India’s liability laws.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 117
- Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:35
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
BRF Oldie
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06
Posts: 4014
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
How India will protect nuclear liabilities of US firms
Liability bill is protection and safety of people not to avoid for one company. Every company have to accept the liability bill or keep there reactor.
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06
Posts: 4014
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
How India will protect nuclear liabilities of US firms
Liability bill is protection and safety of people not to avoid for one company. Every company have to accept the liability bill or keep there reactor.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Kudankulam second reactor to generate power in May - The Hindu
Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project’s second unit is likely to commence power generation in May even as the first unit is generating 715 MWe against its maximum capacity of 1,000 MWe.
715 MWe from first unit
During an informal chat with reporters at Anu Vijay Township at Chettikulam in the district on Friday, KKNPP Site Director R.S. Sundar, after handing over garbage cleaning autos to eight village panchayats situated around KKNPP site, said that power generation in the first unit had been gradually increased to 715 MWe and the generation would be increased to 1,000 MWe.
The second unit would be ready for power generation in May as enriched uranium fuel loading would be taken up in the near future after getting the approval of Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, he said.
Relief for power managers
As Tangedco would get 562 MWe power whenever the first unit of the KKNPP achieved its maximum capacity of 1,000 MWe, the announcement on power generation in the second reactor in May would enthuse power managers considering that the demand would be shooting up in the peak of summer.
Mr. Sundar said that excavation of site for the third and the fourth reactors was progressing as planned.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
X-post from India-Japan Thread.. Something for Indian powers that be to understand and ensure they have the right experts and working procedures in place.
In Japan the top nuclear expert was an economist.
Bosses in Tokyo were giving confusing directions to workers out there trying to save the plants.
{quote="Philip"}
The truth about Fukushima and the dangers of an N-plant meltdown.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ister.html
Every root cause analysis (RCA) that ends up blaming individuals instead of taking institutional corrective action to fix procedures and processes is itself a failure and will cause a repeat.
In Japan the top nuclear expert was an economist.
Bosses in Tokyo were giving confusing directions to workers out there trying to save the plants.
{quote="Philip"}
The truth about Fukushima and the dangers of an N-plant meltdown.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ister.html
{/quote}Fukushima: Tokyo was on the brink of nuclear catastrophe, admits former prime minister
Five years on from the tsunami, the former Japanese prime minister says the country came within a “paper-thin margin” of a nuclear disaster.
Bags of radioactive contaminated soil piled up along the coast near the Fukushima nuclear plant Photo: Julian Simmonds for The Telegraph
Andrew Gilligan
04 Mar 2016
Japan's prime minister at the time of the 2011 earthquake and tsunami has revealed that the country came within a “paper-thin margin” of a nuclear disaster requiring the evacuation of 50 million people.
In an interview with The Telegraph to mark the fifth anniversary of the tragedy, Naoto Kan described the panic and disarray at the highest levels of the Japanese government as it fought to control multiple meltdowns at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station.
He said he considered evacuating the capital, Tokyo, along with all other areas within 160 miles of the plant, and declaring martial law. “The future existence of Japan as a whole was at stake,” he said. “Something on that scale, an evacuation of 50 million, it would have been like a losing a huge war.”
Fukushima five years on - Former Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan.
Mr Kan admitted he was frightened and said he got “no clear information” out of Tepco, the plant’s operator. He was “very shocked” by the performance of Nobuaki Terasaka, his own government’s key nuclear safety adviser. “We questioned him and he was unable to give clear responses,” he said.
“We asked him – do you know anything about nuclear issues? And he said no, I majored in economics.”![]()
From a very early stage I had a very high concern for Tokyo Naoto Kan, former PM
Mr Terasaka, the director of the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, was later sacked. Another member of Mr Kan’s crisis working group, the then Tepco chairman, Tsunehisa Katsumata, was last week indicted on charges of criminal negligence for his role in the disaster.
The 9.0 magnitude quake, the largest ever recorded in Japan, triggered a gigantic tsunami which broke through the plant’s flood defences, cutting off power to its control room and the coolant systems of its nuclear reactors.
{Hazard for the sea shore based nuke power plants is a giant tsunami that neuters the coolant system. Especially Japan has mega earthquakes and giant Tsunamis}
Deprived of cooling, radioactive fuel, in three of the plant’s six reactors melted down. Explosive hydrogen gas built up, blowing holes in the reactor containment building and allowing radioactivity to escape.
{Vulnerability of the nuke power plants was failure of cooling mechanism. When a hazard meets a vulnerability you get the disaster.}
Fukushima five years on
The town of Futaba is still sealed off in an exclusion zone Photo: Julian Simmonds for The Telegraph
“When we got the report that power had been cut and the coolant had stopped working, that sent a shiver down my spine,” Mr Kan said. “From March 11, when the incident happened, until the 15th, the effects [of radioactive contamination] were expanding geographically.
"From the 16th to the 20th we were able to halt the spread of radiation but the margin left for us was paper-thin. If the [fuel rods] had burnt through [in] all six reactors, that would definitely have affected Tokyo.
“From a very early stage I had a very high concern for Tokyo. I was forming ideas for a Tokyo evacuation plan in my head. In the 1923 earthquake the government ordered martial law – I did think of the possibility of having to set up such emergency law if it really came down to it.
“We were only able to avert a 250-kilometre (160-mile) evacuation zone [around the plant] by a wafer-thin margin, thanks to the efforts of people who risked their lives. Next time, we might not be so lucky.”
Dramatic CCTV footage from the plant, released in 2012, showed a skeleton staff – the so-called “Fukushima 50” - struggling to read emergency manuals by torchlight and battling with contradictory, confusing instructions from their superiors at Tepco. At one stage, an appeal went out for workers to bring batteries from their cars so they could be hooked up to provide power for the crippled cooling systems.
Total disaster was averted when seawater was pumped into the reactors, but the plant manager, Masao Yoshida, later said he considered committing hara-kiri, ritual suicide, in despair at the situation.
Five years on, the decontamination and decommissioning process at the Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s embattled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant continues
Five years on, the decontamination and decommissioning process at the Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s embattled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant continues Photo: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images
Mr Kan said he had to retreat to an inner room after the atmosphere in the government’s crisis management centre became “very noisy”.
He said: “There was so little precise information coming in. It was very difficult to make clear judgments. I don’t consider myself a nuclear expert, but I did study physics at university.
"I knew that even based on what little we were hearing, there was a real possibility this could be bigger than Chernobyl. That was a terrible disaster, but there was only one reactor there. There were six here.”
Although the Fukushima disaster caused no immediate deaths from radiation, it did force the evacuation of almost 400,000 people, most of whom have still been unable to return to their homes. Hundreds of thousands more fled in panic and much of Fukushima province ceased functioning.
Fukushima five years on
Derelict buildings in Futaba locked in an eerie time capsule Photo: Julian Simmonds for The Telegraph
An area within 20km (12.5 miles) of the plant remains an exclusion zone, with no-one allowed to live there. Some studies have identified a higher incidence of child cancer in the wider region.
Mr Kan said that the nuclear accident is “still going on” today. He said: “In reactors 2 and 3, the radioactive fuel rods are still there and small amounts of [radioactive] water are leaking out of the reactor every day, despite what Tepco says.”
He said the experience had turned him from a supporter of nuclear power into a convinced opponent. “I have changed my views 180 degrees. You have to look at the balance between the risks and the benefits,” he said. “One reactor meltdown could destroy the whole plant and, however unlikely, that is too great a risk.”
{High consequence event}
Mr Kan lost the prime ministership later in 2011 amid strong criticism of his handling of the crisis. A parliamentary investigation accused him of distracting emergency workers by making a personal visit to the plant, withholding information, and misunderstanding a request by Tepco to pull out some staff as a demand to withdraw them all.
]{This best example of hindsight bias. Things look crystal clear in hind sight after the incident/accident. It totally ignores the morass of procedures, procceses, people, training etc which create the confusion.}
However, another independent inquiry said his action in ordering the “Fukushima 50” to stay at their posts was vital. “I went to the Tepco offices and demanded they not evacuate. To this day I am criticised for that, but I believed then and I still believe now that I did the right thing and that that was a decisive moment in the crisis,” he told The Telegraph.
Fukushima five years on
Derelict buildings and a destroyed car in Futaba Photo: Julian Simmonds for The Telegraph
He admitted “regret” at his decision not to publish results from a computer system called Speedi, System for Prediction of Environmental Emergency Dose Information, which accurately forecast the spread of radioactivity around the plant and could have saved thousands of local residents from exposure.
“As a result, some areas were exposed to high levels of radiation,” he said.
He criticised his successor as prime minister, Shinzo Abe, for restarting some of the country’s nuclear power stations, all of which were shut down after the crisis, saying that Japan had “not learned the lessons enough” and was “closing its eyes” to the risk of a second disaster. He has joined protest demonstrations against the plant reopenings.
{The real lesson is the other three plants in Fukushima survived the tsunami as the disel generator plants were also in the containment building and thus protected from the ill effects of the tsunami.}
“There is a clear conflict between government policy and the wishes of the public,” he said. “Additional protective measures against tsunamis have been taken, such as raising the protective walls, but I don’t think they go far enough. We shouldn’t be building nuclear power plants in areas where there is a population to be affected. After the tsunami, Japan went without nuclear power for years, so it can be done.”
Fukushima five years on
A sign in Futaba Photo: Julian Simmonds for The Telegraph
The former leader said that “a lot of the accident was caused before March 11” by the complacency and misjudgment of Tepco, a verdict echoed by the official inquiry, which dubbed the nuclear accident a “man-made disaster”.
The criminal investigation which led to last week’s charges against Mr Katsumata and two other Tepco managers found that they had known since June 2009 that the plant was vulnerable to a tsunami but had “failed to take pre-emptive measures [despite] knowing the risk".
Mr Kan expressed satisfaction at the charges brought last week against a senior Tepco manager and said he would testify against Mr Katsumata if asked.
Every root cause analysis (RCA) that ends up blaming individuals instead of taking institutional corrective action to fix procedures and processes is itself a failure and will cause a repeat.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Can' answer without a quote!
Leak is on secondary i.e. non-nuclear side. Most likley some coolant water piping. Its not on primary side i.e. non-nuclear side. Hence did not trigger an investigation.
I would look to see if such components are on the primary side too.
Most likely they did.
Leak is on secondary i.e. non-nuclear side. Most likley some coolant water piping. Its not on primary side i.e. non-nuclear side. Hence did not trigger an investigation.
I would look to see if such components are on the primary side too.
Most likely they did.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
99.9 percent of accidents and leaks in N-plants are on the non nuclear side, most often due to corrosion in piping.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Or gasket leaking.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Japan says India’s nuclear MoU “legally binding” - Kallol Bhattacherjee, The Hindu
Days before Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Washington DC for the Nuclear Security Summit, a senior Japanese diplomat told The Hindu that India had committed to adhere to the “control of nuclear material, traceability [of nuclear fuel] and consequence in case of a nuclear accident” under the memorandum of understanding (MoU) on civil nuclear cooperation with Japan signed during Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s visit to India in 2015.
Intrusive, feel experts
Though the bilateral agreement leaves out India’s military nuclear programme, experts warn that the agreed principles impinge on India’s independent nuclear programme as they imply intrusive inspection of civilian nuclear reactors as warranted under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT).
The Japanese diplomat pointed out that so far, the world had to rely on India’s verbal commitments on nuclear non-proliferation, but the India-Japan MoU marked the first occasion when India came under legal obligation to uphold non-proliferation concerns.
“There were no tools to bind India, only India’s voluntary self-claimed policy existed, but now there is legally binding measures by the agreement between India and Japan,” said the diplomat, explaining that the commitments were proof of India’s peaceful and transparent intentions in using nuclear reactors solely for energy generation. He said India will be financially accountable if it is found to be violating the principles.
An Indian official who has been associated with the negotiations said the principles being cited by the Japanese were nothing extraordinary and were part of the “standard template for civil nuclear deal” that India had signed with several countries. However, he refused to address the Japanese assertion that India would have to financially compensate Japan if it violated the principles.
Top experts on nuclear affairs, however, describe the MoU as a “backdoor attempt to draw India into the NPT”.
“The principles of traceability and control over nuclear material are highly intrusive measures that will be used by the Japanese to trace the nuclear fuel that Japanese-origin reactors sold to India will contain,” says Ashok Parthasarathi, former Scientific Adviser to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The MoU may destabilise India’s established nuclear deals with Russia and France as they too may demand similar commitments previously denied to them, he said.
A. Gopalakrishnan, former Chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, points out that conditions on “traceability of nuclear fuel and safety of nuclear material” do not figure in the deals India concluded with the U.S., France and Russia.
“The government should not accept such intrusive provisions as these are demeaning for a country of India’s stature,” Dr. Gopalakrishnan told The Hindu . Refuting the government’s claim on the “template of civil nuclear deal”, he said: “The official template of nuclear deal did not contain provisions that might empower outside powers to carry out inspection to trace nuclear fuel in India.”
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
India has a clean non-proliferation record. The Hindu reporter is making a mountain out of a molehill.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
India, France sign MoU for construction of six nuclear reactors at Jaitapur.
India and France have signed an MoU for the construction of six nuclear reactors at Jaitapur in Maharashtra, two months after the two countries decided to conclude the techno-commercial negotiations for the project by the year end.
The pact was inked yesterday at the end of the two-day visit of a high-level delegation of Electricite de France (EDF - French public utility) to Mumbai for holding discussions with National Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) on the construction of the plants, diplomatic sources said.
French Ambassador to India Francois Richier, who was present on the occasion, reiterated his country's commitment to working seamlessly with India through a collaborative approach to enable both sides to contribute collectively to the development of nuclear energy in India in the most economical manner.
The EDF visit was a follow-up on the State Visit of French President Francois Hollande to India in January, during which France and India drew up a cooperation roadmap for concluding techno-commercial negotiations for the Jaitapur project by the end of 2016.
"It may be recalled that, on this occasion, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Hollande welcomed the initialising of an updated MoU between EDF and NPCIL for the construction of six EPR units at Jaitapur. This updated MoU was formally signed by EDF and NPCIL on 22nd of March," the sources said.
Asserting that both industrial parties were working on the "Make in India" aspect of the Jaitapur project, they said this will be carried out through industrial partnerships, and joint ventures between Indo-French manufacturers for cost- effective and time-bound localisation in India.
In this regard, it will also include the transfer of rights on technology to be mutually agreed on by the parties.
EDF is France's public electricity producer and supplier and has been designated by the French government for taking over AREVA NP.
EDF is now leading the negotiations for the French side, with the support of AREVA NP, for the Jaitapur nuclear park and supply of all equipment under EDF's scope.
"The project will thus benefit from EDF's recognised expertise and extensive experience in the development and construction of nuclear fleets and ensuring their safe and reliable operation," the sources said.
The Jaitapur nuclear power project, proposing a nuclear power plant of 9900 MW, consists of 6 European Pressurised Reactors (EPR) of 1650 MW each.
India and France have signed an MoU for the construction of six nuclear reactors at Jaitapur in Maharashtra, two months after the two countries decided to conclude the techno-commercial negotiations for the project by the year end.
The pact was inked yesterday at the end of the two-day visit of a high-level delegation of Electricite de France (EDF - French public utility) to Mumbai for holding discussions with National Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) on the construction of the plants, diplomatic sources said.
French Ambassador to India Francois Richier, who was present on the occasion, reiterated his country's commitment to working seamlessly with India through a collaborative approach to enable both sides to contribute collectively to the development of nuclear energy in India in the most economical manner.
The EDF visit was a follow-up on the State Visit of French President Francois Hollande to India in January, during which France and India drew up a cooperation roadmap for concluding techno-commercial negotiations for the Jaitapur project by the end of 2016.
"It may be recalled that, on this occasion, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Hollande welcomed the initialising of an updated MoU between EDF and NPCIL for the construction of six EPR units at Jaitapur. This updated MoU was formally signed by EDF and NPCIL on 22nd of March," the sources said.
Asserting that both industrial parties were working on the "Make in India" aspect of the Jaitapur project, they said this will be carried out through industrial partnerships, and joint ventures between Indo-French manufacturers for cost- effective and time-bound localisation in India.
In this regard, it will also include the transfer of rights on technology to be mutually agreed on by the parties.
EDF is France's public electricity producer and supplier and has been designated by the French government for taking over AREVA NP.
EDF is now leading the negotiations for the French side, with the support of AREVA NP, for the Jaitapur nuclear park and supply of all equipment under EDF's scope.
"The project will thus benefit from EDF's recognised expertise and extensive experience in the development and construction of nuclear fleets and ensuring their safe and reliable operation," the sources said.
The Jaitapur nuclear power project, proposing a nuclear power plant of 9900 MW, consists of 6 European Pressurised Reactors (EPR) of 1650 MW each.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 131
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
^
Will be late, over budget, and expensive power costs after it is built.
Finalize a 1000MW indigenous Heavy-Water design and scale up on it. We don't need anymore distractions with foreign nuclear plants. Just focus on current 3-stage nuclear strategy. Current agreements already allow India to purchase Uranium from a variety of sources.
Will be late, over budget, and expensive power costs after it is built.
Finalize a 1000MW indigenous Heavy-Water design and scale up on it. We don't need anymore distractions with foreign nuclear plants. Just focus on current 3-stage nuclear strategy. Current agreements already allow India to purchase Uranium from a variety of sources.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Nuclear Fuel Complex sets new production record in 2015-16.
The Nuclear Fuel Complex (NFC) in Hyderabad, a part of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), on Saturday said it has set a new world record with production of 1503 metric tonnes (MT) of nuclear fuel in 2015-16 though its capacity is 850 tonnes.
In 2014-15, NFC, which produces fuel assemblies required for all the operating nuclear power reactors in the country, become world’s highest producer of nuclear fuel with the production of 1252 MT, its chief executive officer N. Saibaba said. Though the country doesn’t need 1500 tonnes of pressurised heavy-water reactor (PHWR) fuel bundles at present, the production was achieved to demonstrate its ability to meet future requirements, he said.
“We need only around 750 tonnes today for operating all our reactors in the country. But we are making more, because we would like to demonstrate the capacities of our NFC and also we plan to develop new places. For example, about 16,700 MW reactors are expected to come up by 2030-31. These require huge amount of fuel,” he said.
The NFC plant in Hyderabad has plans to go up to 2,000 tonnes and the plant at Kota aims to go up to 800-1,000 tonnes, he said, “so that we don’t need any new plant, existing two plants will be able to take care of all the requirements”. The output of nuclear power is expected to be 14,000 MW-15,000 MW in the next six years (by 2022-23) with more reactors likely to be in place with the government committing to provide Rs.3,000 crore every year for power production and a new Act allowing NFC to join hands with PSUs in developing new power plants, he said.
NFC also manufactures various Zirconium alloy reactor core structures like Pressure Tubes and Calandria Tubes. The complex is also involved in manufacturing seamless tubes in different grades of materials for strategic applications, meeting critical requirements of the DAE, space and defence.
These include Truss Rod Assemblies, hydraulic tubing for Light Combat Aircraft, special grade Copper blanks for Prithvi and Nag missiles, Missile casings, special grade seamless tubes for nuclear submarine, seamless tubes for Advanced Ultra Supercritical Boilers and Brahmos.
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Wouldn't storage be a problem?
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 119
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/k ... 479588.ece
The way it is worded, it's supposed to look like it was the leak that caused it. But they're doing maintenance along with the incident rectification
The way it is worded, it's supposed to look like it was the leak that caused it. But they're doing maintenance along with the incident rectification
Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
There does not seem to be any massive movement to order huge number of domestic PHWR reactors after Modi Govt came to power. I was hoping to see at least 20-30 new PHWR reactors in the range of 500-1000 MW being ordered by Modi Govt.
French Reactor costing may work out if they give us 60 year Euro loan with interest of Minus 0.5% per annum to balance out their costly reactors.
French Reactor costing may work out if they give us 60 year Euro loan with interest of Minus 0.5% per annum to balance out their costly reactors.
Last edited by Gyan on 15 Apr 2016 22:47, edited 2 times in total.