India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

vera_k wrote:It occured to me that the ENR fight may actually be about getting Indian R&D to show their cards with respect to the current state of Indian ENR
Not really...In the original nuke agreement with the US, as well as the NSG "waiver", India had already committed to building a dedicated reprocessing facility for imported fuel....Russian fuel commitments for Kudunkulum 1/2 (concluded way before the nuke deal) also speficies India's right to reprocess, but only either in a dedicated facility under safeguards, or under item-specific safeguards in an existing facility...

Point to be noted is that there is no legal/strategic compulsion to reprocess spent fuel, for civilian purposes...The issue is economic - it provides more fissile material, neutrons and above all, reduces the cost of disposal..

Are there studies that compares total economic cost of nuke power with and without reprocessing? Amber G, GP?
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4667
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by gakakkad »

@ somnath Reprocessing might not benefit from the cost point of view in the immediate future. But once uranium starts depleting and the prices increase (decades away) reprocessing will be inevitable.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

^^^That is the cornerstone of the 3 stage programme..But that isnt the point -even today, only a part of the spent fuel ccumulated is actually reprocessed...Technically, India can also choose to keep the entire imported spent fuel invesntory unreprocessed - question is, what are the cost implications? There are of course, neutron economics implications that GP explained in an ealier thread....
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by negi »

somnath wrote: Net net, imported fuel cannot be used for "strategic" purposes...This was the issue in 1974 as well...
That is the NPA pov akin to their nightmare about PSLV being used to lob a nuke over the west. :roll: . After PoK-II and now Arihant's sea trials it should be clear to everyone that fuel for strategic programs is produced and processed in house.

Well technically, there is no need for the ENR tech to be "imported"..India can setup a facility under safeguards to enrich imported fuel...Depends on the cost-benefit - does the imported ENR facility cost more than the Indian? If it does, we might never need to import..
Not sure about the underlined part as the spent fuel from imported plants will not be the same as from our PHWRs also the volume of spent fuel which India will have to deal with will be huge. Moreover in a field like nuclear energy cost-benefit is usually driven by the state of the art technology.
Added later: In April 2010, India and US signed an agreement that gave India the right to reprocess all fuel imported from the US, in an (IAEA) safeguarded facility...Its quite significant, as US has such a deal only with Japan and a couple of European countries...
Yes I guess the number was 2/3 such facilities (cannot recollect of top of my head).
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3986
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by vera_k »

somnath wrote:Point to be noted is that there is no legal/strategic compulsion to reprocess spent fuel, for civilian purposes...The issue is economic - it provides more fissile material, neutrons and above all, reduces the cost of disposal..
Don't think the issue is economic at all. The reprocessing facility was needed because the output from there is supposed to fuel the safeguarded FBRs that would come up.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

vera_k wrote:Don't think the issue is economic at all. The reprocessing facility was needed because the output from there is supposed to fuel the safeguarded FBRs that would come up.
Quite right..But we dont necessarily need imported ENR tech to reprocess imported fuel...So for now, as we import fuel, its not necessary to reprocess all of it - a large part of it isnt in any case...
negi wrote:That is the NPA pov akin to their nightmare about PSLV being used to lob a nuke over the west. . After PoK-II and now Arihant's sea trials it should be clear to everyone that fuel for strategic programs is produced and processed in house
How? given that the second half your statement is true, there should be no issues with all "civilian" reprocessing being under safeguards...
negi wrote:Not sure about the underlined part as the spent fuel from imported plants will not be the same as from our PHWRs also the volume of spent fuel which India will have to deal with will be huge. Moreover in a field like nuclear energy cost-benefit is usually driven by the state of the art technology.
We dont just operate PHWRs :wink: ...Import of ENR tech is a technology and cost-benefit question - does the imported tech offer anything "better" to wht we already have? If not, and current indications from people like Srikumar Bannerjee display a distinct ambivalence to it, then we wont need to import..
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3986
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by vera_k »

somnath wrote:Quite right..But we dont necessarily need imported ENR tech to reprocess imported fuel...
The imported tech is needed if the establishment wants to hold its cards close when it comes to the performance and reliability of the domestic technology. If those parameters are known by virtue of disclosures made as part of a safeguarding protocol, then interested parties can come up with much better estimates of the current state of the military program.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

vera_k wrote:The imported tech is needed if the establishment wants to hold its cards close when it comes to the performance and reliability of the domestic technology. If those parameters are known by virtue of disclosures made as part of a safeguarding protocol, then interested parties can come up with much better estimates of the current state of the military program
We are already doing that..Imported fuel is reprocessed under item specific safeguards...We gave the same commitment during Kudunkulum 1/2...
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Sanku »

vera_k wrote:It occured to me that the ENR fight may actually be about getting Indian R&D to show their cards with respect to the current state of Indian ENR.
Actually that is the purpose of whole 123 "deal" (where deal is in wheeling-dealing) -- this is one sub-step
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3986
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by vera_k »

somnath wrote:We are already doing that..Imported fuel is reprocessed under item specific safeguards...We gave the same commitment during Kudunkulum 1/2...
But the foreign suppliers are also supplying the ENR tech for that - Russia for Kudankulum for example.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

vera_k wrote:But the foreign suppliers are also supplying the ENR tech for that - Russia for Kudankulum for example
Ideally, we would like to (at least evluate)..But the original Kudunkulum 1/2 predated the nuke deal - there was no provision of Russian ENR tech then (even the Russians werent willing to stretch so far!)...The arrangement was that either we set up a dedicated safeguarded facility, or under item-sepcific safeguards in an existing one...

with the nuke deal, Russia's version of 123 apparently enables export of ENR tech, which we can evaluate...
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3986
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by vera_k »

^^^

Nuclear Exports to India
The agreement did not contain provisions for the supply of fresh fuel or the reprocessing and disposition of spent fuel.
So again, reprocessing using domestic tech wasn't anticipated.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

^^^That claim actually doesnt make sense - no way India would spend a few billion dollars importing a reactor if the contract did not include ironclad guarantees on fuel supplies - remember this was pre-nuke deal to boot...

On reprocessing of fuel..
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SAAN_/message/530
DAE officials disclosed that Minatom and Russia have agreed that DAE and
the Nuclear Power Corp. of India Ltd (NPC) may opt not to send the spent
fuel from the VVERs back to Russia. Instead, the officials outlined, DAE
and NPC would reprocess the spent fuel under IAEA safeguards, either at the
Kalpakkam reprocessing plant associated with the two Madras PHWRs or at a
dedicated separation plant which DAE may build at the site of the VVER
station
.
The same position has been quoted in many other places, and is corroborated by India's well-known sensitivities around reprocessing..
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3986
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by vera_k »

^^^

That supports my point though. If they envisaged reprocessing Kudankulam fuel at Kalpakkam, then it is clue enough that it was not planned to happen in a safeguarded reprocessing plant that would expose domestic tech to outside inspectors.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

^^Note the phraseology - "DAE and NPC would reprocess the spent fuel under IAEA safeguards".....

So it had to be either a dedicated new facility, or existing, but either way under IAEA safeguards...

Actually, there cant be much debate around this point - the Kudunkulum deal was a one-off kind of txn (bit like Chashma) - and there was no way Russia could have "sold" the story to the world (specifically NSG) without the full txn being under safeguards...

BTW, even the imported fuel for Tarapur was/is reprocessed under safeguards - so nothing new there...
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3986
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by vera_k »

Fair enough, but again this only takes care of reprocessing, but not enrichment. That tech and its capability is still a closely guarded secret in the domestic industry.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

^^^India isnt about to open any indigeneous enrichment facility to safeguards - the Iyer Village complex has been kept out of safeguards...Any imported facility, to produce LEUs will be under safeguards...
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3986
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by vera_k »

Exactly. Which is why any tech denial for the "E" would be an issue, since domestic tech wouldn't be used in any facility that is opened to safeguards.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

vera_k wrote:Exactly. Which is why any tech denial for the "E" would be an issue, since domestic tech wouldn't be used in any facility that is opened to safeguards.
No..."E" isnt required for imported reactors - the reactor comes with guarantees of fuel (enriched to whatever level it has to, as per design specs)...It is "R" that is crucial, from an economic perspective...

Import of "E" would be more for us to get working knowledge of designs for commercial purposes (our "E" plants are largely dedicated strategic units) and evaluating newer tech...
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Sanku »

Despite the massive pressure by pro-US lobbies to take deeply anti-India decisions for commercial gains by US and their Indian agents a lot Indians stay firm.

The nuclear limit

Indeed please return my nation to sanity. Imagine a civilian nuclear sector run like current UPA govt runs railways and other critical ministries.

:(
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by ShauryaT »

Something to watch for. Post 123 deal, the new base line to defend are the nuances of 123, not "equal rights and responsibilities". Long time participants of this thread should note this. The chimera of DAE has been going on since decades now. Nothing unique to DAE that does not affect all our government planning!
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Sanku »

ShauryaT wrote:Post 123 deal, the new base line to defend are the nuances of 123, not "equal rights and responsibilities". Long time participants of this thread should note this.
The vote buyers have even given up the pretense of trying to explain that 123 was the way towards a nuclear nation with all the rights and responsibilities of a nuclear power like United states.

There is no limit these people wont go down to.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Prem »

http://www.nationaljournal.com/national ... t-20110711
U.S. Reaffirms Backing of Indian Nuclear Pact
The U.S. said it still completely backs its civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with India and intends to honor every obligation made during President Obama's ( Not Bush) trip to New Delhi late last year, Asian News International reported on Saturday.
The 46-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group in 2008 granted a special exception enabling its members to engage in civilian atomic trade with India, even though the nuclear-armed South Asian state has not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Last month, though, the organization acted to prohibit the export of nuclear fuel enrichment and reprocessing systems to countries outside the treaty.“The Obama administration remains fully committed to the civil nuclear deal and to all of the commitments that were made during the president’s visit in November,” U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake said.“The Obama administration fully supports the so-called clean Nuclear Suppliers Group exception for India and the speedy implementation of our bilateral nuclear cooperation. Nothing about the new enrichment and reprocessing transfer restrictions that were recently agreed to by the NSG members will in any way detract from our existing nuclear cooperation," he said.“We’ve done a lot since the president’s highly successful trip. As part of our commitment to treat India as a nonproliferation partner we delisted [India's Defense Research and Development Organization and the Indian Space Research Organization] from the Commerce Department’s Entities List. We removed India from most unilateral license requirements and have worked hard with India on its membership in the four arms-control regimes. We have conducted regional consultations on Asia and I held the first Central Asia Dialogue with my counterpart in June,” Blake said.Russia's chief envoy to India on Friday expressed his country's support for New Delhi's potential entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the Indo-Asian News Service reported
No apartheid can be applicable to India. Russia's position is very clear on this matter. We want India to be a full member of the NSG and of other similar regimes. There has been no change in this," Ambassador Alexander Kadakin said in an interview.
"As regards the renovated rules worked out by the NSG, we are confident that they will not affect our large-scale plans and bilateral 'road map' of March 2010 to develop peaceful nuclear energy in India," Kadakin said.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

ShauryaT wrote:Something to watch for. Post 123 deal, the new base line to defend are the nuances of 123, not "equal rights and responsibilities". Long time participants of this thread should note this. The chimera of DAE has been going on since decades now. Nothing unique to DAE that does not affect all our government planning!
"Equal..." w.r.t whom?
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by negi »

somnath wrote:We dont just operate PHWRs :wink:
I know; why do you think we imported fuel for Tarapur (first two units of which are BWR essentially a type of LWR) from Unkil and post sanctions from Russia ? For PHWRs we fabricate the bundles in India onlee. LWRs need enriched Uranium i.e. when operating a bunch of LWRs one would need a large scale ENR program (Afaik we have one Uranium enrichment facility in ratenhalli , it's anyone's guess as to how much enriched Uranium it can produce to meet both the civillian as well as the strategic needs) .
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

negi wrote:I know; why do you think we imported fuel for Tarapur (first two units of which are BWR essentially a type of LWR) from Unkil and post sanctions from Russia ? For PHWRs we fabricate the bundles in India onlee. LWRs need enriched Uranium i.e. when operating a bunch of LWRs one would need a large scale ENR program (Afaik we have one Uranium enrichment facility in ratenhalli , it's anyone's guess as to how much enriched Uranium it can produce to meet both the civillian as well as the strategic needs)
1. All imported fuel for Tarapur is reprocessed in IAEA safeguarded facilities (or item-specific safeguards) - has been since that import from Russia.
2. PHWRs use natural U, it does not need "enrichment"..We (post nuke deal) buy them from all over - Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Canadians...
3. Imported LWRs will come with g'teed supplies of LEU, a la Kudunkulum..
4. Ratnahalli is used exclusively for the strategic programme - by all available accounts its capacity was dedicated to the ATV project..
5. We have limited experience with commercial enrichment - which is where imported "E" tech could be interesting...though till now, indications from BARC/DAE have been ambivalent on that...
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by negi »

^ I know that and that's why I made the Tarapur point i.e. for LWRs we import fuel iow we do not have the installed capacity to enrich and process fuel for LWRs and that is why this talk about import of ENR technology , the cost-benifit part in fact supports importing the ENR technology as it would allow India to have greater control over the complete fuel cycle not only for it's domestic needs but for any future plans to play a bigger role in NSG.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by ShauryaT »

^^Negi ji: The point being made is why worry about the fuel for the imported LWR, as the west will guarantee those! Just be dependent you see - not independent. Also, do not make LWR's on your own as you do not have the capacity for ENR, stick with PHWR, for which the west again controls the fuel supply of U. Just do what the west wants you to and be happy, just give the dollars to them. That is the point!
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

ShauryaT wrote:^^Negi ji: The point being made is why worry about the fuel for the imported LWR, as the west will guarantee those! Just be dependent you see - not independent. Also, do not make LWR's on your own as you do not have the capacity for ENR, stick with PHWR, for which the west again controls the fuel supply of U. Just do what the west wants you to and be happy, just give the dollars to them. That is the point!
What ##%#...Imported LWRs are required precisely because we have no indigeneous expertise in building LWRs! some of our uber nationalists described those as snake oil! Just as our PHWR programme is a derivative of the CANDU reactors, our local LWR (a programme is now underway) will derive inspiration from the imported reactors..Which is exactly what the nuke deal enables...

Supply of fuel is always tied to supply of the reactor..again, our focus on getting foriegn ENR tech is also to have a peek into what others do, so that our Ratnahalli complex can benefit out of it...Again, something that the nuke deal has enabled!

Our patriots have a strange POV - first describe the nuke deal as a "sellout", and then complain that India isnt "indigeneously" making a bunch of stuff that the nuke deal itself is aimed to enable :twisted:
negi wrote:that is why this talk about import of ENR technology , the cost-benifit part in fact supports importing the ENR technology as it would allow India to have greater control over the complete fuel cycle not only for it's domestic needs but for any future plans to play a bigger role in NSG
The current "feeling" in the establishment seems to be that we dont need any imported ENR - Srikumar Bannerjee said that in an interview...In any case, in our 3 stage plan, U-enrichment isnt a key variable....But if required, we can always get it along with the reactor - as the belaboured French hastily confirmed!
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by negi »

somnath wrote:The current "feeling" in the establishment seems to be that we dont need any imported ENR
It will chnage for our growing energy requirement isn't going to wait for 3-stage programme to gain traction and like everything else (as in military platforms or anything which we claim to import as an interim stop gap measure and eventually end up importing more) we will end up importing more reactors than planned initially; all in all setting up additional ENR facilities in India is a matter of time and to be honest right thing to do. Now when one talks about ENR technology and it's 'import' it's all about semantics i.e. if one has to import a piece of machinery to set such a facility from one of the NSG members it is an import at the end of the day and because of the nature of nuclear trade here every screw, nut and bolt is tightly controlled hence all this hooha over ENR import.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Sanku »

somnath wrote: What ##%#...Imported LWRs are required precisely because we have no indigeneous expertise in building LWRs! some of our uber nationalists described those as snake oil!
Imported LWRs are not required, and foaming at the mouth is not going to change that.
Just as our PHWR programme is a derivative of the CANDU reactors, our local LWR (a programme is now underway) will derive inspiration from the imported reactors..Which is exactly what the nuke deal enables...
Brilliant, so after 50 years, in a totally different set up you want to tell us that Indians cant make LWRs if they so chose and expect to be belived?

Wow. Just wow.

Importing CANDU 60 years ago == importing LWRs now.

WOWWWWWW

Supply of fuel is always tied to supply of the reactor..
Why, because some mai baap sarkar in some western country decreed that?

Is the supply of uranium linked to supply of reactors for China?

Castrating one self has become a virtue now?
again, our focus on getting foriegn ENR tech is also to have a peek into what others do, so that our Ratnahalli complex can benefit out of it...Again, something that the nuke deal has enabled!
And what is not happening.
Our patriots have a strange POV - first describe the nuke deal as a "sellout", and then complain that India isnt "indigeneously" making a bunch of stuff that the nuke deal itself is aimed to enable :twisted:
That's a lie, to put it charitably, the patriots are complaining quite something else, which is that despite having the capability of doing well, the Indian effort is being subverted and other players are being given a chance.
negi wrote: The current "feeling" in the establishment seems to be that we dont need any imported ENR - Srikumar Bannerjee said that in an interview...In any case, in our 3 stage plan, U-enrichment isnt a key variable....But if required, we can always get it along with the reactor - as the belaboured French hastily confirmed!
Yeah war is peace.
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by negi »

Sanku maharaj LWR import is tied to supply of fuel it's the latter which we are after, nuclear deal is just a way to achieve that.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Sanku »

negi wrote:Sanku maharaj LWR import is tied to supply of fuel it's the latter which we are after, nuclear deal is just a way to achieve that.
Negi-ji; if it was only that, we would not need the likes of Sanjay Baru and Somnath to tell us that LWR import is needed like CANDU was needed 60 years back, and many such far fetched stories.

People who have pulled a fast one know that their story is hollow and thus constantly create new fluff to spread FUD. If it was so simple, all this drama and unwilling coercion of the largest part of Indian nuclear establishment would not be needed.

There is a reason why goal posts are being shifted all the time.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

negi wrote:LWR import is tied to supply of fuel it's the latter which we are after, nuclear deal is just a way to achieve that.
Its the other way round...Post the NSG waiver, we are importing U from a variety of countries - Kazakh, Uzbek, Nigeria - none of whom will ever sell any reactor to us..

The point on fuel supplies tied to reactor sale is simple - it ties in Areva to a commercially binding commitment to ensure that the reactor keeps operating even if something in the "environment" changes...So that we dont have a Tarapur redux...
arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by arnab »

^^^^ Isn't China a signatory to the NPT? So why compare China with India?
Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Virupaksha »

somnath wrote:
negi wrote:LWR import is tied to supply of fuel it's the latter which we are after, nuclear deal is just a way to achieve that.
Its the other way round...Post the NSG waiver, we are importing U from a variety of countries - Kazakh, Uzbek, Nigeria - none of whom will ever sell any reactor to us..

The point on fuel supplies tied to reactor sale is simple - it ties in Areva to a commercially binding commitment to ensure that the reactor keeps operating even if something in the "environment" changes...So that we dont have a Tarapur redux...
Can you elucidate the above.
1) We need fuel

2) So for that to tie in, we get France/US/Canada to build reactors in our country.

3) Then we get the fuel previously needed + fuel for new reactors from that country

and some how, by magic, with this, there is no possibility of Tarapur redux.

Did i get your logic right??

Werent there even STRONGER guarantees on toilet paper for Tarapur? Why are these "commercially binding commitments" more worth than the toilet paper??
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

ravi_ku wrote: 1) We need fuel

2) So for that to tie in, we get France/US/Canada to build reactors in our country.

3) Then we get the fuel previously needed + fuel for new reactors from that country
This isnt correct at all...

1. We do NOT need to import reactors from anyone to import fuel..As of right now, post the "waiver", we are importing U from Nigeria, Kazakh, Uzbek et al - all to fire our existing reactors...In the next 3-4 years, we should have fuel supply contracts with at least 20-25 countries in place, all to fire our indigeneous PHWRs/LWRs...

2. IF and WHEN we import reactors, we would need to have fuel guarantees from the supplier in place along with the reactor..This is to ensure that the supplier is locked in with the performance of the reactor rather than making a one-off txn..This is actually standard commercial practice in nuke commerce (good for the buyer!)..

3. All commercial agreements can be "broken", but there are implications for doing that...In 1974, the so-called fuel guarantees on Tarapur could be broken because a) the US created a global architecture that excluded trade with certain countries, basically non-NPT signatories, and b) India was really an insignificant country with a loud voice...

It would be far more difficult to carry out a similar shindig today as a) India has gotten "kosher" as per the same international architecture post the nuke deal, and is on its way to getting a seat on the "board", and b) India is the second-hottest property around in the world...
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by negi »

somnath wrote:
negi wrote:LWR import is tied to supply of fuel it's the latter which we are after, nuclear deal is just a way to achieve that.
Its the other way round...Post the NSG waiver, we are importing U from a variety of countries - Kazakh, Uzbek, Nigeria - none of whom will ever sell any reactor to us..

The point on fuel supplies tied to reactor sale is simple - it ties in Areva to a commercially binding commitment to ensure that the reactor keeps operating even if something in the "environment" changes...So that we dont have a Tarapur redux...
May be I am not clear enough in my posts but I said the same thing right ? i.e. nuclear deal is all about getting acces to the fuel i.e. fuel budnles for LWRs and Uranium for others which we build inhouse .
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by negi »

somnath wrote:1. We do NOT need to import reactors from anyone to import fuel..As of right now, post the "waiver", we are importing U from Nigeria, Kazakh, Uzbek et al - all to fire our existing reactors...In the next 3-4 years, we should have fuel supply contracts with at least 20-25 countries in place, all to fire our indigeneous PHWRs/LWRs...
And the waiver came because Pee-5 realised that they did a great mistake by banishing India from nuclear trade and the deal + NSG waiver is a penance for the same. Boss the NSG waiver and reactor sales are part of the deal, also there is only so much NPCIL alone can do so importing reactors is ideally an interim measure to ramp up the installed capacity.
somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by somnath »

negi wrote:And the waiver came because Pee-5 realised that they did a great mistake by banishing India from nuclear trade and the deal + NSG waiver is a penance for the same. Boss the NSG waiver and reactor sales are part of the deal, also there is only so much NPCIL alone can do so importing reactors is ideally an interim measure to ramp up the installed capacity
Not sure about "penance" - there is no remorse in international relations..But surely a recognition of India as the power to reckon with...Its a very proud achievement - we broke the rules as set by the rest of the world, and then got the world to change its own rules, only for us! We got into the "club" on substantially our own terms...

Do we need to import reactors? Of ourse - its not just a question of paying a price for the club entry...NPCIL/DAE's performance on ommercialisation of nuke tech has been extremely tardy...Imports will help us leapfrog capacity, and also learn the tricks of the trade...
negi wrote:.e. nuclear deal is all about getting acces to the fuel i.e. fuel budnles for LWRs and Uranium for others which we build inhouse
Ok, yes...Additionally, it was also about getting access to those LWRs and other nuke tech from all over the world...the immediate benefit has been in terms of fuel supplies for our PHWRs..
Post Reply