India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011
Posted: 04 Jul 2011 09:51
Please start afresh
Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/
negi wrote:Negi might be an Ass but he is definitely not an Asslick&r
Ironically, from a card carrying "green"!To successfully reduce the risk of climate change we need to commericalise affordable, safe, flexible, long-lasting, low carbon sources of energy. We do not know yet if LFTRs fit the bill but they look extremely promising. It would be irresponsible to dismiss them out of hand before finding out. If the UK is serious about pursuing nuclear power, and it appears that it is, then we must include the pursuit of thorium power in this endeavour. On paper it looks like it may just save us.
Yups....merlin wrote:Wasn't it Kakodkar who said recently that denial of ENR is betrayal of the clean exception given to India?
Therefore, India should refuse the offer of NSG membership even if it is offered to India in the absence of NPT membership so long as the NSG does not consider transfer of ENR technologies to India under proper safeguards as a legitimate requirement for the progress of Indian civilian nuclear programme.
By AFP
Published Monday, July 04, 2011
India has suggested that countries refusing to match nuclear reactor sales with technology transfers could be frozen out of one of the world's largest reactor markets.
The veiled threat came in a television interview broadcast Sunday, in which Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao was asked about new Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) guidelines on sensitive uranium enrichment and reprocessing technology.
The guidelines place restrictions on the sale of such technology to countries which, like nuclear-armed India, have not signed up to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Good article, encapsulates some of the known facts..One disconnect though..ShauryaT wrote:India, ENR and NSG - G. BalachandranTherefore, India should refuse the offer of NSG membership even if it is offered to India in the absence of NPT membership so long as the NSG does not consider transfer of ENR technologies to India under proper safeguards as a legitimate requirement for the progress of Indian civilian nuclear programme.
The NSG "waiver" is on civilian nuke trade, not for military! So any imported ENR facility will be under safeguards, by definition...The question of "similar" is a bit of a red herring, how does anyone know if a new ENR facility built by BARC is "similar" to imported tech or not, unless stated by India?Therefore, a transfer of ENR technology to India under the current environment can be made only if India agrees to such conditions i.e. allow for an examination by IAEA or mutually agreed experts to decide whether or not any similar ENR facility constructed by India subsequent to an ENR transfer is or is not based on the transferred technology i.e. whether or not the constructed facility should or should not be covered by IAEA safeguards. If India should consider such a condition a violation of its freedom to separate the civilian and military facilities and not agreeable to it, then transfers of ENR technologies to India may not be possible even if NSG does not bar ENR transfers.
Any issuance of guidelines by NSG is a laborious, time-consuming process..Its by consensus - it took years of deliberations before the ENR guideline was passed...The US isnt going to spend political capital to hasten it out the way it did last time around...In any case, the "battle" has to be fought bilaterally with individual countries, on commercial negotiations..So why waste time on international law making?Currently, NSG is considering on how to accommodate India as an NSG member. As NPT membership is also a criterion for admittance of new members to NSG, the NSG will, therefore, have to craft a language that will allow India to circumvent this requirement.
This would be very foolish...NSG loses nothing by not having India as a member..However, by being a full member, India ensures that no guidelines can go out that is inimical to our interests, even peripherally, like the latest one on ENR...Its a no-brainer, with NSG working only by consensus, India as a member has veto over all decisions...Especially, on Chinese shenanigans on offering a similar waiver to Pakistan...Once India is on board, Pak will never get a waiver, unless its on India's terms...If, however, the NSG is unwilling to consider such a move then India may reconsider its approach to the issue of NSG membership and decline NSG’s offer of NSG membership
This exemption reflects the unique situation of India and constitutes a historical achievement. Therefore, in the French view, nothing in the existing and future guidelines shall be interpreted as detracting from that exemption or reducing the ambition of our bilateral cooperation
Euros work better, especially in a scenario of a stressed Euozone, than legal niceties“This agreement aims at expanding our existing cooperation to ‘full civil nuclear cooperation for the development and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes’...,” he said. The ambassador emphasised that this “covers all aspects of a civilian nuclear program, including nuclear reactors, nuclear fuel cycle, nuclear fuel and nuclear waste management, and scientific cooperation”.
With Man Mohan at the helm Govt will play hardball?tejas wrote:Finally the GOI understands how to play hardball. The French or Russians are surely likely to break from the pack for the $$$$. Once one breaks there will be a deluge.
Yet again you bring in frivolous OT comments in the nuke dhagga and then you ask God what you have done to deserve the treatment you get.Sanku wrote:Only with Baba Ramdev.
The French reiteration is quite explicit - it only took one veiled threat by an outgoing Foreign Sec..Presumably the negotiations on Jaitapur are at their home stretch!amit wrote:And the French reaction:
Nothing will detract from NSG's clean waiver to India: France
The decision on ENR was certainly a shifting of goalposts. But on hindsight maybe in a way it would be beneficial for now with it out in the open, it can be good benchmark to use for buying reactors. I think the US companies are going be a very unhappy lot!
Money, irrespective of whether its denominated in US$, Euro or even Rupees is a powerful lever. We only have to see the Chinni example.somnath wrote:The French reiteration is quite explicit - it only took one veiled threat by an outgoing Foreign Sec..Presumably the negotiations on Jaitapur are at their home stretch!amit wrote:And the French reaction:
Nothing will detract from NSG's clean waiver to India: France
The decision on ENR was certainly a shifting of goalposts. But on hindsight maybe in a way it would be beneficial for now with it out in the open, it can be good benchmark to use for buying reactors. I think the US companies are going be a very unhappy lot!
Yeah, it is good. Unless we(general public) know what was aimed at by Clean waiver, we don't know how good it is going to be.amit wrote:^^^^
Just to add to my post on ENR above, it's good that this decision by NSG has come before the negotiations with the French and Russian have been finalised.
N deal is like walking on the rope, delicately balanced. Devil is in the details. If you are happy that french prostrating at our feet with one veiled threat, good for you. Those who followed the N deal negotiation knows until you reach there, nothing is certain.somnath wrote:The French reiteration is quite explicit - it only took one veiled threat by an outgoing Foreign Sec..Presumably the negotiations on Jaitapur are at their home stretch!amit wrote:And the French reaction:
Nothing will detract from NSG's clean waiver to India: France
The decision on ENR was certainly a shifting of goalposts. But on hindsight maybe in a way it would be beneficial for now with it out in the open, it can be good benchmark to use for buying reactors. I think the US companies are going be a very unhappy lot!
Usual BC chime inIrritation has built up in India over revised rules agreed on last month by the U.S., Russia, France and other major suppliers banning the sales of key technology and equipment that has civilian applications but also can be used to arm nuclear weapons. The agreement does not limit India's access to modern U.S. or other foreign-made reactors that are difficult to use for making fissile warhead material. The move, however, does appear to slam the door on any future attempts by New Delhi to expand its secretive nuclear arms program through foreign purchases of weapons-making technologies. India already can reprocess material from its fast-breeder reactor program to arm its nuclear missiles. So for New Delhi, the issue may be more a sense of injured pride at being rebuffed in strivings to stand shoulder to shoulder with the five "recognized" nuclear powers — the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France. In any case, the Asian giant is unhappy at what it sees an anti-Indian move backed by Washington and other suppliers — and is hinting that it may retaliate by cutting them out of any multibillion dollar reactor deals
"A betrayal," is how Anil Kakodar, the former chairman of India's Atomic Energy Commission, described the new rules. Washington does appear to be saying that the new restrictions permanently block transfers of enrichment and reprocessing equipment or know-how to all nations outside the 46-member Nuclear Suppliers Group — and that would include India. "The new NSG guidelines don't put the India exception in doubt," a senior U.S. official told the AP. But the official, who asked for anonymity for commenting on the sensitive topic, said they "reinforce the commitment of NSG members to prevent the transfer of items that could be used for weapons purposes." To access NSG equipment, all countries except the five formally recognized nuclear-armed powers normally must accept safeguards of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency meant to ensure that their atomic programs are peaceful. If India makes good on veiled threats to retaliate by boycotting U.S. suppliers, the potential losses are huge. The U.S. nuclear industry could stand to lose billions of dollars in projected reactor sales as the country plans to quadruple its present 5,000 megawatts of nuclear power to 20,000 megawatts by 2020 — a project that could cost it as much as $250 billion (euro173 billion.)
aryl G. Kimball, who heads the Washington-based Arms Control Association calls it "an important, if overdue, decision to tighten its rules on the transfer of equipment and technology that can be used to make fissile material for nuclear weapons." The new NSG guidelines, "ensure that sensitive enrichment and reprocessing technologies will not be transferred to India and used in its unsafeguarded military program," says Kimball, whose organization shared a copy of the restricted text with the AP
Does not it mean that ENRT can be transferred in a for safeguarded civilian purpose but not for un safeguarded places ? That there is not ban on ENRT transfer.The new NSG guidelines, "ensure that sensitive enrichment and reprocessing technologies will not be transferred to India and used in its unsafeguarded military program," says Kimball, whose organization shared a copy of the restricted text with the AP.
This is Kimball' interpretaiton of the guideline - isnt what the guideline itself says (whichs isnt formally know yet, though)...gakakkad wrote:Does not it mean that ENRT can be transferred in a for safeguarded civilian purpose but not for un safeguarded places ? That there is not ban on ENRT transfer.The new NSG guidelines, "ensure that sensitive enrichment and reprocessing technologies will not be transferred to India and used in its unsafeguarded military program," says Kimball, whose organization shared a copy of the restricted text with the AP.
That should not be an issue as we can manage weapons plutonium on our own . Beside nothing transferred via this deal will be un safeguarded .
The shifting of goal posts is a usual technique used by those who have nefarious means at end, including this Govt at center.somnath wrote: In any case, all trade under the NSG waiver is "civilian" - there is no "military trade" allowed! So anyone expecting that and deriding the nuke deal is basically creating hot gas...
The much-awaited ‘hot run' of the first of the 2 X 1,000 MWe reactors under construction as part of the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNPP) commenced last Friday, indicating that this nuclear reactor may attain criticality within another five months provided the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) is satisfied with the functioning of the hi-tech equipment of this reactor and gives its clearance on time.
It's simple imported reactors are under safeguards anything that comes out of those reactors will be under safeguards so the facility in question will fall into the safeguards (at least in theory); also any reprocessing or ENR facilities setup with phoren help will be under safeguards.gakakkad wrote: Can we reprocess fuel from imported reactors in our own facilities? If not what will happen to the spent fuel ? To what stage of fuel disposal are safeguards likely ?
The modalities of nuclear trade like any other trade are at country-country level in fact to be honest NSG permit is just like a license once you have that what one can buy(manage to buy) from one of the big players is completely governed by the buyer-seller equation (case in point Cheena selling reactors to TSP).Is there any difference in agreement between different countries ?
If you are referring to 'legal' angle then as long as the said facility is under safeguards no issue whatsoever . However technically I do not know for maal coming out of imported reactors is not same as that of our PHWRs. If I am not wrong that is what import of ENR technology is supposed to address.What about imported fuel used in Indian reactors , can it be reprocessed in Indian facilities ?
If the fuel is imported (under a civilian contract), then it needs to be reprocessed in a facility that is under safeguards..Net net, imported fuel cannot be used for "strategic" purposes...This was the issue in 1974 as well...negi wrote:If you are referring to 'legal' angle then as long as the said facility is under safeguards no issue whatsoever . However technically I do not know for maal coming out of imported reactors is not same as that of our PHWRs. If I am not wrong that is what import of ENR technology is supposed to address
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..negi wrote:For the nuclear deal to make sense to the US and others who pushed for it the fuel will have to be processed in India else the cost of operation will hit the roof (i.e. if some NPA comes with brilliant idea of shipping the fule from India to say Japan/France for ENR and then back as fuel bundle)
I hate it, when our DDM puts in a single quote and the rest is their take if someone finds the actual speech, please link. Thanks.“This is obviously their agenda,” said Kakodkar