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.
amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by amit »

^^^^^

Same old stuff that has been discussed to death and dissed recycled yet again. Sigh!
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 »

amit wrote:^^^^^

Same old stuff that has been discussed to death and dissed recycled yet again. Sigh!
People expecting that severity of a crime will become less because time has passed and people have forgotten are in for a nasty surprise.

SC has reopened the cash for votes episode which was the lynch pin of purchasing the parliament to push the deal through.

The story is just beginning, this will be the centerpiece of history when these years are talked about.
amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by amit »

^^^^^^^

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I like the righteous anger. Recently it seemed to be missing. Adds spice to the entertainment.

But please do carry on.
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 »

There are repeated allusions to non-amendment of NPT...Was that ever a goal? Do people even know what NPT is about? Signing up to NPT, even as a nuclear weapons power, would mean giving up the right to test for ever!

It would obvioulsy be a waste of time to ask for any evidence that anyone promised "NPT amendment" as a byproduct of the nuke deal..
amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by amit »

somnath wrote:There are repeated allusions to non-amendment of NPT...Was that ever a goal? Do people even know what NPT is about? Signing up to NPT, even as a nuclear weapons power, would mean giving up the right to test for ever!

It would obvioulsy be a waste of time to ask for any evidence that anyone promised "NPT amendment" as a byproduct of the nuke deal..
Somnath, boss let it go. Round and round the mulberry tree...

How many times have we gone through this same arguments and counter arguments. In your old age read the history that Sanku ji is talking about! It is only then that you will attain Moksha from all things nuclear. :wink:
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9265
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Amber G. »

gakakkad wrote:@ Amber would you be having full text of the nature article?
From my hospital I can only access Nature Medicine and Nature genetics.
Full text given in the link, I realize now, needs subscription or association with an institution.. I thought most schools have it. If you still need the whole text let me know..

OTOH many papers have the story... Google gives ...Scientific American Blog, or Physics World (http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46592 or
New Scientist even
From Daily India: (Excerpts below)
What keeps the Earth cooking? 44 trillion watts of continuous heat!
London, July 18: We all know that the Earth runs on massive amounts of heat - enough to melt iron in the outer core, create magnetic field, spread the sea floors and move the continents. However, where all this heat comes from was a mystery until now....
...
According to a new research, ...half of our planet's internal heat stems from natural radioactivity...

Geologists have used temperature measurements from more than 20,000 boreholes around the world to estimate that some 44 terawatts (44 trillion watts) of heat is constantly flowing out of the Earth's interior into space. But, where does it come from?

Geologists relied on temperature measurements from more than 20,000 boreholes around the world.

Radioactive decay of uranium, thorium, and potassium in Earth's crust and mantle is a principal source, and in 2005 scientists in the KamLAND collaboration, based in Japan, first showed that there was a way to measure the contribution directly.

Using the Kamioka Liquid-scintillator Antineutrino Detector (KamLAND) located under a mountain in Japan, they analyzed geoneutrinos -emitted by decaying radioactive materials within the Earth.

<snip>

KamLAND scientists have now published new figures for heat energy from radioactive decay. Based on the improved sensitivity of the KamLAND detector, plus several years' worth of additional data, the new estimate is not merely "consistent" with the predictions of accepted geophysical models but is precise enough to aid in refining those models.

Antineutrinos are produced not only in the decay of uranium, thorium, and potassium isotopes but in a variety of others, including fission products in nuclear power reactors. In fact, reactor-produced antineutrinos were the first neutrinos to be directly detected (neutrinos and antineutrinos are distinguished from each other by the interactions in which they appear).

All models of the inner Earth depend on indirect evidence. Leading models of the kind known as bulk silicate Earth (BSE) assume that the mantle and crust contain only lithophiles ("rock-loving" elements) {We talked about this wrt to question why U/Th is more in the crust etc} and the core contains only siderophiles (elements that "like to be with iron"). Thus all the heat from radioactive decay comes from the crust and mantle - about eight terawatts from uranium 238 (238U), another eight terawatts from thorium 232 (232Th), and four terawatts from potassium 40 (40K).{K40 is primary reason why banana - or human body - is radioactive ...though C14 also contributes to human radioactivity}

Additional factors that have to be taken into account include how the radioactive elements are distributed (whether uniformly or concentrated in a "sunken layer" at the core-mantle boundary).....
...

The study is detailed in the journal Nature Geoscience.
Hth
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4667
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by gakakkad »

@ Amber thanks . These will do. Will get the full text from university library . From the hospital only the medical related journals are accessible.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9265
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Amber G. »

Gerard wrote:
upcoming uranium mine in Andhra Pradesh's Tumalapalli
.
Hello Gerard. Nice to see you still post here once in a while. I have a question, and thanks in advance, if you (or Somnath or GP et al) can point to a source, or give your perspective. (I know you have put some post(s) here a few months ago about PBR)

What is the status of any research into pebble bed reactors ( HTGR or other VHTR) in India?
(Recently this came into a conversation I was having with a physicist and came to know that China is very serious about this and has invested a lot - also that India does have some knowledge/technology wrt manufacturing TRISO and pebbles)

For those who are unfamiliar with pebble bed reactors.. any good source, such as this one from MIT http://web.mit.edu/pebble-bed/.. is a good starting point.

From physics point of view as far as Fission reactors go -

- There is virtually no chance of re-activity type ((Chernoyble) of accidents.. (reaction will stop if moderator is not there)
- There is virtually no chance of Fukushima (loss of Coolant) type accidents.. (Even if all the power and coolant is gone .. reactor will still be okay - No meltdown )
- High efficiency (about twice of normal BWR etc..)
- Radioactive discharge in environment - many magnitude lower than BWR (100x lower)
- Very suitable for Th as a fuel
- No need to shutdown while changing fuel etc..


(Germany was the first one to use but they stopped and discarded the technology after an accident.. more for political /PR reason than technical reason (IMO). Actually some one I respect a lot, and who knows a lot about such things, told me that that decision by Germany was very silly... BTW China's efforts, I am told, are based on German design.)
Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2649
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Jarita »

I remember bringing this up sometime back when Somnath had mocked me and said that it was not true and India barely had any uranium.
I had also mentioned how Dow has a partnership to extract this Uranium (yes, same Union Carbide Dow) (yes and Somnath types had done the same - guess people will believe only after all our reserves are gone). This was through a blatant sell-out by the YSR government which gave them the deal. Which is also why a lot of top US leaders made hyderabad destination of choice - Uranium, oil, minerals. Additionally, this is also why the region is hot target of EJ activity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-14196372

India: 'Massive' uranium find in Andhra Pradesh
Uranium mine at Tummalapale Exploration work is underway in Tummalapalle
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories

India adopts landmark nuclear law
Surrender by 'uranium theft' man
Indian uranium decision condemned

India's southern state of Andhra Pradesh may have one of the largest reserves of uranium in the world, the country's chief nuclear officer says.

Studies show Tummalapalle in Kadapa district could have reserves of 150,000 tonnes of the mineral, Atomic Energy Commission chief S Banerjee said.

India has estimated reserves of about 175,000 tonnes of uranium.

Analysts say the new reserves would still not be sufficient to meet India's growing nuclear energy needs.

Mr Banerjee said that studies at Tummalapalle have shown that the area "had a confirmed reserve of 49,000 tonnes and recent surveys indicate that this figure could go up even threefold" and become one of the world's largest uranium reserves.

The uranium deposits in the area appeared to be spread over 35km (21 miles), he said, adding that exploration work was going on in the area.

Mr Banerjee said the new findings were a "major development", but India's own uranium reserves would still fall short of meeting its nuclear energy needs.

"The new findings would only augment the indigenous supply of uranium. There would still be a significant gap. We would still have to import," he was quoted as saying by The Hindu newspaper.

India is planning to set up some 30 reactors over as many years and get a quarter of its electricity from nuclear energy by 2050.





Please read


http://www.scribd.com/doc/48832278/E-Jo ... 15-2011-10

http://www.scribd.com/doc/48832406/E-Jo ... 15-2011-11
Theo_Fidel

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Theo_Fidel »

Guys, lets not get carried away by this. Its just a 150,000 tonnes :) of U238/235.

It says some thing about the sad state of affairs that this could be the worlds largest Uranium deposit. The miracle of Nuclear power has been so over sold to us that even the numbers are not remembered anymore. There is likely a lot more Uranium in India, but even this will not matter. This is not going to save us. We need to move on.

Simple math shows that burning the U235 alone this 150,000 tonnes is the equivalent of very generous 500 Million (yes with an M) tonnes of coal. Now we would not be doing cartwheels over such a piddling amount of coal would we. Yet the nuclear establishment trumpets this as the greatest find ever.

Compare that to our inferred and hypothetical coal resources of 250+ Billion tonnes (yes with a B) of relatively good quality coal alone, not including Lignite.
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 »

Jarita wrote: had also mentioned how Dow has a partnership to extract this Uranium (yes, same Union Carbide Dow)
I am still waiting for any evidence of the fact that foreign investment is allowed in uranium mining...I would also wait for any references to how a state govt can "give away" oil/gas properties to anyone, or indeed uranium...

About the latest find, lets see how it turns out - how much of it is economically feasible to mine, how much is really there..Even in more "assured" mining discoveries like oil and gas, there are large deviations often between projection and production...

Even if the current projections were to be true, this is what a certain Srikumar Bannerjee has to say,
Terming the new findings a major development, Dr. Banerjee, however, pointed out that the indigenous reserves would still not be sufficient to meet the entire demand of the country's nuclear programme. “The new findings would only augment the indigenous supply of uranium. There would still be a significant gap. We would still have to import.”
An interesting write-up by TS Subramanium on the discovery..
http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/and ... 554078.ece
Srikumar Banerjee, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission, described the discovery as “very large although it is not a rich ore.”
The uranium resources found so far can sustain a generation of 5,000 MWe of nuclear power.
This is just about enough to fire the existing PHWR capacity, once production hits peak levels...Plans are for quadrupling that in 15 years...

About previous experiences with "discoveries"..
In Meghalaya, about 10,000 tonnes (at Domiasiat) and 8,000 tonnes (Wakhyn) of deposits were discovered several years ago. But the UCIL was unable to mine them because of socio-economic problems, said S.K. Mathur, Scientific Officer, AMD.
Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2649
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Jarita »

^^^
I am still waiting for any evidence of the fact that foreign investment is allowed in uranium mining...I would also wait for any references to how a state govt can "give away" oil/gas properties to anyone, or indeed uranium...

Errr... have you heard of the Krishna Godaveri Basin scam and the 2G scam
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 »

Jarita wrote:^^^
I am still waiting for any evidence of the fact that foreign investment is allowed in uranium mining...I would also wait for any references to how a state govt can "give away" oil/gas properties to anyone, or indeed uranium...
Errr... have you heard of the Krishna Godaveri Basin scam and the 2G scam
Of course, may be you can explain how they are related to foreign investment regs on uranium mining? Or indeed how a state govt can auction oil/gas/uranium properties?
Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2649
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Jarita »

Of course, may be you can explain how they are related to foreign investment regs on uranium mining? Or indeed how a state govt can auction oil/gas/uranium properties?

A state govt can be party to a decision made by a central government. It may not have to be an auction either - many of the deals to "Quattrocchi's" firms granted during the Rajiv era were not via auctions either.
arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by arnab »

Sigh..
No FDI in uranium mining

Sidhartha, TNN Jul 23, 2007, 01.08am ISTNEW DELHI: In a move that sets a precedent for mining firms, the government has ruled out the entry of foreign players in the business of uranium mining, saying it is a strategic sector where it could not take chances. Following objections from the department of atomic energy, the Foreign Investment Promotion Board has turned down a proposal from UK's GoldStone Resources to hunt for the mineral, initially in Karnataka.

GoldStone had proposed to set up a wholly-owned subsidiary in India to engage in exploration of diamond, gold and uranium palaeoplacers. According to the company's analysis, there is a large potential for finding gold and diamond palaeoplacers that typically contain heavy minerals like gold, diamond and uranium. The proposed exploration involved surface mapping, sampling and diamond drilling and various geophysical applications.

Sources said the government could not permit mining of uranium as it was the exclusive domain of the public sector. "It was a different matter if they found uranium while looking for gold. But we have not thought about that situation at the moment," said an official.
That conspiracy theorist bozo who had claimed that Union Carbide had been given a license to mine uranium in India had probably confused the UCIL (Uranium Corporation of India Ltd) to be Union Carbide India Ltd (UCIL). That is the problem with the internet - any idiot with half baked knowledge can write anything.
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 »

arnab wrote:confused the UCIL (Uranium Corporation of India Ltd) to be Union Carbide India Ltd (UCIL).
Eureka moment! :D Nice catch..
Amber G. wrote:What is the status of any research into pebble bed reactors ( HTGR or other VHTR) in India?
None at all, AFAIK...The Chinese seem to be the only guys working on the design..They have now a collaboration going with South Africa as well...Concrete has been poured for the first commercial reactor in China...

A uni in China has been operating a 10MW design for some time now, isnt it? It is touted as the "best" of the "small reactor" designs in terms of cost and safety...Our contribution to the "small reactor" movement is the 220MW PHWR :wink: If they can crack the "cost" element, it would be interesting...
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 »

Theo_Fidel wrote:Guys, lets not get carried away by this. Its just a 150,000 tonnes :) of U238/235.
How muxh net PU addition by these reserves?
Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Dipanker »

Theo_Fidel wrote:Guys, lets not get carried away by this. Its just a 150,000 tonnes :) of U238/235.

It says some thing about the sad state of affairs that this could be the worlds largest Uranium deposit. The miracle of Nuclear power has been so over sold to us that even the numbers are not remembered anymore. There is likely a lot more Uranium in India, but even this will not matter. This is not going to save us. We need to move on.

Simple math shows that burning the U235 alone this 150,000 tonnes is the equivalent of very generous 500 Million (yes with an M) tonnes of coal. Now we would not be doing cartwheels over such a piddling amount of coal would we. Yet the nuclear establishment trumpets this as the greatest find ever.

Compare that to our inferred and hypothetical coal resources of 250+ Billion tonnes (yes with a B) of relatively good quality coal alone, not including Lignite.
Could you explain where you are getting 150,000 tonnes of Uranium = 500 Million tonnes of Coal ?

As per this source (http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/guide/facts/):
1 tons of Uranium = 16,000 tons of coal
Thus 150,000 tones of Uranium = 16,000 x 150,000 tons of Coal
------------------------------>= 2400 millions tons of coal
------------------------------>= 2.4 Billions tons of Coal.

Also Coal deposits ( or for that matters mineral deposits in general) is categorized as Proven, Indicated, and Inferred. Use of the term "hypothetical" is incorrect.

Also you are not correct about the quality of Indian coal. Indian coal (bituminous variety) is high in Sulphur and Ash content. Indian coal can be said to be of o.k. quality but certainly not good.
Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2649
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Jarita »

arnab wrote:Sigh..
No FDI in uranium mining

Sidhartha, TNN Jul 23, 2007, 01.08am ISTNEW DELHI: In a move that sets a precedent for mining firms, the government has ruled out the entry of foreign players in the business of uranium mining, saying it is a strategic sector where it could not take chances. Following objections from the department of atomic energy, the Foreign Investment Promotion Board has turned down a proposal from UK's GoldStone Resources to hunt for the mineral, initially in Karnataka.

GoldStone had proposed to set up a wholly-owned subsidiary in India to engage in exploration of diamond, gold and uranium palaeoplacers. According to the company's analysis, there is a large potential for finding gold and diamond palaeoplacers that typically contain heavy minerals like gold, diamond and uranium. The proposed exploration involved surface mapping, sampling and diamond drilling and various geophysical applications.

Sources said the government could not permit mining of uranium as it was the exclusive domain of the public sector. "It was a different matter if they found uranium while looking for gold. But we have not thought about that situation at the moment," said an official.
That conspiracy theorist bozo who had claimed that Union Carbide had been given a license to mine uranium in India had probably confused the UCIL (Uranium Corporation of India Ltd) to be Union Carbide India Ltd (UCIL). That is the problem with the internet - any idiot with half baked knowledge can write anything.

Sigh! We've had that discussion before too. Many a so called conspiracy theory is turning out to be true
arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by arnab »

Jarita wrote: Sigh! We've had that discussion before too. Many a so called conspiracy theory is turning out to be true
Saar the loony left had a catch-all conspiracy theory when the liberalisation process started in the 90s - That such 'IMF dictated' policies would lead to large scale looting by the rich and corrupt and the masses of poor citizens would suffer. So yes I suppose the 2G / K-G scams are proving their theories correct.

Now we can discuss conspiracy theories ranging from the US establishing a base on mars to train kashmiri terrorists or we can have a fact based discussion. So do come to us with factual data on union carbide uranium mines in india when you get them...till then...
sivab
BRFite
Posts: 1075
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by sivab »

Dipanker wrote: 1 tons of Uranium = 16,000 tons of coal
Thus 150,000 tones of Uranium = 16,000 x 150,000 tons of Coal
------------------------------>= 2400 millions tons of coal
------------------------------>= 2.4 Billions tons of Coal.
Just to add, above number is for once through fuel cycle mode. Indian program plans to use it closed cycle mode which will extract 50 times more energy from same fuel. So we are talking 100+ billion tons of coal.

This aspect is one of the understated things about imported reactors and fuel. Each 10,000MW worth of imported fuel over 40 years can provide 500,000MW of power over 40 years with closed fuel cycle. This is one of the reasons imported fuel is attractive. We will be building lots of fuel reserve for future by paying one time cost now. We will get some new technology so the one time cost is less.
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4667
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by gakakkad »

somnath wrote:
arnab wrote:confused the UCIL (Uranium Corporation of India Ltd) to be Union Carbide India Ltd (UCIL).
Eureka moment! :D Nice catch..
Amber G. wrote:What is the status of any research into pebble bed reactors ( HTGR or other VHTR) in India?
None at all, AFAIK...The Chinese seem to be the only guys working on the design..They have now a collaboration going with South Africa as well...Concrete has been poured for the first commercial reactor in China...

A uni in China has been operating a 10MW design for some time now, isnt it? It is touted as the "best" of the "small reactor" designs in terms of cost and safety...Our contribution to the "small reactor" movement is the 220MW PHWR :wink: If they can crack the "cost" element, it would be interesting...

The Chinese have paid the Germans license fees for the design the Germans discontinued.
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4667
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by gakakkad »

Prem wrote:
Theo_Fidel wrote:Guys, lets not get carried away by this. Its just a 150,000 tonnes :) of U238/235.
How muxh net PU addition by these reserves?

Enough to destroy earth. Though it would be foolish to build those many weapons. Though we will be using Pu for fuel as well.
Last edited by gakakkad on 21 Jul 2011 09:12, edited 1 time in total.
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4667
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by gakakkad »

@ Amber et al India is working on a compact High temperature design. Most probable fuel config will be pebble bed .
BARC is carrying out design of a 600 MWth reactor
for commercial hydrogen production [3]. For this
reactor, various design options as regards fuel
configurations, such as prismatic bed and pebble bed
were considered for thermal hydraulics and
temperature distribution analysis. Coolant options such
as molten lead, molten salt and gaseous medium like
helium were analyzed. Besides these, other criteria
such as ease in component handling, irradiation related
material and fuel degradation, better fuel utilization
and passive options for coolant flow etc. were also
considered. Initial studies carried out indicate selection
of pebble bed reactor core with molten salt-based
coolant
http://www.barc.ernet.in/publications/n ... 091015.pdf

Guruprabu where are you boss ? We need an access to your Pan wallas . These are exciting times.
Theo_Fidel

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Theo_Fidel »

Dipanker,

Complete burn through is not possible with once through Uranium process. Suggest you check the burn through numbers. Might shock you.

But lets ignore that and go with 2.5 Billion tonnes of coal equivalent. It is still does not change the essential situation. We would not tom tom such a coal deposit as the greatest in the world.

I'm not advocating coal. But just presenting the numbers for perspective. Yes our Indian coal is dirty, but it burns just fine and releases plenty of BTU's which is what matters. Keep in mind coal is an industrial chemical. It is all going to be burnt, one way or the other. We should not kid ourselves in this regard.

Let me also point out that the 150,000 U-238 deposit is hypothetical as well. Only the 49,000 tonne number is Inferred.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The daydreams on breeding start off immediately but it has never worked commercially when tried. The most modern breeder Super Phenix in France, sodium metal reactor, has tended to consume more electricity than it generates as the Sodium has to be kept molten even during shut downs. In fact 10+ years after it was shut down the reactor still consumes power as they can't decided what to do with the molten Sodium.

We tend to think that India is the only one to have thought of this breeder thing for Thorium & U-238, this is simply not true. Dozens upon dozens of designs have been tried by 10 or so countries since the 1950's and it has always been a disappointment commercially. No salvation lies this way.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prem,

I suspect you were not concerned about the weapon potential of Pu-239 but rather on the energy potential. Theoretically in a Fast Breeder all the U-238 could be converted to Pu-239 after a initial charge of either Pu-239 or U-235. The 500 MW PFBR in Kalpakkam is using Pu-239 to breed U-238. Not Thorium as many mistakenly think still. This has not proved to be a simple or cost effective process commercially.

The PFBR is also optimistically set at a breeding ratio of 1.1 using oxide fuel. This means the fuel must burn 10 times and be reprocessed 10 times to get one additional core of fuel. Conservatively this is a 20 years type timescale. There are plans for better numbers but they have been tried before and has not really gone into commercial use due to various issues.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The big problem with the Pebble bed has been the size limitation at about 600 MW or so. This increases the costs tremendously. Wasn't it the Chinese who commented that if it was about money they would never build their Pebble bed reactors or something similar.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wish BARC would look at bit more at the MSR concept. It requires reprocessing and massa has the most experiance and technology locked up. It appears to have an outside shot of succeeding however.
Last edited by Theo_Fidel on 21 Jul 2011 10:35, edited 2 times in total.
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4667
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by gakakkad »

^^ one of the reactors in Kakrapar plant breeds thorium. We do have a few research reactors and some more in design stage. Kalpakkam does not breed thorium AFAIK. The FBTR in Kalpakkam is Pu based.
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4667
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by gakakkad »

classic pan walla info on CHTR design research of desh. Fuel config of pebbles as indicated in the last page. CFD of core and thermodynamic studies of various designs are underway. Informative presentation on concepts.

http://www.iaea.org/INPRO/CPs/COOL/2nd_ ... -INDIA.pdf
Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Shrinivasan »

Dipanker wrote:Also you are not correct about the quality of Indian coal. Indian coal (bituminous variety) is high in Sulphur and Ash content. Indian coal can be said to be of o.k. quality but certainly not good.
You bang on Target, Indian Coal is not the best quality, which is why we import coal for certain critical purposes. I have also heard that we mix imported coal with domestic coal for power plants.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9265
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Amber G. »

Dipanker wrote:
Theo_Fidel wrote: ... The miracle of Nuclear power has been so over sold to us that even the numbers are not remembered anymore. There is likely a lot more Uranium in India, but even this will not matter. This is not going to save us. We need to move on.

Simple math shows that burning the U235 alone this 150,000 tonnes is the equivalent of very generous 500 Million (yes with an M) tonnes of coal. Now we would not be doing cartwheels over such a piddling amount of coal would we. Yet the nuclear establishment trumpets this as the greatest find ever.

Compare that to our inferred and hypothetical coal resources......
Could you explain where you are getting 150,000 tonnes of Uranium = 500 Million tonnes of Coal ?

As per this source (http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/guide/facts/):
1 tons of Uranium = 16,000 tons of coal
Thus 150,000 tones of Uranium = 16,000 x 150,000 tons of Coal
------------------------------>= 2400 millions tons of coal
------------------------------>= 2.4 Billions tons of Coal.
<snip>

.
Indeed simple math and attention to numbers are helpful! The 16,000 figure above is indeed simple math/physics.. ! The ratio between fission of U235 / burning of coal (for identical mass), as any first year book on physics will tell you, is of the order of
3,000,000. (About 20,000 if one assumes .7% u235 etc).. consistent with the above.
("Individual millage" may vary depending on efficiency etc....)
(The values above are 1 sig figure.. where 16,000 and 20,000 are consistant)
.. But then we have a ...
But lets ignore that and go with 2.5 Billion tonnes of coal equivalent. It is still does not change the essential situation...
..
Huh??.. why quote a wrong number , (claiming that it comes from "simple math") if one is just going to ignore it? :eek: Just a few posts above, wasn't the "simple math" was claimed to be the basis of the "belief"?
The point is, if one is presenting numbers, and want to have any credibility , one has to justify a hypothesis, say, amount of BTU's etc quantitatively .. not some mumbo-jumbo like:
..Yes our Indian coal is dirty, but it burns just fine and releases plenty of BTU's which is what matters...
Please note that I am not too harsh, it is okay to give rough values, estimates etc.. as long as they are presented as such. In my opinion, it would have been perfectly okay if the estimates were qualified as "about" or "roughly".. what is NOT okay, in my opinion, are use the of words like " very generous 500 Million " which give the impression that the value is an upper-bound.
Theo_Fidel

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Theo_Fidel »

^^^^

Lost in the foxhole and foaming at the mouth again are we...
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9265
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Amber G. »

gakakkad, Somnath - Thanks for the links and perspective ..Wrt to China's Pebble Bed, saw a nice presentation by one of their scientist on the status/development/deployment of their HTR-PM. - If there is an interest, I may put something up. For the current one the design parameters are 250MW..some where in the future next step may be 600MW.
(There were also some recent stories about this in main-stream papers like NY times etc)
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9265
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Amber G. »

Shrinivasan wrote:
Dipanker wrote:Also you are not correct about the quality of Indian coal. Indian coal (bituminous variety) is high in Sulphur and Ash content. Indian coal can be said to be of o.k. quality but certainly not good.
You bang on Target, Indian Coal is not the best quality, which is why we import coal for certain critical purposes. I have also heard that we mix imported coal with domestic coal for power plants.
Thanks. Quick checking also shows that instead of
Theo_Fidel wrote: Compare that... coal resources of 250+ Billion tonnes (yes with a of relatively good quality coal alone, not including Lignite.
The Lignite type reserve is only about 4.5 Billion tons..With additional 56 Billion tons of bituminous variety giving total of about 60 Billion tons..and NOT ]250+ Billion :-?
(Link: http://www.worldenergy.org/documents/se ... port_1.pdf
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9265
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Amber G. »

Theo_Fidel wrote:^^^^

Lost in the foxhole and foaming at the mouth again are we...
Sir, I don't know who is included in your "we" but I am simply trying to ask how "simple math" etc.. will give discrepancy of 500 Million vs 2400 Million or 250+ vs 60 ityadi..
/sigh/
Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Dipanker »

Amber G. wrote: Please note that I am not too harsh, it is okay to give rough values, estimates etc.. as long as they are presented as such. In my opinion, it would have been perfectly okay if the estimates were qualified as "about" or "roughly".. what is NOT okay, in my opinion, are use the of words like " very generous 500 Million " which give the impression that the value is an upper-bound.
That was my point too.
The Lignite type reserve is only about 4.5 Billion tons..With additional 56 Billion tons of bituminous variety giving total of about 60 Billion tons..and NOT ]250+ Billion :-?
(Link: http://www.worldenergy.org/documents/se ... port_1.pdf
The 60 billion tons figure is probably for "Proven" reserve only ( somewhat dated).

This source says a total of 267 billion tonnes (Proven + Indicated + Inferred), I am more inclined to take this value.
http://www.coal.nic.in/reserve.htm
Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Dipanker »

Shrinivasan wrote:
Dipanker wrote:Also you are not correct about the quality of Indian coal. Indian coal (bituminous variety) is high in Sulphur and Ash content. Indian coal can be said to be of o.k. quality but certainly not good.
You bang on Target, Indian Coal is not the best quality, which is why we import coal for certain critical purposes. I have also heard that we mix imported coal with domestic coal for power plants.
We are short on Coking Coal, needed for steel production. This is the variety we mostly import.

Jharia (Dhanbad) coalfileds are the only one producing coking coal in India.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9265
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Amber G. »

Dipanker wrote: The 60 billion tons figure is probably for "Proven" reserve only ( somewhat dated).

This source says a total of 267 billion tonnes (Proven + Indicated + Inferred), I am more inclined to take this value.
http://www.coal.nic.in/reserve.htm
Thanks, yes the figures (figure of 60) are from 2008 and according to link is proven only (same figure in wiki too).. so it is dated.
Theo_Fidel

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Theo_Fidel »

Yup! no need to go into the Hypothetical even. Just inferred is 250 Billion ton plus. Why in heavens name would you use the 60 Billion ton number. No one in India who is remotely is interested in the energy sector would use such a weird number. Not even know your own country....

What can one say, the 'World Energy.org" is more reputable than Indian coal ministry in some eyes.

Not only that Neyveli alone has 30 Billion tonnes Inferred of lignite. Hypothetical is much more, and approaches 100 Billion tonnes, just in TN alone. I don't need to google it. I know my country at least that much.

Meanwhile...
Welcome to the no sanctions regime. Another victory onlee... ..spin away...

http://the-diplomat.com/indian-decade/2 ... -landmine/
Indian concerns about the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group’s recent hardening of Enrichment and Reprocessing technology transfer terms remained unaddressed, while Clinton instead conveyed Washington’s annoyance over Indian nuclear liability laws, which make it possible to seek compensation from suppliers, and asked the UPA government to tweak them further to conform with international liability norms. She also asked India to negotiate with the International Atomic Energy Agency on the legislation, even though there’s no international legal requirement to do so. Finally, she spoke of some ‘remaining issues’ that need to be tackled to enable full implementation of the Indo-US civilian nuclear energy cooperation agreement.

What Clinton didn’t say directly, but what she likely meant, was that unless India dilutes its nuclear liability laws, full implementation of the deal will remain a mirage. It’s clear that although officially the United States is insisting that it will fully implement the nuclear deal, the agreement faces yet another phase of diplomatic rough and tumble.

The UPA government can’t contemplate diluting the liability laws due to massive domestic pressure. Virtually the entire opposition, from left to right, has pressured Prime Minister Manmohan Singh into hardening liability legislation. Tinkering with this now would therefore be political suicide for his government.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. The coal consumption number I used for a 1000 MW power plant was from the Ianten coal plant in Missouri that I worked with. I had the data handy. I went back and saw that the load factor in that year was only 38%. That is probably where the discrepancy sneaked in. But the efficiency factor was 44% using its new super critical SG.

Which brings me to the other point that CANDU type reactors are not super critical temperature capable and rarely rise above 33% efficiency. Also the load factor for the local Nuclear plant was only 61% that same year.

The more I think about it in a conventional un-enriched CANDU cycle like India has 1 Tonne of Uranium ore is unlikely to exceed 4000 tonnes of coal equivalent. Which is roughly what my numbers indicated.
Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Dipanker »

Theo_Fidel wrote:Yup! no need to go into the Hypothetical even. Just inferred is 250 Billion ton plus. Why in heavens name would you use the 60 Billion ton number. No one in India who is remotely is interested in the energy sector would use such a weird number. Not even know your own country....

What can one say, the 'World Energy.org" is more reputable than Indian coal ministry in some eyes.

Not only that Neyveli alone has 30 Billion tonnes Inferred of lignite. Hypothetical is much more, and approaches 100 Billion tonnes, just in TN alone. I don't need to google it. I know my country at least that much.
250 billion tons is not just Infered, it is Proven+Infered+Indicated. Please use the correct terminology.

Now as far as "Hypothetical researve" is concerned, I have no clue, I have never seen any hpothetical coal reserve figure in my whole life. Can you post some "hypothetical figures" along with the source?

The world Energy.org figure of $60 billion Proven/Recoverable (2008) is quite close to the ball park figure. Notice that it talking about recoverable reserve not the entire Proven+Infered+Indicated reserve. If you check out the Indian Coal ministry figure for Proven reserve, it is about 120 billion tons. That is the Proven coal underground. Indian coal mining industry, because of the mining methods used (mostly Board & Pillar), will be able to recover only about 50% of that i.e. about 60 billion tons.

Of course in future some of the Infered+Indicated reserve will be added to Proven category when the exploration+Sampling is completed. It is also possible that new reserves may be discovered too. But that is down the line.

The more I think about it in a conventional un-enriched CANDU cycle like India has 1 Tonne of Uranium ore is unlikely to exceed 4000 tonnes of coal equivalent. Which is roughly what my numbers indicated.
Let me reiterate, 1 ton of Uranium = 16,000 tons of Coal. ( US Govt. Website)

This is Uranium, not Uranium ore.

BTW UCIL produces 1500 tons of Uranium ore per day from one of its mine near Jamshedpur.
https://sites.google.com/site/hagrawal6 ... pahar-mine
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4667
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by gakakkad »

Amber saar , please post the presentation of lizard reactor designs. anything to do with Panda is of interest to us.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9265
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Post by Amber G. »

^^^For your reading pleasure..
(This is google docs ppt )
Post Reply