India Nuclear News & Discussion - 13 Aug 2007

Locked
Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Post by Rye »

ShauryaT wrote:
I have been in business long enough to answer this question. The true value of any item is the highest price the buyer gets at a given time. Period.

I do not understand. Do you mean the highest price a seller gets at any given time? A buyer usually knows only his own price and has no information on the price offered by other buyers, and thus cannot assess the "true value" in a vaccum.
Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15043
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Post by Suraj »

Hasn't this been posted yet ? I didn't see any reference. The Aussies seem to be doing just as kgoan posited:
Australian uranium bound for India
AUSTRALIA has decided to start uranium shipments to India with the condition that Australian inspectors be allowed to check on-site that the yellowcake is used only for peaceful purposes and electricity generation.

The Australian nuclear safety inspectors would check the "chain of supply" of nuclear material from Australia to India to ensure none was siphoned off into weapons programs.

The National Security Committee of federal cabinet decided last night, after more than two hours, to allow the uranium shipments to India, despite the subcontinental nuclear power not signing the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Australia has only recently decided to ship uranium to China for the first time.

The National Security Committee discussed ways for Australia to export uranium to India without contributing to nuclear tensions between India and Pakistan or assisting the spread of nuclear weapons.

John Howard will contact his Indian counterpart Manmohan Singh, who is also Minister for Atomic Energy, to explain the conditions before formally announcing the agreement.

The cabinet committee was under pressure to both allow India access to uranium - a process the US has offered to assist with - and defend its record on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

It is understood Mr Howard will be personally contacting Mr Singh as soon as possible.

Labor has accused the Howard Government of being prepared to water down strict controls on uranium exports and move away from the international agreements limiting nuclear weapons.

Pakistan has also asked for uranium to power its domestic electricity grid if India is sold it.

The Australian Government wants to help India with its peaceful energy needs but does not want to contribute to the nuclear tensions between India and Pakistan.

The decision comes as the ALP has committed to a scare campaign over nuclear power reactor sites in Australia.

Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said yesterday the fact India already had nuclear weapons meant "there is no risk" of contributing to nuclear proliferation by exporting uranium to the energy-hungry economy.

"I think the reverse in fact is the case - that the more you can get the India civil nuclear program under UN inspections and under the UN protocols of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the better," Mr Downer told the ABC. "I think that creates a safer and more secure environment for those power stations."

Labor foreign affairs spokesman Rob McClelland said any step towards uranium exports to India would be moving away from the NPT signed by Australia.

"We see that the Government is prepared to further undermine the NPT by selling uranium to India while that country remains outside the non-proliferation regime," he told the UN Association of Australia last night.

"The bottom line is that the Howard Government is worse than ambivalent when it comes to nuclear non-proliferation - it is positively obstructive."

Even the uranium industry has reserved judgment on the Government's support for uranium exports to India until it hears how the NPT can be protected.

Michael Angwin, executive director of the Australian Uranium Association, said Australia's policy of exporting uranium only to signatories to the treaty had been successful to date.

India now needs to win IAEA approval of its planned safeguards, the support of an international grouping of nuclear suppliers, and ratification of its nuclear co-operation agreement with the US. Only then can it do a bilateral deal with Australia to allow the uranium trade and start negotiating with local miners.

Last week Pakistan's Minister for Religious Affairs, Ejaz ul-Haq, said Australia should consider selling uranium to Pakistan as well. He rejected concerns Islamabad would use the uranium in nuclear weapons.

But Mr Downer ruled out selling uranium to Pakistan.
Uranium deal for India under attack
SENIOR Howard Government players have talked up the benefits of selling uranium to India as Labor prepares a fresh political assault over nuclear power in the countdown to the federal election.

Ahead of a meeting late yesterday of cabinet's powerful national security committee, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer confirmed the Government was considering a new export agreement with India.

The deal is regarded as as good as done in India, whose government has said the uranium would be used purely for energy purposes.

Power cuts are a regular feature of life, even in the Indian capital. Indian industry is plagued by prolonged power cuts that affect efficiency and productivity.

"The agreement with Australia is a great breakthrough between the two countries. It is a direct result of the Indo-US nuclear deal which has finally removed the stigma that has stuck to India for decades for not signing the NPT (non-proliferation treaty).

The deal with the US — and now uranium from Australia — is a recognition of India's responsible behaviour on proliferation for decades," said Vinod Kumar, associate professor at the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses in Delhi.

Despite analysts' fears that selling yellowcake to India could increase regional instability, Mr Downer argued there were no risks associated with selling uranium to India.

"India has no record of being a proliferator of nuclear materials," he told the ABC.
Reuters: Australia approves uranium sales to India
Australia has ended a ban on uranium sales to India, with senior ministers reversing a policy of selling the nuclear fuel only to signatories of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), a newspaper said on Wednesday.

Foreign Minister Alexander Downer convinced cabinet security colleagues a uranium deal with India was in Australia's interest, the Australian newspaper said.

Under the proposed deal, agreed late on Tuesday night, Australian nuclear inspectors would be allowed to check that uranium was used only for peaceful purposes and ensure none was diverted for nuclear weapons programmes, the paper said.

Prime Minister John Howard would contact his Indian counterpart Manmohan Singh to explain the conditions of the proposed export deal before officially announcing the agreement.

Australia has 40 percent of the world's known reserves of uranium and is a major exporter of the material. India has been lobbying Canberra for access to it after an India-U.S. nuclear deal was agreed in principle two years ago.
bala
BRFite
Posts: 1994
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Post by bala »

Aussies selling Uranium to India must be massive H&D blow to TSP.. ouch. If ever there is a list of benefits of 123 this must be near the top of the list. Just think about what has been achieved.. the US has taken leadership on NPT and basically has told the world, India is special, screw the other wannabes in the world. The rest of the world agrees and poodle Oz is rolling out the red carpet to sell uranium to India, whilst rebuffing any overtures from cretins like TSP. Good show.
Mr Downer ruled out selling uranium to Pakistan.

India has no record of being a proliferator of nuclear materials
bala
BRFite
Posts: 1994
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Post by bala »

Nuke deal: Congress backs Manmohan

Congress supports the deal hence the left has no choice but to line up for now...

Karat say efforts will be made to sort out issues

In a bid to iron out differences on the Indo-US civil nuclear deal, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Tuesday met CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat and both sides said efforts would be made to sort out the issues.

Manmohan Singh and External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee had a breakfast meeting with Karat and discussed issues related to the bilateral civil nuclear cooperation agreement between the two countries.

"Karat and the Prime Minister reiterated that efforts would be made to sort out the issues", Prime Minister's Media Adviser Sanjaya Baru said in a brief statement.

The Prime Minister made a strong defence of the deal in Parliament, saying the country retained the strategic autonomy and "sovereign" right to conduct a nuclear test.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

I agree we have discussions in pockets like well thinking BRites, Well Known behind the strategic programs like RC, and con-grace party. Now, in a democratic system, how does one handle this without taking every one into account. It is insane of the grace party which is grazing with left and showing thumping face at everyone else, rather get to the basics, make everybody understand issues, and get the subject rolling towards positive ends.

I am not seeing this angle from the grazers. This is worrying me a lot, more than the deal itself. This is the number one deal breaker.
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4665
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Post by putnanja »

As the communists have said earlier, all these tactics are just to extract their pound of flesh from congress. The comments by PM that the left can withdraw support if they want to have made their task easier.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

The Australian turnaround is very significant on many counts without bringing in TSP.

I think it has bearing on the Middle East transformation of which TSP is an extension.
williams
BRFite
Posts: 875
Joined: 21 Jun 2006 20:55

Post by williams »

Distinguished Speaker : Dr. A. Gopalakrishnan, an electrical power engineer who obtained his M.S. and Ph.D degrees from the University of California at Berkeley and worked in USA in various technical and managerial positions in the University of California, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) in California.

In 1976 he returned to India and spent the subsequent 24 years in various technical and senior management positions in various public sector organizations in India, including being Executive Director at Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL) and chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) of the Government of India. He also served as the Chairman of the 15-nation Drafting Committee of the International Atomic Energy Agency ( IAEA ), for finalizing the text of the International Convention on Nuclear Safety, which subsequently came into force upon its ratification by most of the nations having nuclear power plants and associated facilities. During his long career, Dr. Gopalakrishnan has also been associated with several academic and research institutions in advisory capacities.
http://www.indiaclub.org.sg/index.php?p=41

You can see from the above link who is Dr.Gopalakrishnan. Dr.G seems to have worked in US Atomic energy commission :shock:
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

ramana wrote:The Australian turnaround is very significant on many counts without bringing in TSP.

I think it has bearing on the Middle East transformation of which TSP is an extension.
They need less dependence on ME oil for 10-20 years for transformation.
The large OIL consumers are going to be weeded out of dependency of ME.

There will be periods when ME may not be able to export OIL at all.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

the left may have some genuine question, that we should not ignore. of course we ignore them altogether.

Oz is an international left (as defined by them) alligned with Amriks. They will dance any which way the cans open.
ShibaPJ
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Oct 2005 21:21

Post by ShibaPJ »

Acharya wrote: The large OIL consumers are going to be weeded out of dependency of ME.
How is it possible? India/PRC can lessen the need for gas with alternate energy source, but is there any substitute for gasoline yet?
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Post by Paul »

University of California at Berkeley
:roll:
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

SaiK wrote:the left may have some genuine question, that we should not ignore. of course we ignore them altogether.

Oz is an international left (as defined by them) alligned with Amriks. They will dance any which way the cans open.
Saik, You have made many posts but are unable to articulate what you want. Please think it through and write.

My take is you want the Parliament to debate the deal. Why?
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

ShibaPJ wrote:
Acharya wrote: The large OIL consumers are going to be weeded out of dependency of ME.
How is it possible? India/PRC can lessen the need for gas with alternate energy source, but is there any substitute for gasoline yet?
What is the share of ME OIL(19 bbd) in the global supply.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

ramana:

my reasons:
1. Part of the deal making itself. A process that we follow to take the nation into confidence.

2. There is nothing to do with strategic needs or defence related nuke weapons stuff that we are worried (from civilian perspective). That worry needs to be taken care by our specialist group and their heads have already answered satisfied. There is no other major civilian representative for India better than the parliament.

3. We need to discuss in the parliament w.r.t political process, foreign policy changes, NAM, ME especially Iran, etc.

4. We need to discuss how it would effect/affect our power generation, and detail the benifits in terms of cost to consumer.

5. How much money GoI is planning to spend for separation and special reprocessing zone?

6. What are the obligatory psy-ops that happen after the deal in terms of our culture, that feels we need to pay back the Khans, just because we signed this deal. We have that quality. What are the other side effects of that.

7. How much of this deal would emphatically clear the minds of the major political parties that are still finding holes.. We all understand here, that its perfecto.. ok, from technical angle. But, only politicians know whats hidden behind many things.

...
I might have said more than what I wanted to say.. sope, please spare your sword..
:wink:
bala
BRFite
Posts: 1994
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Post by bala »

Here is another one by Dr. A.G. who thrives on sensational assertions. Look at how he bashes the weapons folks at any given time in these articles and links all ills to them including his pet topic nuke safety.

Baseless criticism of the prime minister

The weapon scientists claim that the military and civilian nuclear facilities cannot be delineated separately. This is blatantly wrong, based on what was already done during the Vajpayee government's tenure.

Issues of nuclear safety

The Pokhran tests of May 1974 and May 1998, and hawkishness within the nuclear energy establishment, have only reinforced secretiveness and non-accountability on safety issues.



And this sensational assertion because he was appointed El Chairman of IAEA sub-committee and he has problems reporting to the Secretary of DAE. He forgets in his zeal to impress his international bosses that he is neglecting India's real needs to progress on the nuke front and its security needs vis-a-vis China.

In June 1994, the IAEA organised a Diplomatic Conference to adopt the final text of the Convention on Nuclear Safety. I was the head of the Indian delegation to this conference and was unanimously elected Chairman of the 16-nation Drafting Committee for the Convention. The Convention, based on the text submitted by this committee, was adopted on June 17, 1994. India was one of the first countries to join the Convention in September 1994.

Article 8-2 of this Convention reads: "Each Contracting Party shall take the appropriate steps to ensure an effective separation between the functions of the regulatory body and those of any other body or organisation concerned with the promotion or utilisation of nuclear energy."

With the present arrangement, under which the AERB reports to the AEC and, in effect, to the Secretary, DAE, it is evident that India is in deliberate violation of this international Convention, to which it is a party.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

btw, I agree on one condition about re-testing of weapons. lets say, we developed a 150-175KT and under-estimated its actual TNT value. What if the delivery of the second strike ends up with 2-3 Mega Tonnes. Is that what we want? from a destruction point of view? where is our yindoo analysis going?

On this very same thought, non-tested weapons from India can send shiver to many .. UNKill is enough for the deterrance (psy-op) propogation what it feels like. There is more devil into the unknown than known. [unknown unknown makes even a super power nervous.. read Rumsfeld]
ShibaPJ
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Oct 2005 21:21

Post by ShibaPJ »

Acharya wrote:
ShibaPJ wrote: How is it possible? India/PRC can lessen the need for gas with alternate energy source, but is there any substitute for gasoline yet?
What is the share of ME OIL(19 bbd) in the global supply.
Acharya, I don't have the exact ME breakdown, but OPEC seems to get about 37 out of 49 bbds for '05. So I would expect ME share to be 30 out of 49 give or take.. A very, very significant chunk to turn off the tap completely..
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

Saik, Your questions are reasonable and wont attract censure. I want a discussion of the deal as a process of political buy-in. This will ensure that the deal has maximum support. One mistake the neo-cons made in the US was to assume that 51% gets you to make laws- Yes it does but not those laws that will be obeyed. You need to allow the people to express thermselves or else it wont be binding. And this debate will be healthy as it will show the rest of the world that there is an active democracy and not a rubber stamp polity.

Pranabda's statement that the PM will only inform the Parliament as was done by Mrs IG on treaty with FSU and Bangladesh wont pass muster as they were majority governments and had directly elected PMs. This is a new and uncharted era of Indian politics and does not augur well for the political freedom if it is run rough shod by fiat accompli.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

ShibaPJ wrote: What is the share of ME OIL(19 bbd) in the global supply.

Acharya, I don't have the exact ME breakdown, but OPEC seems to get about 37 out of 49 bbds for '05. So I would expect ME share to be 30 out of 49 give or take.. A very, very significant chunk to turn off the tap completely..
Total demand is about 85bbd. Opec exports around 20bbds. 20BBds can be diverted from other sources if needed. If Iraq production increases from 2bbd to 5-10bbd then this is possible.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7127
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by JE Menon »

vsudhir, MR,

Yes, Shyam Saran will be involved in the IAEA/NSG negotiation, but his immediate priority I think is to do some diplomacy with Russia on the matter.

My point, essentially, is this: on the nuclear issue, historically in India, there has been a certain consensus at the fundamental level. While there may be differences on tactics, and egos coming in the way as well as frictions between individuals and agencies on any number of counts, the consensus at the fundamental level has been maintained - since Nehru's time. It is necessary to recall that the option was kept open by him, despite all the dewy-eyed moralising and exhortation of general principles.

This consensus has not been undermined - no matter what one may read here and there. Of course, our media is now hyper active, and there is a whole bunch of opinion, "fact", and informed/misinformed/etc commentary out there... There are also agendas to be implemented, monies to be paid, articles to be written, etc. Everybody plays this game, and we know it.

Ditto with the politicos. They will make the noises they need to make. (Only ones I leave out of this equation are the bloody commies, whose loyalties are questionable so long as they uphold the lunatic ideas of a misguided Russian and an unhygienic Chinaman over those of our own). But, at the end of the day, they will do what is needed.

Of course, this is not to suggest that there is some grand conspiracy sort of thing going on - some wizened old babus etc sitting somewhere guiding the country to the light. Hardly. It is vested interest pure and simple. It is in their interest, and therefore the country's interest, to expand the boundaries of our power. Anything which will help achieve this will be helped along.

It helps that over the years we have developed a fairly resilient system, both political and bureaucratic that can take hits and quickly uncrumple back into shape. Of course, I'm not suggesting, on the other hand, that the whole thing is just "happening" and that there is no direction being given whatsoever. It could be the case, but it is probably not a good idea to surrender to an inherent tendency among us Indians to look up overly to the intellectual elite... will not help the democratic mindset which IMHO needs at least another century to be truly entrenched :twisted:
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

Yes, and then if a new party/govt sworns in, may give the one year notice and terminate the deal. Is that a sign of good active democracy? IMHO, nope. It not only puts us into shame, but shames exactly the way we live. We would become taliban's non-western complment.

I agree we are not following precendence set by IG and as you said there was a clear reason for her to do so since she represented a thumping majority., and its not the case now. Very valid point that this govt has to note and give into opposition for a discussion, and ratify each line entry taking all parties into confidence.

BTW, there is nothing wrong in changing Gandhistic traditions to a more stable process., that thinks about our future rather "some" groups' prestige.
Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Post by Rangudu »

Let me throw in my 2 paise. I think that this deal has split Indian polity into many camps but one useful split to observe is those that are comfortable with a rising India versus those that feel uncomfortable with India projecting power even an inch farther than its immediate confines. Not saying that all deal opponents are wimps but a portion of the deal opponents can be considered as such.

In other words, if you look at many of the 123 possibilities and "what ifs" with the India of 1962, you can foresee certain results but if you look at the same possibilities with an India of 1971, there maybe different results.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

Acharya wrote:
ShibaPJ wrote: What is the share of ME OIL(19 bbd) in the global supply.

Acharya, I don't have the exact ME breakdown, but OPEC seems to get about 37 out of 49 bbds for '05. So I would expect ME share to be 30 out of 49 give or take.. A very, very significant chunk to turn off the tap completely..
Total demand is about 85bbd. Opec(Only ME) exports around 20bbds. 20BBds can be diverted from other sources if needed. If Iraq production increases from 2bbd to 5-10bbd then this is possible.
Kati
BRFite
Posts: 1850
Joined: 27 Jun 1999 11:31
Location: The planet Earth

Post by Kati »

Rangudu wrote:Let me throw in my 2 paise. I think that this deal has split Indian polity into many camps but one useful split to observe is those that are comfortable with a rising India versus those that feel uncomfortable with India projecting power even an inch farther than its immediate confines. Not saying that all deal opponents are wimps but a portion of the deal opponents can be considered as such.

In other words, if you look at many of the 123 possibilities and "what ifs" with the India of 1962, you can foresee certain results but if you look at the same possibilities with an India of 1971, there maybe different results.
Rangudu,
apart from the politicians, what are the scientific staff at AEC saying about the deal? They are supposed to be informed about the details this week.

Apart from splitting the home, another goal of this nuclear deal, from unkil's point of view, has been to split BRIC (Brazil-Russia-India-China). In some other websites/blogs there are some discussions along this line. Putin has been working aggressively to use this BRIC to challange the lone superpower.
enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Post by enqyoobOLD »

One useful thing that the BJP can do is to articulate their own role in getting India to the present situation, where the world is essentially recognizing India as a legitimate nuclear technology state (NTS). Let's not use the term "NWS".

The Australian PM's declaration speaks volumes. A direct contrast between India and its neighbors, expressed with the directness of a Gilchrist straight sixer.

The BJP should (not that they will listen to me!) demand that the GOI do more than just cash in on the laurels that the NDA government earned the hard way - and how the NDA saved the nation from disintegration by exposing Pakistan's nuclear perfidy and calling their bluff. How this saved India from nuclear blackmail in 1999, and saved millions of lives. This is what has led to the whole Pakistan problem unraveling and today IndiaPakistan is a vastly different proposition from what it was during the rule of the Congress.

BJP should ask what the GOI's vision is for India of 2020. Now that Dr. Kalam is out of the Presidency, it is fine to start taking aim at the lack of vision in that office.

Is there a national energy policy that will bring energy independence, and not just a new slavery to the American/Oiropean/Australian East Injun Companies? What is the scale of govt. support and investment in renewable energy?

The nuke plants should NOT be used to run agricultural pumps or grain mills. THOSE should be the domain of renewable energy. Where is the government's policy in these respects? India is the only country (as of 2006) to have a Minster for Renewable Energy - ask what clue that fellow has.

This is how the debate should be driven. If nuclear energy and imported oil were only 2% of the GOI's planned energy source increase, it wouldn't really matter a whole lot whether the US or the Middle East tried fuel embargos again.

This debate has all the elements of a useful national campaign to raise awareness about energy independence, give hope, and inspire initiative to go that route - and the BJP can take the Swadeshi lead to make imported uranium and oil irrelevant.

Why do I feel like I am whistling in the wind?
ksmahesh
BRFite
Posts: 209
Joined: 10 Jan 2007 17:55
Location: Mt Everest - its the coolest one

Post by ksmahesh »

enqyoob wrote:
The nuke plants should NOT be used to run agricultural pumps or grain mills.
But that is precisely what GOI intends else how do we explain a NPP in fatehabad (Agricultural town). However one should not have problems with running water pumps in agriculture (even if on free electricity). The reason is the entire agri-market is hijacked by provision of nominal subsidies and strict regulation of prices of produce on other. Infact farmland income is actually decreasing every year because the GOI is not allowing demand and supply determination of prices. The conservative estimate of inflation is 4% and farmland income growth is 2-3%. result net loss.

But I should refrain from ranting on the faulty agri-policies in this thread. Provision of subsidised power (from whatever source - nuclear et al) for agri sector should not be an issue.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

yes.. no nukes to farmers.. especially Andhra Pradesh where it seeks free electricity. :twisted: .

go brazil's way to make ethanol from sugar canes... and develop 100% ethanol engines, and not the MOF (mixed oil fuel). That jathropa is a long term farce., might as well invest in advanced solar cell research to the bang for the buck on all house tiles combining to generate 1-2KW power for each village home.

extraction of U235 from sea needs higher priority now.. higher MW reactor is need of the hour.
ksmahesh
BRFite
Posts: 209
Joined: 10 Jan 2007 17:55
Location: Mt Everest - its the coolest one

Post by ksmahesh »

SaiK wrote:yes.. no nukes to farmers.. especially Andhra Pradesh where it seeks free electricity.
Why no nuke PP for farmers. When entire India demands extremely low food prices why should not farmers demand subsidised power??
:twisted:
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

they can use hydros for it.. it can fluctuate per the cost of food and its seasonal. marries well. no water, no food & no power. fits farmer! :twisted: .

i am thinking of services orgs like Indian Railways, mass transport systems should go nukes.. make all rail lines nuke powered., and from desh designs.

btw, we could dedicate a few desh designed ADS for farmers. lets keep it at the political budget.. and the dangling heavy weight jibba pockets of MLAs and MPs taking decisions. Can't stop them doing it, might as well legalize.

/straying out of context.
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Post by CRamS »

Guys, reporting from a control systems conf in the Tenesse valley. There was key note talk by Dana Christiansen of Oak Ridge (http://www.ornl.gov/ornlhome/leadership ... _bio.shtml). He spoke about USA's road map for nuke power, and during the Q&A I asked his views on the India-US nuke deal. First he said that sibnce the 123 agreement is out, he is free to talk about it, he made the usual fluff about nuke proliferation and how this deal address that, he saqid its a great thing for bot countries, but the intersting tit-bit he gave was that he visited India earlier this year to meet with top scientists at BARC, many of whom had prior connections to Oak Ridge, and said that the Indian scientists are all gung-ho about this deal as this would let them renew their relationship with Oak Ridge. I don't want to second guess Indian scicom, its easy for me to be a 'desh bhakt' sitting in USA, but could it be that many of the scicom turn around was due to lure of lucrative cross postings in US labs like Oak Ridge? :-). If scientists migrate en masse to US, what will be the state of India's strategic programme?
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

good point CRamS, may be that is also one of UNkill's strategy to capture all nuke scientists from India and make them work at US labs for few thousand $ more. Its serves more UNKill and a few Indians (not India). Remember people of Dr. AG in headlines now, are now being talked off in a different manner cause of affiliations. How it benefits GoI!.. I don't think we think that much.

Now, the Khan govt can lynch us saying we are stealing more of their techs.. and perhaps name those scientists.

Who can stop outrun? Its happening to DRDO and its LCA project, Arjun and other strategic projects. BARC is gonna have its share now.
ksmahesh
BRFite
Posts: 209
Joined: 10 Jan 2007 17:55
Location: Mt Everest - its the coolest one

Post by ksmahesh »

BJP finally seeing some sense.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/210502.html


[quote]

While conceding to Dasmunshi’s arguments against the ratification of the treaty, Advani sought to differentiate the nuclear deal saying that the BJP wanted it to be “renegotiatedâ€
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Post by ShauryaT »

Rye wrote:ShauryaT wrote:
I have been in business long enough to answer this question. The true value of any item is the highest price the buyer gets at a given time. Period.

I do not understand. Do you mean the highest price a seller gets at any given time? A buyer usually knows only his own price and has no information on the price offered by other buyers, and thus cannot assess the "true value" in a vaccum.
I am sorry. Yes, I do mean the highest price the seller gets.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Post by SSridhar »

CRamS, I am not against this agreement and yet I would say that among the many ways that the US could throttle India's progress is 'brain drain' from Indian organizations such as DAE, ISRO etc. A large part of the blame should also go to the GoI for not being able to retain talent.
disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 8242
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Post by disha »

CRamS wrote:Guys, reporting from a control systems conf in the Tenesse valley. There was key note talk by Dana Christiansen of Oak Ridge (http://www.ornl.gov/ornlhome/leadership ... _bio.shtml). He spoke about USA's road map for nuke power, and during the Q&A I asked his views on the India-US nuke deal. First he said that sibnce the 123 agreement is out, he is free to talk about it, he made the usual fluff about nuke proliferation and how this deal address that, he saqid its a great thing for bot countries, but the intersting tit-bit he gave was that he visited India earlier this year to meet with top scientists at BARC, many of whom had prior connections to Oak Ridge, and said that the Indian scientists are all gung-ho about this deal as this would let them renew their relationship with Oak Ridge. I don't want to second guess Indian scicom, its easy for me to be a 'desh bhakt' sitting in USA, but could it be that many of the scicom turn around was due to lure of lucrative cross postings in US labs like Oak Ridge? :-). If scientists migrate en masse to US, what will be the state of India's strategic programme?

It might be that or it might be just like current it-vity types are going back to the desh, the sci-com will get recycled and more wise. More than that the gung-ho factor is because now the sci-com can share their findings across the board and be able to take credit for it. For most of the sci-com what matters is the peer appreciation. One of the biggest motivator for the PNE was that the Indian sci-com wanted to prove that they too can do it.

Also if sci-com feels that it is underpaid and under appreciated in India, is it the fault of the US? What is GOI upto?
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Post by vsudhir »

UPrabhu
BRFite
Posts: 102
Joined: 21 Sep 2004 11:51

Post by UPrabhu »

[quote="ksmahesh"]BJP finally seeing some sense.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/210502.html

Why finally, BJP was along saying it doesn't have problem with 123 itself but the Hyde Act.
[quote]

While conceding to Dasmunshi’s arguments against the ratification of the treaty, Advani sought to differentiate the nuclear deal saying that the BJP wanted it to be “renegotiatedâ€
williams
BRFite
Posts: 875
Joined: 21 Jun 2006 20:55

Post by williams »

My own opinion is that there will not be any shortage of brain even if there is a drain. I am also happy that the debate has come to this stage from 'total sellout' arguments.
sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Post by sunilUpa »

With all due respect, please stop calling everyone a traitor. US does not need to sign a 123 agreement to attract people from DAE.
Locked