India nuclear news and discussion

[Gerard]

UCIL scouts for Uranium mine acquisition overseas

[NRao]

Pardon if this was posted earlier:

Obama's letter to PM Dr Manmohan Singh on the partnership he wants

I strongly support civil nuclear cooperation, because I believe it will enhance our partnership and deepen our cooperation on a whole range of matters. Importantly, it will help India to meet its growing electricity demands while aiding in the important effort to combat global warming. But I see this agreement only as a beginning of a much closer relationship between our two great countries. I would like to see US-India relations grow across the board to reflect our shared interests, shared values, shared sense of threats and ever-burgeoning ties between our two economies and societies.

As a starting point, our common strategic interests call for redoubling US-Indian military, intelligence and law enforcement cooperation. ................................................

I also hope that a civil nuclear cooperation agreement can open the door to greater collaboration with India on non-proliferation issues. This subject will be one of my highest priorities as President. I am committed to the goal of a world without nuclear weapons, and will make this a central element of US nuclear weapons policy. I will work with the US Senate to secure ratification of the international treaty banning nuclear weapons testing at the earliest practical day, and then launch a major diplomatic initiative to ensure its entry into force. I will also pursue negotiations on a verifiable, multilateral treaty to end production of fissile material for nuclear weapons.

I very much hope and expect India will cooperate closely with the United States in these multilateral efforts. With the benefits of nuclear cooperation come real responsibilities -- and that should include steps to restrain nuclear weapons programs and pursuing effective disarmament when others do so. I greatly look forward to working with you on these and other issues in the future.

[NRao]

Not sure how this would impact India, but there is a change in NZ: New Zealand opposition wins vote

[Gerard]

‘No objection’ to U.S. nuclear trade with India: Hitachi

[RajeshA]

Not sure how this would impact India, but there is a change in NZ: New Zealand opposition wins vote

I am not quite sure, how the National Party (center-right party), that has won the elections in New Zealand, would act on immigration issues, which too is of prime concern to Indians. I believe there was some talk of a India-New Zealand FTA. I would hope that the FTA is concluded with some assurances from the new government on continued Indian immigration to New Zealand.

On the other hand, New Zealand has gone conservative, when its two most significant partners, Australia and USA have both become far more left-leaning. Earlier the problem was, that US wanted NZ to come a bit down from its high-horse on nuclear proliferation, while NZ was not willing to, and now when it may be willing to, if arguments are made in NZ's interests, US under Obama may not be asking it to anymore.

On another front, there is negative news too.

Goff frontrunner to replace Clark by Michael Fox: stuff.co.nz.

This means that even if New Zealand Govt. tries to be less dogmatic about nuclear-proliferation, it would always remain under constant pressure from the previous Minister for Disarmament and Nuclear Non-Proliferation, Phil Goff, who will become the Leader of the Opposition, and who did create huge difficulties for India.

I guess he will still be the Minister, when the next NSG Plenary Meeting will be taking place this month, which will ban all ENR exports to India, as the new NZ Govt. would not have been formed as yet (of course it doesn't really matter, as US would be pressing for the ban).

Should Obama however pursue the Bush's policy towards India and its plans to integrate India even more fully with the nuclear mainstream and make India a card-holding NSG member, which looks doubtful, then Obama would have much less opposition coming from New Zealand of the pipsqueak fame.

[Raj Malhotra]

In my (real life experience) nobody can have a bigger ego or be as insufferable as a successful or rich LAWYER.

[Gerard]

Ready to supply uranium to India, says Kazakhstan

[Nitesh]

x posting for asking question , have we done any work on this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... los-alamos
£13m shed-size reactors will be delivered by lorry
Nuclear power plants smaller than a garden shed and able to power 20,000 homes will be on sale within five years, say scientists at Los Alamos, the US government laboratory which developed the first atomic bomb.

The miniature reactors will be factory-sealed, contain no weapons-grade material, have no moving parts and will be nearly impossible to steal because they will be encased in concrete and buried underground.

The US government has licensed the technology to Hyperion, a New Mexico-based company which said last week that it has taken its first firm orders and plans to start mass production within five years. 'Our goal is to generate electricity for 10 cents a watt anywhere in the world,' said John Deal, chief executive of Hyperion. 'They will cost approximately $25m [£13m] each. For a community with 10,000 households, that is a very affordable $250 per home.'

Deal claims to have more than 100 firm orders, largely from the oil and electricity industries, but says the company is also targeting developing countries and isolated communities. 'It's leapfrog technology,' he said.

The company plans to set up three factories to produce 4,000 plants between 2013 and 2023. 'We already have a pipeline for 100 reactors, and we are taking our time to tool up to mass-produce this reactor.'

The first confirmed order came from TES, a Czech infrastructure company specialising in water plants and power plants. 'They ordered six units and optioned a further 12. We are very sure of their capability to purchase,' said Deal. The first one, he said, would be installed in Romania. 'We now have a six-year waiting list. We are in talks with developers in the Cayman Islands, Panama and the Bahamas.'

The reactors, only a few metres in diameter, will be delivered on the back of a lorry to be buried underground. They must be refuelled every 7 to 10 years. Because the reactor is based on a 50-year-old design that has proved safe for students to use, few countries are expected to object to plants on their territory. An application to build the plants will be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission next year.

'You could never have a Chernobyl-type event - there are no moving parts,' said Deal. 'You would need nation-state resources in order to enrich our uranium. Temperature-wise it's too hot to handle. It would be like stealing a barbecue with your bare hands.'

Other companies are known to be designing micro-reactors. Toshiba has been testing 200KW reactors measuring roughly six metres by two metres. Designed to fuel smaller numbers of homes for longer, they could power a single building for up to 40 years.

[ramana]

These are decay heat Peltier type reactors. Some are used in deep space probes.

[Prabu]

Gerard wrote: <<<<<Ready to supply uranium to India, says Kazakhstan

wow, this is Good news for us ! Energy cooperation agreement with Oman, qatar also is being done now.

[vsudhir]

India to sign nuclear deal with Belgium in Chennai

The deal will be signed in Chennai, about 80 km north of the nuclear power stations in Kalpakkam, which is also the campus of the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research (IGCAR).

Officials from the Tata Memorial Centre hospital and the Apollo group of hospitals along with several other major cancer research institutes in India which need and use nuclear technology will be participating in the memorandum signing ceremonies between the two countries, the sources said.

King Albert II and Queen Paola are on a 10-day state visit during which economic and academic relationship agreements with India will be inked.

[RajeshA]

India to sign nuclear deal with Belgium in Chennai

The deal will be signed in Chennai, about 80 km north of the nuclear power stations in Kalpakkam, which is also the campus of the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research (IGCAR).

Officials from the Tata Memorial Centre hospital and the Apollo group of hospitals along with several other major cancer research institutes in India which need and use nuclear technology will be participating in the memorandum signing ceremonies between the two countries, the sources said.

King Albert II and Queen Paola are on a 10-day state visit during which economic and academic relationship agreements with India will be inked.

Considering how much of a headache it is to deal with the chronic political instability in Belgium, they have deserved their holiday and all at the cost of India's tax payer.

[Gerard]

UK Govt lifts ban on civilian nuclear exports to India

Since 2002, Britain has refused all export licence applications for so-called "Trigger List" items to India, Foreign Office Minister Bill Rammell said, referring to an agreed list of sensitive technology.

"That policy has now changed and we will now consider on a case-by-case basis licence applications for peaceful use of all items" on the list if they are destined for UN-safeguarded civil nuclear facilities in India, he added.

Rammell said the ban would remain in force for items destined for "unsafeguarded nuclear fuel cycle or nuclear explosive activities" or where there is a major risk they would end up there.

[Gerard]

NTPC sends programme draft to Kakodkar

[Gerard]

UN agency warns about nuclear scrap contaminating consumer goods

[Gerard]

No talks with India for supplying N-powered submarine

[Jason_B]

Britain lifts ban on civilian nuclear exports to India

by Staff Writers
London (AFP) Nov 10, 2008
Britain has lifted a ban on exporting sensitive nuclear technology to India for civilian projects, it said Monday, after an international accord to relax rules in September.

Since 2002, Britain has refused all export licence applications for so-called "Trigger List" items to India, Foreign Office Minister Bill Rammell said, referring to an agreed list of sensitive technology.

"That policy has now changed and we will now consider on a case-by-case basis licence applications for peaceful use of all items" on the list if they are destined for UN-safeguarded civil nuclear facilities in India, he added.

Rammell said the ban would remain in force for items destined for "unsafeguarded nuclear fuel cycle or nuclear explosive activities" or where there is a major risk they would end up there.

The Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which controls the export and sale of nuclear technology, agreed at a meeting in Vienna on September 6 to waive its ban on nuclear trading with India.

The ban had been in place for 34 years because India will not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, developed atomic bombs in secret and conducted its first nuclear test in 1974.

But the United States pressed for a special waiver for India, saying the deal would allow New Delhi to satisfy its booming economy's thirst for energy while curbing its dependence on fossil fuels linked to climate change.

It would also give the US access to India's lucrative nuclear market, which is worth an estimated 100 billion euros (142 billion dollars) over 15 years.

India has since signed pacts with the US and France and is laying the groundwork for a pact with Russia, set to be finalised when President Dmitry Medvedev visits India next month, under which Russia would build four reactors.

The NSG deal had proved divisive, with India's fellow Asian giant China apparently reluctant to back lifting the ban although it later withdrew its opposition.

Analysts said the friction was part of the long-standing competition between the economic and strategic rivals.

It also drew domestic criticism of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, with the main opposition Hindu nationalists and Communists saying the deal brings India's foreign policy too closely under US influence

[ramana]

News Report Deccan Chronicle, 13 Nov 2008

A mission for Bond! Infiltrate India nuke secrets


Washington, Nov. 13: Ahead of the latest James Bond film’s release in the US this Friday, a foreign policy journal has listed out five missions it would like the most popular fictional spy to take up, including infiltrating India’s nuclear programme to find out if the country has got a hydrogen bomb. “James Bond is out for revenge in the new film, Quantum of Solace, opening in the United States on November 14.

But here in the real world, the intelligence community is badly in need of a super spy to solve some of its biggest conundrums. Here are five missions we’d love Agent 007 to tackle,” writes Jerome Chen in an article, “Five Real Missions for 007”, on the web edition of the highly regarded American journal Foreign Policy.

Here is how the article describes the mission number one for the superspy: “Infiltrate the nuclear weapons programmes of India, Pakistan, and North Korea to determine which ones possess the hydrogen bomb.” And here is the briefing for the job: “It’s long been assumed that these smaller nuclear powers possess inferior nuclear weapons. During the Cold War, only superpowers had the ability to make advancements in nuclear weaponry such as making hydrogen bombs. But the barriers are no longer so high.”

“The idea is out,” the article quotes Mr John Pike, director of the defence and intelligence news website GlobalSecurity.org as saying. According to Mr Pike: “The computational power available to design a device and conduct tests is leaps and bounds above what was available to Cold War-era scientists.” Moreover, required materials such as plutonium, uranium, and tritium are available to any country with a nuclear reactor, notes the article.
“Do the newer members of the nuclear club possess weapons only as potent as the Nagasaki bomb? ... Possession of the H-bomb could also complicate certain conflicts such as the long-simmering dispute between India and Pakistan over Kashmir.”

So the band rolls on!

[Rye]

moved.

[Gerard]

India concerned at nuclear weapons falling in wrong hands

India has expressed concerns over nuclear weapons falling in wrong hands, due to the "fragile and unstable governments" possessing those capabilities.

[Rye]

moved to Intl. nuke news thread.

[NRao]

Can Obama Say No to Nuclear Weapons?

Thursday 13 November 2008

by: J. Sri Raman, t r u t h o u t | Perspective


Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. (Photo: AFP / Getty Images)
A minor controversy among India's mandarins and in its media has ended, with US President-elect Barack Obama making a telephone call to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Wednesday morning. What deserved far greater notice than the details of the four-day-long controversy was its relation to one of the major world issues of our times - the menace of nuclear weapons.

The controversy raged on in newspaper columns and television studios about Obama calling up several heads of governments across continents, while he seemed to have pointedly ignored Singh. The omission rankled, particularly after the much-publicized, 20-minute call on November 8 to Pakistan's President Asif Ali Zardari. Independent and informed reports related this to a possibly new US stand under Obama on the nuclear issue.

Immediately after Obama's conversation with Zardari, red-faced officials of India's external affairs ministry claimed that the president-elect had called up only "the military allies" of the US - with one of them even adding that "we are happy not to figure in the league." The prime minister himself was quick to dissociate himself with such a posture. He hastened to tell the media that he had lacked the time for a leisurely chat that Obama had indeed wanted.

Singh added that Obama had sent him a letter instead, spelling out the future president's "approach" to India. The prime minister seized the occasion to stress his staunch commitment to the "strategic partnership" with the US, and reports were silent on the blushes of the bureaucrats who had offered a very different explanation.

The independent interpretation of the mystery of the missing call linked it to an earlier Obama letter in September. New Delhi chose to release it after Obama's historic election victory. The letter, said to laud US-India relations, was released presumably as an answer to local critics of Singh's gaffe in declaring India's deep love for Bush during the prime minister's Washington visit of September 26, at the height of Obama's long and hard poll campaign.

The release of the September letter, say knowledgeable sources, did not mend the matters. According to them, the New Delhi version of the letter omitted a crucial paragraph about the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) which India had yet to sign. The US has signed the 12-year-old CTBT, but is yet to ratify it. Obama and the Democrats are committed to its ratification. Singh's omission from the president-elect's call list, say the sources, was Obama's response to the manipulated version of his missive.

What the Singh government has now publicized is Obama's expression of "firm support" for the US-India nuclear deal during his talk with the Prime minister. No further details of the interaction on the issue were either discussed or divulged. While Obama had finally voted in the US Senate for the deal, his vote included an amendment making the deal conditional upon a presidential certification that the agreement would not be used to aid India in creating new nuclear weapons.

The Indian media had called this a "killer amendment," reading it as a crippling restriction on India's right to test nuclear weapons again. We must wait to see whether Obama's "firm support" of the deal will allow any future action by the US administration to address concerns articulated in the amendment and the reported allusion to the CTBT in the September communication.

Obama, however, has to prepare to tackle three specific and larger nuclear issues to have come up in the post-election period. The first of these is about the Missile Defense Program, raised particularly in the context of the proposed missile deployment in Poland, on which the president-elect has indicated a preference for caution. The subject deserves separate treatment in a subsequent column.

The second issue relates to what Obama has called the "real 21st century threats" in this regard. To quote him: "The biggest nuclear security risk is not from a rogue state lashing out with ballistic missiles, but a terrorist smuggling a crude nuclear device across our borders. We spend more than $10 billion a year on missile defense, but far too little on securing nuclear materials around the world and improving security (including detection) at our ports and borders."

The third issue to have cropped up is about the Bush-initiated proposal for production of a new generation of nuclear weapons. During his campaign, Obama said a clear no to the proposal. "I will not authorize the development of new nuclear weapons," he said in September. "And I will make the goal of eliminating nuclear weapons worldwide a central element of US nuclear policy."

He faces a challenge on this issue from US Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Speaking at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on November 7, Gates asked for new nuclear weapons and said the US could not maintain deterrence, reduce arms or modernize them without tests. He argued that the country ceased developing nuclear weapons in the 1980s and stopped producing nuclear munitions in the 1990s. With weapons developers and engineers gone, the US suffered a "brain drain" and the situation needed to be remedied, he added.

******

The world peace movement as a whole will hope that Obama replies to such cunning and contrived arguments with a reaffirmation of his campaign promise on the core issue. He told the voters: "As president, I will set a new direction in nuclear weapons policy and show the world that America believes in its existing commitment under the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) to work to ultimately eliminate all nuclear weapons."

He added: "I fully support reaffirming this goal, as called for by George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, William Perry and Sam Nunn, as well as the specific steps they propose to move us in that direction." The first three of this formidable team held important positions in both Republican and Democratic administrations, and the fourth has served as a front-ranking anti-nuclear-weapon campaigner. In a statement published on January 4, 2007, they said: "US leadership will be required to take the world to the next stage - to a solid consensus for reversing reliance on nuclear weapons globally as a vital contribution to preventing their proliferation into potentially dangerous hands, and ultimately ending them as a threat to the world."

Mere words cannot eliminate the most dangerous of mass-destruction weapons. Experts estimate that all the nuclear-weapon states together possess about 27,000 intact nuclear warheads, of which 97 percent are in US and Russian stockpiles. About 12,500 of these warheads are considered operational, with the balance in reserve or retired and awaiting dismantlement. The Pentagon, according to them, has custody of nearly 10,000 stockpiled warheads, of which 5,735 are considered active or operational. Russia, in their estimate, has 16,000 intact warheads, of which about 5,830 are considered operational.

In January 2007, the respected Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists thought it fit to warn that, despite the reduction of arsenals, especially since the end of the Cold War, the world had entered a "Second Nuclear Age marked by grave threats." Among the reasons it cited were: the continuing launch-ready status of at least 2,000 of the approximately 20,000 nuclear weapons in the US and Russian arsenals, the unsecured nuclear materials in Russia (which could fall into terrorist hands), and even "new pressure from climate change for expanded civilian nuclear power that could increase proliferation risks."

Obama has stated: "A world without nuclear weapons is profoundly in America's interest and the world's interest. It is our responsibility to make the commitment, and to do the hard work to make this vision a reality. That's what I've done as a senator and a candidate, and that's what I'll do as president."

Is such easy optimism warranted in a country and a world which an economic crisis alone may not suffice to liberate from the military-industrial complex? Time will tell. Meanwhile, it will be for the people of the US and the peace movement everywhere to hold Obama to his word, to pin the new president down to possibly the most historic of his promises.

A freelance journalist and a peace activist in India, J. Sri Raman is the author of "Flashpoint" (Common Courage Press, USA). He is a regular contributor to Truthout.

(Seems to have got some aspects wrong.)

[NRao]

http://www.economist.com/world/internat ... d=12609825

Posted by Gerard in the intl. nuke thread.

As for more global treaty commitments, Mr Obama is expected to try to get Congress to ratify the test-ban (it refused in 1999). That could prod others, like China, to do likewise. He has also said he will not authorise the building of new nuclear weapons. That is music to disarmers’ ears. But there may eventually have to be a trade-off: ending testing in return for building some simpler, safer warheads (based on a previously tested design).

NPA Henry Sokolski is openly admitting that the CTBT stewardship program is key to the P-5 maintaining all their arsenals in the long term, while pretending that they are pushing for a nuke-free world. The P-5 have already done all the testing they need and want to stop that route to everyone else -- they have no intention of denuclearizing, as should be obvious.

What am I missing? The Letter:

I also hope that a civil nuclear cooperation agreement can open the door to greater collaboration with India on non-proliferation issues. This subject will be one of my highest priorities as President. 1): I am committed to the goal of a world without nuclear weapons, and will make this a central element of US nuclear weapons policy. I will work with the US Senate to 2): secure ratification of the international treaty banning nuclear weapons testing at the earliest practical day, and then launch a major diplomatic initiative to ensure its entry into force. I will also 3): pursue negotiations on a verifiable, multilateral treaty to end production of fissile material for nuclear weapons.

NPA Sokolski is having nuclear withdrawal?

[Rye]

moved

[vsudhir]

If Delhi finds, after careful and deliberate deliberation that India is not yet ready to commit to CTBT and FMCT, what then? AFAIK, CTBT won't enter force unless Delhi agrees or something. What may the implications be of holding off against the rest of the world, again?

The rest of the world winked while PRC proliferated to TSP making our neighborhood what it is today. I trust Delhi will decide the right course of action based on what it alone knows about the N capabilities and current inventory of everyone in the extended neighborhood.

[Rye]

vsudhir, Not talking about India's decision. I have moved all the international nuclear news and discussion thread, and deleted the posts from this thread. I think Pres. Elect Obama's goals are rather ambitious if they think the P-5 will be given an easy pass this time around by the NNW states if there is a push to ratify the CTBT.

I would be surprised if China or the US congress would agree to ratifying the CTBT if the stewardship program was disallowed for the P-5, and with that clause in there, the CTBT does not really help with this alleged goal of "global nuclear disarmament".

[sum]

Link

Rao buckled under US pressure
DH News Service, New Delhi:
Two experts on foreign policy and strategic affairs have disclosed that P V Narasimha Rao as prime minister attempted nuclear test in 1995 but buckled down under US pressure.


K Subrahmanyam, who was Convenor of the National Security Council Advisory Board during the NDA government and former foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal said here on Wednesday that the US got wind of the Rao plan to test and pressurized him against it.

Speaking at a function where Vice President Abdul Hamid Ansari released security expert Bharat Karnad’s book “India’s Nuclear Policy”, Subrahmanyan said, “Rao attempted to test in 1995. He did leave a note to A B Vajpayee, who succeeded him [to conduct the test]”.

Sibal confirmed this in his speech as he said: “Rao as prime minister wanted to conduct the test. He attempted it but somehow Americans got wind of it and pressurized him. He backed off. Vajpayee was determined, he went ahead and conducted the test”. Former external affairs and defence minister Jaswant Singh, who was on the dais when these remarks were made, did not react.

Taken by surprise

Retired Navy Chief Admiral Arun Prakash said the military was “taken by surprise” by the 1998 nuclear test at Pokhran. He, however, was of the opinion that there was no need for the second test. He remarked: “We could have stopped after the 1974 test. What is the point of having nuclear arsenal except to get the respect of other countries ? We have already committed to no first use and moratorium. Has it deterred others ? Look at Pakistan, it keeps us busy with cross-border terrorism. China has examined our nuclear capabilities in great detail. These should give rise to alarm. Have we got what we are aiming for through testing?”, he asked.

Sibal did not agree with Subrahmanyam that nuclear issue had now been put on the backburner as he said it was instead on the frontburner. “The nuclear non-proliferation treaty is in great difficulty. Iran and North Korea have nuclear ambitions which is a concern. Iraq’s nuclear ambition led to a bloody war. Russia wants disarmament agenda revived but the US is reluctant”. Commending the book during the release, Vice President Hamid Ansari said the book was authoritative and densely written.

So, the IN feels that our current nukes are sufficient for any needs and the nukes have failed to achieve the deterrence hoped since very possible enemy of India is anyways operating away without any care about Indian nukes?

[RamaY]

Retired Navy Chief Admiral Arun Prakash said the military was “taken by surprise” by the 1998 nuclear test at Pokhran. He, however, was of the opinion that there was no need for the second test. He remarked: “We could have stopped after the 1974 test. What is the point of having nuclear arsenal except to get the respect of other countries ? We have already committed to no first use and moratorium. Has it deterred others ? Look at Pakistan, it keeps us busy with cross-border terrorism. China has examined our nuclear capabilities in great detail. These should give rise to alarm. Have we got what we are aiming for through testing?”, he asked.

I think it is the other way round... this is what I read...

What is the point of having nuclear arsenal when we have already committed to no first use and moratorium? Why is it not deterring Pakistan or China?

Did we get what we are aiming?

Do what it REALLY takes to achieve your goals... stated or unstated...

[Nayak]

Is it the continued exposure to oceanic salt that corrodes the common-sense among retd admirals ?

Seems most of them turn out into rabid peace-niks/WKKs and support the fifth columnists in undermining the security of India.

[ramana]

No he is being sarcastic.

I am more surprised by Sibal. Choti muhe baadi baath. He is talks back to KS without understanding what he is saying.

KS is saying regarding NPT and India its a closed matter. All other stuff is breakig the NPT. Its not India's business. Maybe Sibal wants to carry the water for his massa.

Rao in an interview said he had done what he had done and had informed his successor. It was not a case of buckling under. It was a case of ensuring the right thing gets tested. Then we have BARC and their stuff.

And Rao was working on his biography and after his death his house was surrounded by sleuths of IB on UPA orders. So one will never know what he was writing.

[Avinash R]

Mulford hopes India is birth place of global nuclear industry

[sanjaykumar]

So this Chen classes India with Pakistan and North Korea, this is more psyops than anything meaningful.

Mr Chen I have it on good authority that India has targetted your native village in China with a I MT fusion device.

[Rye]

Shri Mulford ko gussa kyon aatha hain?

http://in.news.yahoo.com/20/20081114/14 ... ace-o.html

He expressed displeasure over the "volumes of inaccurate comments" about the US nuclear industry during the course of negotiations on the Indo-US nuclear deal. "Many misinformed commentators have inaccurately alleged that the US civil nuclear industry has been out of the business for almost 30 years and that we are no longer competitive in nuclear technology and engineering," he said.

"The US ranks number one in the world in terms of number if nuclear reactors (104) with 24 per cent of the world's total," the US envoy said pointing out that France ranked number two with 13.4 per cent of world's atomic power reactors which generate 17 per cent of nuclear power produced globally. ".

President Jimmy carter shut down all research on Breeder reactors in 1978 -- 30 years ago, Mr. Mulford.

http://millercenter.org/academic/americ ... iography/4

Energy Policy Success

Carter's main achievement involved energy policy, though he would receive little credit for it during his term. Despite the lip service paid by American presidents to reducing energy dependence, U.S. oil imports had shot up 65 percent annually since 1973. In 1976 the nation was consuming one-quarter of all Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) production. The U.S. remained wasteful in energy use, with consumption per capita 2.3 times the average for nations in the European Economic Community and 2.6 times Japan's. Carter set out to reduce this dependence.

The president got Congress to pass the Emergency Natural Gas Act, which would authorize the national government to allocate interstate natural gas. He created a Department of Energy to regulate existing energy suppliers and fund research on new sources of energy, particularly sustainable (wind and solar power) and ecologically sound sources. His Energy Security Act created the U.S. Synthetic Fuels Corporation, which would provide $20 billion in joint ventures with private industry. Carter signed his first energy package into law on November 9, 1978. The deregulation of oil and natural gas prices that resulted would lead to a vast increase in the supply of energy in the 1980s, and consequently a lowering of prices.

During Carter's term, however, the actions of the OPEC oil cartel (foreign oil producers) resulted in an increase in oil prices, from $13 a barrel to over $34. With America so dependent on oil, this huge price increase resulted in a run-up in inflation. Carter asked Congress to accelerate stockpiling 500 million barrels of crude oil in a national security reserve, setting target date by end of 1980 instead of 1982 (the deadline set by the Ford administration). The administration also developed new conservation measures that would sharply reduce industry's use of fuels, as well as automobile mileage standards. Strip mining would now be regulated by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, a victory for environmentalists.

Carter had other successes in energy policy, particularly in nuclear energy policy, in which he was an expert. He got Congress to abolish the powerful Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, a step that would make it easier to block breeder reactors and move toward light-water reactors of the kind favored by the administration. Carter won his route for a soon to be constructed oil pipeline in Alaska. He killed funding for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor, because the plutonium reactor technology would increase the risk of nuclear proliferation if adopted elsewhere in the world. Instead, Congress authorized and funded a shutdown of the reactor.

What about all the nuclear waste produced by Light Water Reactors, Mr. Mulford?

[ramana]

Not to mention Toshiba now owns the GE BWR designs and another Japanese comapny owns the Westinghosue desings. All reactor vessels were made by Mitsubishi.

They are number one in only in bums.

[svinayak]

President Jimmy carter shut down all research on Breeder reactors in 1978 -- 30 years ago, Mr. Mulford.

http://millercenter.org/academic/americ ... iography/4

The whole reason for shut down was to give big support to the disarmament and anti-nuclear movement which was turned into a green movement globally.

[ramana]

And FBR tech in those days was very rudimentary and quite dangerous. It was literally playing with fire as it was based on liquid sodium which cathces fire on contact with water. So it was prudent to shut it dwon and at samet ime get soem brownie points for furthering disarmament/ anti-nuke power crowd. .

[Raj Malhotra]

And FBR tech in those days was very rudimentary and quite dangerous. It was literally playing with fire as it was based on liquid sodium which cathces fire on contact with water. So it was prudent to shut it dwon and at samet ime get soem brownie points for furthering disarmament/ anti-nuke power crowd. .

I thought that Indian Fast breeder programme is also based on Sodium?

[Paul]

No he is being sarcastic.

I am more surprised by Sibal. Choti muhe baadi baath. He is talks back to KS without understanding what he is saying.

KS is saying regarding NPT and India its a closed matter. All other stuff is breakig the NPT. Its not India's business. Maybe Sibal wants to carry the water for his massa.

Rao in an interview said he had done what he had done and had informed his successor. It was not a case of buckling under. It was a case of ensuring the right thing gets tested. Then we have BARC and their stuff.

And Rao was working on his biography and after his death his house was surrounded by sleuths of IB on UPA orders. So one will never know what he was writing.

Kapil Sibal's younger brother Kanwal was ambassador to Russia for some time.

His key role there may have contributed to some of the acrimony with Russia.

[NRao]

That is Amby. Mulford's was of saying - remember who brought you to this stage. The US wants a piece of the pie.

Yeah, Indian FBRs also use Sodium. However, the Indian techs are Indian for sure and far better tested than any as we write. It is a gene of its own. Which is what is causing heart burns all over. It is secure, efficient (there is one that can be deployed at a village cluster level - proposed), cheap, and well understood (by India of course).

From what I have read (ONLY Indian lit) the others will make money now and then ................. They all have a few years before the window closes.

IMHO/JMTs.

[NRao]

I did forget to add that I am rather surprised that he has not mentioned GNEP so far.