Indian Nuclear News & Discussion - 28 Jul 2007

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Postby samuel » 31 Jul 2007 08:27

Rye wrote:Thanks, Ramana. So it makes sense that the Thorium only be used in the fuel cycle arising from the "military" program -- no point creating U-233 from the Indigenous Thorium and then placing them under IAEA safeguards, when Uranium under IAEA safeguards is going to be available from the NSG countries.


There is a picture on page 13 of the document below that helped me look at the big picture. It shows schematically the three-stage process (though of course no ADS).

Thorium fuel cycle...

Using imported fuel will only be possible on the safeguarded side as will any derivative from it.
So reprocessing imported fuel (and here I mean the recovery of Pu/Dep. U as in Figure 1), would make little sense unless we plan to develop a fuel cycle on the civilian side. Would that be the three-stage process, so we can start leveraging our thorium reserves?

If so, until we can bring the FBR and AHWR to the civil side, what do we do with the reprocessing option? When we do bring FBR/AWHR under safegaurds, how do we protect them?

I am not sure I understand exactly how this deal relieves us from the civil/military crunch. The Pu stock that we produce on the unsafeguarded side will have to be split between strategic reserve and doing the three step. Does this mean that the three-step process is unsafeguarded till we can perfect and protect that technology, but when it is ready to become operational on a large-scale we will turn that over to the civil side?

Then, again, the whole thing comes under IAEA, which seems problematic. If we don't turn it over to civil side, how does the three-stage help resolve the civil power needs? If we run a separate unsafeguarded three-stage, where does the driving U for both civilian power and strategic needs come from? Would we not be where we are now, only with a pile of imported fuel that we can reprocess but not be able to do much with, and with a dependence on imported fuel that lasts in perpetuity?

I am reading up here, but if someone can point to or clarify, I'd be grateful.

S
Last edited by samuel on 31 Jul 2007 09:01, edited 3 times in total.

Ananth
BRFite
Posts: 344
Joined: 16 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Ananth » 31 Jul 2007 08:30

CRamS wrote:Ramana:

BC doesn't sound one bit optimistic about this 'deal'. He rips open India's positive spin every contentious issue. There are etseemed folks here and elsewhere who are gungo ho about this 'deal'. What is it that they see that BC doesn't?


Lets say BC is an antidote to NPAs and leave it at that.

Sparsh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 30 Jan 2007 12:57

Postby Sparsh » 31 Jul 2007 08:40

Ananth,

No country, not even the Russians, will consent to us using their material in an unsafeguarded facility, i.e. a non-civilian facility. What is the whole point of having a separation then? How do they know we are not using their stuff to make bums?

So if you want to use foreign fuel in an AHWR or FBR then those need to be on the civilian side.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 31 Jul 2007 08:55

We really need to spend the money on expanding the domestic uraniums sources. There's no excuse for it, if we want to have the necessary leverage in negotations, and ultimately the required autonomy of policy.

Ananth
BRFite
Posts: 344
Joined: 16 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Ananth » 31 Jul 2007 09:07

Sparsh wrote:Ananth,

No country, not even the Russians, will consent to us using their material in an unsafeguarded facility, i.e. a non-civilian facility. What is the whole point of having a separation then? How do they know we are not using their stuff to make bums?


Forget about Russkies, they themselves depend on Kazhak.

The constraints to supply us might be true present or even in medium term future. But is that true forever? In medium term it is ok to let imported fuel and derivatives go on in civilian side. My point is we shouldn't prevent Khazak, Niger or even our dear Oz if they are willing to supply us for our non-civil 3-stage program.

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Postby samuel » 31 Jul 2007 09:10

Ananth wrote:
Sparsh wrote:Ananth,

No country, not even the Russians, will consent to us using their material in an unsafeguarded facility, i.e. a non-civilian facility. What is the whole point of having a separation then? How do they know we are not using their stuff to make bums?


Forget about Russkies, they themselves depend on Kazhak.

The constraints to supply us might be true present or even in medium term future. But is that true forever? In medium term it is ok to let imported fuel and derivatives go on in civilian side. My point is we shouldn't prevent Khazak, Niger or even our dear Oz if they are willing to supply us for our non-civil 3-stage program.


How do you suppose that will happen?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50624
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 31 Jul 2007 09:16

They should feel incentivized to supply na!

Maybe as part of some sort of a reciprocal agreement.

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Postby samuel » 31 Jul 2007 09:26

ramana wrote:They should feel incentivized to supply na!


Maybe...assuming your comment is not tounge-in-cheek :)

Seriously, with Oz under US, Khazakhstan under Russia, Niger under China(?), what incentives are we talking about?

Maybe it really is worth waiting to read this document in all its glory and take what one can from it. But what do I know...Red flags go up for me when its all perfume and no...

Again, just to prod a bit, can we see in very simple terms what this deal is helping is with (as opposed to some strategic mind-numbing transformation to hyper-space, sorry, but I would really like to get, if possible, down to as much detail as we can. You can assume I am ignorant and educate me to the degree your patience lasts).

S

bala
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Postby bala » 31 Jul 2007 10:06

So the practical right to reprocess would not form part of the agreement under Section 123 of the US Atomic Energy Act, but is to be worked out in the future under Section 131, titled "Subsequent Arrangements." Securing the practical right would thus entail a second round of congressional scrutiny and approval.


Folks BC has a good point here. We are at the mercy of the next US President (Democrat?) who may not look at the US-INDIA Nuke Deal with the same perspective as President Bush. The congress may be packed with NPA sympathizers who would be bent on screwing India. If we don't get the right to reprocess then the waste pile up management becomes an issue.

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Postby samuel » 31 Jul 2007 10:24

bala wrote:
So the practical right to reprocess would not form part of the agreement under Section 123 of the US Atomic Energy Act, but is to be worked out in the future under Section 131, titled "Subsequent Arrangements." Securing the practical right would thus entail a second round of congressional scrutiny and approval.


Folks BC has a good point here. We are at the mercy of the next US President (Democrat?) who may not look at the US-INDIA Nuke Deal with the same perspective as President Bush. The congress may be packed with NPA sympathizers who would be bent on screwing India. If we don't get the right to reprocess then the waste pile up management becomes an issue.


Thanks bala for pointing this out.
So reprocessing isn't iron-clad in the "frozen text."
Are we all agreed on that here?

Wow, this deal gets curiouser and curiouser...
So far then:
10. reprocess, maybe...
9. no tech in civil goes outside.
8. three-stage cannot be civil without iaea shackles.
7. no fuel in civil goes outside.
5. We have sovereign right to test, they have sovereign right to screw. Now with some serious money, err electricity to wager. That's just dandy.
4. Our relations are so nice with other countries in the NSG that there will always be fuel whether America likes it or not.
3. We are going to get regulated by NSG, IAEA and America for some very fundamental aspect of sovereignty: electric power.
2. Import American reactors. I tell you they are really good with Oz fuel.
1. And the top reason, folks, American military equipment made easy. What a great way to have the latest greatest, and at dirt cheap financing...F35 included! And there will be more (eyes light up here).
Last edited by samuel on 31 Jul 2007 10:32, edited 1 time in total.

Ananth
BRFite
Posts: 344
Joined: 16 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Ananth » 31 Jul 2007 10:30

samuel wrote:Seriously, with Oz under US, Khazakhstan under Russia, Niger under China(?), what incentives are we talking about?


Will it be always true. In a decade US went from sanctioning, to accomodate us. It pays to be hopeful for future.

Again, just to prod a bit, can we see in very simple terms what this deal is helping is with


This deal gives us a foothold into the cartel, albeit with some conditions, which we are trying to understand. That foothold in itself is a very important gain.

Once GoI releases text to the parliament, it will shed more light. Lets see.

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Postby samuel » 31 Jul 2007 10:38

Ananth wrote:
samuel wrote:Seriously, with Oz under US, Khazakhstan under Russia, Niger under China(?), what incentives are we talking about?


Will it be always true. In a decade US went from sanctioning, to accomodate us. It pays to be hopeful for future.

Again, just to prod a bit, can we see in very simple terms what this deal is helping is with


This deal gives us a foothold into the cartel, albeit with some conditions, which we are trying to understand. That foothold in itself is a very important gain.

Once GoI releases text to the parliament, it will shed more light. Lets see.


Yeah, lets wait till more light sheds on this deal.
The point here is that America is helping us out of its own interest: contain China. Once upon a time it helped China to contain CCCP. Tomorrow, we grow, want to assert our...well guess what happens. Maybe it won't matter, may be it will, but what comes easy may go easy too, no? How do we ensure we are standing on our own two feet?

But how are we coming into this Cartel? As the addict or as the supplier?

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 31 Jul 2007 10:48

Let me restate some basic data.

Arun_S wrote:
Gerard wrote:The Tellis paper

Atoms for War?: U.S.-Indian Civilian Nuclear Cooperation and India’s Nuclear Arsenal

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/ ... final4.pdf
gives good background on PHWR refuelling etc.


Low burn refueling puts 5.5 times additional frequent fuel loading.
I am very sure the 540MWe TAPPS-3 & 4 is designed for that capacity these two themselves could produce ~796Kg/Year.

Commercial CANDU PHWR reactors are typically designed with loader overcapacity of 150%, the Indian CANDU's very likely have higher overcapacity (~300%) because of the pressure of strategic requirements. Assuming on an average 220MWe reactors effectively deliver 100% loader overcapacity (conservatively), the nonsafeguarded 220MWe PHWR can generate 430Kg/yr WgPu.

Thus 540MWe TAAPS and 220MWe will together likely produce 1,230Kg/Yr. Much of it will go to kick start FBR and AHWR.

The Shakti-1 based TN requires ~2 Kg WgPu for Primary and some ~2Kg for tertiary stages.


    1. India has today at least 5,340 tonnes of spent fuel (assuming all of that all reactors operated in high burn mode) containing at least 13.6 tonnes of Reactor grade Pu.
    2. The 8 PHWR will certainly undergo fuel loader upgradation to allow 5 time more frequent fuel turning required for low burning fuel operation that produces 2 time more Pu for given reactor wattage compared to burning the fuel to full 7500MWd.t energy. This will generate 1,750Kg WgPu/Year (this includes Dhruv & Cirus HWR
    3. Spent fuel rods to support initial Indian strategic weapons stockpile corresponding to approx 4000Kg WgPu is very likely already in pocket. Thus more Pu from military reactors are directed to address FBR/AHWR needs. The NPA talk of using FBR for weapon fissile material generation is their wet dream. The numbers speak for themselves.
    4. 1750 Kg WgPu from 10 non-civil power reactors is enough to startup a new FBR or AHWR.
    5. AHWR's driver fuel percentage requirement will only decrease as the size of the rector core increases. The future Thorium AHWR will be self sustaining (not require driver fuel). Accelerator Driven Thorium pile could be a good hybrid solution to accelerate building cheap and bigger Thorium reactors. Also note that Accelerator Driven system talk of only 300mA current. Thus the electric drive power will be <1 MegaWatt
    6. AHWR spent fuel reprocessing is the most difficult technology, and BARC is leading & getting very close to unlocking the secret recipe.
    7. One of the key value of US-India civil nuclear cooperation deal is in able to draw foreign commercial finances in building large N power plants. It is essential though to ensure that India do not budge on liability clause of nuclear power plants. The nation that suffered Bhopal industrial accident should stiffen the penalty clause.

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Postby samuel » 31 Jul 2007 11:21

Hi arun

Thanks very much for your post.

Do you think that 1750 Kg WgPu is likely to be used in FBR till there is sufficient U-Th to seed the AHWR or can the AHWR be seeded with the Pu-Th itself? Also, how different are the reprocessing components in the FBR and AHWR stages. If there is sufficient overlap, is a plan of seeding FBR reprocessing to Pu-U and U-Th from a Th blanket the way to generate startup for an AHWR, and then reuse much of reprocessing technology on the AHWR side, or is that fundamentally different?

Second, when you talk of financing, are you talking about financing reactors on the civilian side with imported fuel and tech -- sort of like a build-operate-transfer model?

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 31 Jul 2007 11:38

samuel wrote:Hi arun

Thanks very much for your post.

Do you think that 1750 Kg WgPu is likely to be used in FBR till there is sufficient U-Th to seed the AHWR or can the AHWR be seeded with the Pu-Th itself? Also, how different are the reprocessing components in the FBR and AHWR stages. If there is sufficient overlap, is a plan of seeding FBR reprocessing to Pu-U and U-Th from a Th blanket the way to generate startup for an AHWR, and then reuse much of reprocessing technology on the AHWR side, or is that fundamentally different?

Your earlier reference answers that.

From waht I understand from open source AHWR will be started with Pu from AHWR. FBR is a key component of the 3 stage Indian garland, but does not have to happen in sequential timeframe. FBR characterization and learning will continue for some time to determine the overall cheapest way forward.

The BARC paper on AHWR & Thorium fuel cycle (see first page of thsi thread) explains how the reactor is initially started with Pu and then how it reaches its equilibrium fuel cycle.

Second, when you talk of financing, are you talking about financing reactors on the civilian side with imported fuel and tech -- sort of like a build-operate-transfer model?
Yes.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 31 Jul 2007 15:52

bala wrote:Folks BC has a good point here. We are at the mercy of the next US President..............................


To a great extent yes.

However, India does have a few cards - like her economy and population. IF used properly, even the prez cannot do too much. Besides some of these assumes a worst case. What if Pakis behave (which is what the US is trying to do in the entire ME - with their new $20 billion package that they are offering today). What IF China behaves? The chances of that happening are better today than ever before.

samuel wrote:Thanks bala for pointing this out.
So reprocessing isn't iron-clad in the "frozen text."
Are we all agreed on that here?

Wow, this deal gets curiouser and curiouser...
So far then:
10. reprocess, maybe...
9. no tech in civil goes outside.
8. three-stage cannot be civil without iaea shackles.
7. no fuel in civil goes outside.
5. We have sovereign right to test, they have sovereign right to screw. Now with some serious money, err electricity to wager. That's just dandy.
4. Our relations are so nice with other countries in the NSG that there will always be fuel whether America likes it or not.
3. We are going to get regulated by NSG, IAEA and America for some very fundamental aspect of sovereignty: electric power.
2. Import American reactors. I tell you they are really good with Oz fuel.
1. And the top reason, folks, American military equipment made easy. What a great way to have the latest greatest, and at dirt cheap financing...F35 included! And there will be more (eyes light up here).


Then there is the possibility that some of these 'state of the art' find their way to the other side of the fence too. Today no one knows what is really happening there.

I feel that the current deal (yet to be made public) is so wide open that it is up to the GovtS of India to do what they please. As long as India is responsible, I do not think that there will be waves.

Besides, India should mount a concerted effort to take on the NPAs +vely.

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 31 Jul 2007 16:49

They should feel incentivized to supply na!

Maybe as part of some sort of a reciprocal agreement.


I assume that is a tongue-e-cheek comment, on the same plane as RAW being behind the Baluchistan Freedom Movement. It just does not happen, by definition, and of course, if it were to happen, u don't just put the spent rods from that in the Hotel, therefore it does not exist.

Other than that, it is exactly what Abdul Xerox & Co. did. Does Rwanda need centrifuges, by any chance? 8)

Re: NPAs. Sorry, the only "+ve" engagement appropriate there is to point out how IMPORTANT each of them is, and how CREDIBLE. As in repeating their testimony to Congress when they were in seats of power, swearing on the Holy Bible that Pakistan had NOOOOO nookulear program, and China had NEVER proliferated nukes or missiles.

Their role in hurting the national interests of their home country should be properly recognized.

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

Postby Rye » 31 Jul 2007 17:44

From all the above posts, it appears that the timeline for syncing up the two cycles is as follows...please correct if this is incorrect/bogus.

Code: Select all


Time              Civilian/IAEA safeguarded                 non-IAEA safeguarded

Today          Foreign nuke plants                      Further R&D to get
                          + fuel                                   FBR + AHWR operational
                       

X years
from today        Lots of  Spent fuel                     AHWR commercialized
                                                           & ready to go under safeguards


Y > X years     Spent fuel reprocessed         unsafeguarded fuel
from today       in civilian AHWR              reprocessed in unsafeguarded   AHWR


CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6151
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Postby CRamS » 31 Jul 2007 17:58

I still don't know which side I am on, I trust and respect BC who mocks this 'deal', then there are equally respectable folks here who say India 'won' the day. Why does it have to be so complicated? It almost got complicated at Trent Bridge too with the 'master blaster & best batsman since Bradman' consumed tamely before India reached 75. :-).

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

Postby Rye » 31 Jul 2007 18:05

CRS, I am not sure India has "won" or "lost" yet...like everything else, India/GoI's own karma from now on will decide whether India wins or loses.

This is a marathon not a sprint.

"Marathon" by Neil Peart.


It's not how fast you can go
The force goes into the flow
If you pick up the beat
You can forget about the heat
More than just survival
More than just a flash
More than just a dotted line
More than just a dash

It's a test of ultimate will
The heartbreak climb uphill
Got to pick up the pace
If you want to stay in the race
More than just blind ambition
More than just simple greed
More than just a finish line
Must feed this burning need
In the long run...

From first to last
The peak is never passed
Something always fires the light that gets in your eyes
One moment's high, and glory rolls on by
Like a streak of lightning
That flashes and fades in the summer sky

Your meters may overload
You can rest at the side of the road
You can miss a stride
But nobody gets a free ride

More than high performance
More than just a spark
More than just the bottom line
Or a lucky shot in the dark
In the long run...


You can do a lot in a lifetime
If you don't burn out too fast
You can make the most of the distance
First you need endurance
First you've got to last...

Last edited by Rye on 31 Jul 2007 18:14, edited 1 time in total.

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 31 Jul 2007 18:10

Well.. I wouldn't "support" it (anyway it does not need my support) as in "this is terrific, rah! rah!"

BUT..
a) it appears that India got, in fact, EVERYTHING that I would have expected to be on the wish list
b) this is still quite reasonable and sensible, and it is IN THE INTERESTS OF THE USA to have agreed to this.

So why not go ga-ga? Because there are always as Sheikh bin Spear said:
Many a slip 'twixt da cup and da lip


and many possible areas of conflict, and many future uncertainties. New POTUS rescinds the deal? Congress says "THPPHHHT?" NSG says "THPPHHHT?" These, if u think about it, are the LEAST scary of the scenarios that one can imagine.

But those uncertainties would be there in any event, given many realities that would not change with ANY deal. Not if Dubya stood in his briefs on the roof of the WHOTUS and yelled:

INDIAstan is an Officially US-Certified Permitted Nuclear Weapon Power and the King Poo-Bah of the UN Security Council VetoWallahs!


It would STILL be true that a future POTUS/COTUS could go a different way. There HAVE been conflicts between P-5 members, u no....

So we just have to say:
On the face of it, we see nothing in this deal that is unfair


What v don't c ain't gonna bother us.

ShibaPJ
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Oct 2005 21:21

Postby ShibaPJ » 31 Jul 2007 18:15

See, how the smartest poodle (or rat) jumped ship.. This is called 'jidhar baris, udhar chatri'.. For uninformed, Oz knows which side of their bread is buttered...

Australia to back India at NSG

In a significant development, Australia on Tuesday promised to support the Indo-US civil nuclear deal in the Nuclear Suppliers Group and indicated its readiness to supply uranium to India.

This was conveyed by Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer to External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee during a meeting in Manila when the recently-concluded Indo-US civil nuclear deal came up for discussion among other issues.

"Australia said it will cooperate in the NSG group with us," Mukherjee told Indian reporters after his meeting with Downer on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum.

The 45-nation NSG is required to modify by consensus its guidelines to allow the international community to have civil nuclear trade with India.

Australia, known to have the one of largest reserves of uranium, said it would extend cooperation by supplying the nuclear fuel as and when India finalises safeguards agreement with International Atomic Energy Agency.

Downer told Mukherjee that the Australian Cabinet will meet soon to take a decision on exporting uranium to India.

Downer separately told Australian journalists that the two leaders discussed the Indo-US civil nuclear deal and he congratulated New Delhi on the agreement.

"I said with this agreement now having been initiated, of course, it has ratification processes to go through, that we will begin to look at this whole question of exporting uranium to India," Downer was quoted as saying by the Australian media.

Earlier, Canberra had reservations on supplying uranium to India as the latter is not a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4278
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Postby abhischekcc » 31 Jul 2007 19:07

If I may use one line to summarise the worries of the people who don't like the deal:

It gives too much discretionary power to the US over the Indian economy.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 31 Jul 2007 19:26

ShibaPJ wrote:See, how the smartest poodle (or rat) jumped ship.. This is called 'jidhar baris, udhar chatri'.. For uninformed, Oz knows which side of their bread is buttered...

Australia to back India at NSG

In a significant development, Australia on Tuesday promised to support the Indo-US civil nuclear deal in the Nuclear Suppliers Group and indicated its readiness to supply uranium to India.

.


Oh, it is sooooo nice to have such a powerful Uncle.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36013
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 31 Jul 2007 19:37

what is the status of meghalaya discoveries that is supposed to be quite large and high quality?

Raju

Postby Raju » 31 Jul 2007 19:38

We are now in the same position as Japan of late 1940s/1950.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 31 Jul 2007 19:40

Raju wrote:We are now in the same position as Japan of late 1940s/1950.


how so? just curious.

Raju

Postby Raju » 31 Jul 2007 19:43

Same level of pampering by unkle. Esp elites.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36013
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 31 Jul 2007 19:55

Japan was under the biggest ever defeat then... what was ours ? is it our freedom that we are losing comparable to Hiroshima & Nagasaki? mmm..wow! nice thoughts there.

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 31 Jul 2007 20:04

Abhishekcc: Thanx for putting it so succinctly:

f I may use one line to summarise the worries of the people who don't like the deal:

It gives too much discretionary power to the US over the Indian economy.


My response to that is:

Absolutely not. Not by a single item that was not ALREADY present. It's just that ppl didn't realize how much power was already there.


Let me just name a few scenarios:

1. Vice President Obama sponsors the "Keep IT in America!" bill and Pres. Clinton signs it.
2. President Obama signs the "Comprehensive Defense Package for Pakistan" - 100 F-35s, 2000 hypersonic missiles, 2 aircraft carriers and 4 nuclear ballistic missile submarines and 6 attack submarines, to defend the Northwest Frontier from the Taliban.
3. The COTUS passes the "US-China Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Defense Bill", resolving that Kashmir, Assam and Sikkim are Integlar Palts of Peopre's Lepubric of China.

4. US joins Europe to sign the Tokyo Protocol, with an embargo or 500% tariffs on all products manufactured in countries that don't meet European standards for CO2 and CH4 emission.

None of these require the "123" or "Hyde" documents to support them. So where's this additional "clout" that has been given to the US?

To return to the Maid and Goat analogy, this is the danger that the maid will clean out your safe, and the goat eats your entire garden. Very plausible. It's your problem if you LET them.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 31 Jul 2007 20:13

Kgoan Garu>> Superb analogy (that too about destructive distillation of unkils capacity :) )

This post should be translated and published in all vernacular dailies to make people understand

1) Where India is highly secretive and exclusive technology

2) how the unkils and aunties are trying to shackle India.


Thanks again for the post.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4278
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Postby abhischekcc » 31 Jul 2007 20:15

N^3

First things first, those aren't my objections. The no-clear deal has confused me so much that I have truned into a fence sitter. :)

To return to the Maid and Goat analogy, this is the danger that the maid will clean out your safe, and the goat eats your entire garden. Very plausible. It's your problem if you LET them.
The point is, the behaviour of the GOI does not inspire such confidence.

Anyway, the scenarios you paint of Obama and Clinton stopping IT shift to INdia is quite impossible, to say the least. All they can do create a few speed bumps along the way.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4278
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Postby abhischekcc » 31 Jul 2007 20:30

Read kgoan's last post now.

Really informative, especially the way Russians and Americans are working together trying to figure out a way to keep India down. As if.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6151
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Postby CRamS » 31 Jul 2007 20:32

abhischekcc wrote: The point is, the behaviour of the GOI does not inspire such confidence.



That is exactly my problem. MMS has not been the most vociferous defender of India's strategic nuke program (this much we can say for a fact. That he is willing to completely give it up and win nobel peace prize along with Mush is just my informed speculation :-)), he praises British rule in India, he looses sleep over the plight of terrorists, and he gives bear hugs to Mush. Not exactly the kind of guy who inspires confidence in his ability to take on India containment hawks of US in this marathon run.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50624
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 31 Jul 2007 21:19

Going back to Maid and Goat analogy one shouldnt put in such highly overt measures that stays the maid and the goat outside. Or else will have a dirty kitchen and a weed infested garden.

Curent 123 agreement is to ensure maid stays in the kitchen and out of bounds of mil program and the goats in the weed-infested/no-productive part of the yard.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 31 Jul 2007 21:37

[quote="Rye"]From all the above posts, it appears that the timeline for syncing up the two cycles is as follows...please correct if this is incorrect/bogus.

Code: Select all


Time              Civilian/IAEA safeguarded                 non-IAEA safeguarded

Today          Foreign nuke plants                      Further R&D to get
                          + fuel                                   FBR + AHWR operational
                       

X years
from today        Lots of  Spent fuel                     AHWR commercialized
                                                           & ready to go under safeguards


Y > X years     Spent fuel reprocessed         unsafeguarded fuel
from today       in civilian AHWR              reprocessed in unsafeguarded   AHWR

Ah learnt some new code today. Thks for that.

Add to above:

Code: Select all

Y > X years      No consequence if India chooses to do more Nuke tests.
from today   

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 31 Jul 2007 21:43

And given India's cost structures, we could end up being the worlds nuclear refinery. With all that that entails.


I do not see this happening - specially if it benefits India. It will break any GNEP efforts.

IF at all, they will allow India to go only as far as they want to. IF India gets too big, based on the reasons BC provides, they will pull the plug on India.

The key will be who drives the bargains with IAEA. I expect AK to deal with all these details and we should get more details as to who will be allowed to reproc in the 'state of the art' facility.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 31 Jul 2007 21:54

Deccan Herald: US warns India on N-test, Iran
[quote]New Delhi, July 30: [color=darkblue]India has for all practical purposes foregone her right to conduct a nuclear test without attracting consequences in return for getting advance consent rights for reprocessing spent fuel, US ambassador to India David C. Mulford said. “The US law is very clear. India knows what that law is. Right of return (of fuel, reactor and technology) is (clearly) preserved (in line) with the Hyde Act,â€

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Postby svinayak » 31 Jul 2007 22:00

[quote="Arun_S"]Deccan Herald: US warns India on N-test, Iran
[quote]New Delhi, July 30: [color=darkblue]India has for all practical purposes foregone her right to conduct a nuclear test without attracting consequences in return for getting advance consent rights for reprocessing spent fuel, US ambassador to India David C. Mulford said. “The US law is very clear. India knows what that law is. Right of return (of fuel, reactor and technology) is (clearly) preserved (in line) with the Hyde Act,â€

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 31 Jul 2007 22:06

Rogue nations do not follow law/s. The US has read that Law and is aware of it.

The silence from India is deafening. Again. I guess they feel that by keeping silent that the problem will vanish.

MMS will live by his words in the deal and die by the Hyde Act.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest