India Nuclear News & Discussion - 10 Aug 2007

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

Post by samuel »

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

Manne wrote:
It will never be applied for NWS. Let's not even have that as our goal. Our energies are far better spent elsewhere.
Not as a goal, but to keep them off balance, without wasting any energy. Can be done by oppositions.
DAE will stay involved at least for the next decade. I have already expressed a wish that whatever reactors get built absorb current local stuff to the max. We should not let local players idle. There will be a big cost to pay later and all the efforts so far will go waste. So yes, I too would like the same.
Local players idling vs. local players as agents of outsiders driving are two diff things.

OK. Now that you have surfaced in this yuga, latest reports state that India is interested in 4 types of reactors (from four vendors), why only these reactors, what is in these reactors that has made India so interested in them?
Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by Calvin »

Israel does not have to worry about country like China. Totalitarian and revisionist states need higher level of information since they are ready to sacrifice their own people in case of war.
They also need constant reminder about your arsenal so that they are always aware.
Which of Israel's dozen or so enemies, including those that once and twice removed do not fit the "totalitarian and revisionist" state criteria, or are not willing to "sacrifice their own people in case of war"?

The Israelis need their deterrent to be as credible, if not more so than ours. They are able to do this without "testing" at the drop of a hat (or ever testing at all).

Think about how they are accomplishing this. The answer will defuse most if not all criticism of the 123 agreement.
enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Post by enqyoobOLD »

I thought he was referring to FMCT


Absolutely not. The FMCT, MTCR, NPT and CTBT are all scams, and India is well rid of them.

I think India should keep on building weapon stockpile to the extent needed, and keep refining weapons, BUT without supercritical testing. That is, any component tests, or other ways of generating data for validating simulations and designs, is fine. But no seismic events and no release of radioactivity. In short, nothing to upset the progress of all the things that can be done without becoming international outcasts again.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Post by ldev »

enqyoob wrote: I think India should keep on building weapon stockpile to the extent needed, and keep refining weapons, BUT without supercritical testing.

..... In short, nothing to upset the progress of all the things that can be done without becoming international outcasts again.
Calvin wrote:]The Israelis need their deterrent to be as credible, if not more so than ours. They are able to do this without "testing" at the drop of a hat (or ever testing at all).

Think about how they are accomplishing this. The answer will defuse most if not all criticism of the 123 agreement
I think the above two statements together just about sum it up. Unfortunately the combined wisdom in these two statements seems to be beyond the comprehension of the Energizer Bunnies. After the entire discourse on the Ramayana it always comes back to, "But what about testing?".

Enqyoob's statement about becoming international outcasts is particularly relevant. When India tested in 1974, there were two distinct camps in the world, the West and Communist block. There was a possibility that the Communist block could consolidate a separate economic system which could be an alternative, however illogical it seemed to a lot of people who believed in the free market system. But a system, however flawed, did exist. And in that alternative India had an option of ensuring that it was not sent into exile. Today that option does not exist, even if some isolationists would want to go that route. Even "communist" China is part of the global system led by the West. When India tested in 1998, the global system had already largely consolidated and hence the costs to India were far higher than in 1974.

The EBs should extrapolate that to 2007 and then consider the costs of becoming an outcast when by all accounts, especially the kind of comments made by Dr. RC, there is no real pressing need for India to test. I think it is the unability of people such as BK to understand the contemporary world in its totality is what motivates them to push for the single point testing agenda.

Gerard has posted earlier about Japan's breakout capability. That capability in terms of reprocessed plutonium plus Japan's engineering and fabrication skills and overall industrial depth ensures that Japan has bought an insurance policy that in the event that it feels that the US cannot guarantee its security that it will breakout. The US guarantees'Japan's security because it is an ally, but more importantly because any Japanese breakout will collapse the global economic, political and non proliferation architecture completely. I mean does the US go about sanctioning Japan in the event that Japan breaks out? And therefore the US will move mountains to ensure that Japan never needs to breakout. There is a lesson in that for the EBs in terms of how India should procced in the future.
samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Post by samuel »

So....

- What do IAEA protocols look like and who's working the strings on the other side?

- how do we overcome China at the NSG? Here's a list of NSG countries; who is in, who's out today?
ARGENTINA, AUSTRALIA, AUSTRIA, BELARUS, BELGIUM, BRAZIL, BULGARIA, CANADA, CHINA, CROATIA, CYPRUS, CZECH REPUBLIC, DENMARK, ESTONIA, FINLAND, FRANCE, GERMANY, GREECE, HUNGARY, IRELAND, ITALY, JAPAN, KAZAKHSTAN, REPUBLIC OF KOREA, LATVIA, LITHUANIA, LUXEMBOURG, MALTA, NETHERLANDS, NEW ZEALAND, NORWAY, POLAND, PORTUGAL, ROMANIA, RUSSIAN FEDERATION, SLOVAKIA, SLOVENIA, SOUTH AFRICA, SPAIN, SWEDEN, SWITZERLAND, TURKEY, UKRAINE, UNITED KINGDOM, and UNITED STATES
From: NSG members...
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

Calvin wrote:
Israel does not have to worry about country like China. Totalitarian and revisionist states need higher level of information since they are ready to sacrifice their own people in case of war.
They also need constant reminder about your arsenal so that they are always aware.
Which of Israel's dozen or so enemies, including those that once and twice removed do not fit the "totalitarian and revisionist" state criteria, or are not willing to "sacrifice their own people in case of war"?

The Israelis need their deterrent to be as credible, if not more so than ours. They are able to do this without "testing" at the drop of a hat (or ever testing at all).

Think about how they are accomplishing this. The answer will defuse most if not all criticism of the 123 agreement.
I hope you are not comparing the PLA and CPC and a country with more than 1B population with incompetent armies of the ME tyrant regimes. India does not have a god father like what Israel has. For Israel Sampson option is a last resort.

The comparison must be more reality based.
These comparison are similar to the earlier argument that India will be bankrupt with weapons program. It is bordering on psy ops.

India is unique and needs an unique posture.
Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Post by Sanjay M »

samuel wrote:And now this:



N-deal not acceptable to majority: Left
Majority? Does that mean Karat may side with -- gasp --the communal forces?
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

Israel and Japan do have lessons for India, but if in 2007+ India is scared of being outcast, it is Indian fault. IMHO, Indian behaviour should neither cause fear within or outside India.

There are reasons for testing - current Russian tests of their missiles systems are an example. As long as they are legit, why bother?

123 has broken some ground. Just that there was an opportunity to do far better and never got done.
Manne
BRFite
Posts: 172
Joined: 26 Jul 2002 11:31
Location: Mumbai

Post by Manne »

NRao wrote: Local players idling vs. local players as agents of outsiders driving are two diff things.
It is expected to be more like local players being freelancers guided by DAE in a loose manner. So, they can be leveraged for all kinds of stuff. Sort of like design houses. Not very clear what you mean by agents but it is possible that their business with outsiders will be more than that with DAE. There is one more thing - when we talk of business don't just think of reactors, think of the entire ecosystem.
OK. Now that you have surfaced in this yuga, latest reports state that India is interested in 4 types of reactors (from four vendors), why only these reactors, what is in these reactors that has made India so interested in them?
NR, I wish I could respond properly to the first part.
Any number of reactors that India chooses will be based on few easy to understand parameters:
1. Proven designs or mods of proven/internationally reviewed designs
2. Subsystems
3. Technocommercial arrangements
4. Fit into the fuel map
5. Foreign relations

not necessarily in that order. If you have solved profit maximising product mix problems with linear programming, that can be considered to be a good analogy of this strategy. There may be other factors but these are the ones off the top of the head.

It will be very interesting if India ends up dealing with Japan or Japanese companies in this context. That would truly be a taste of things to come. That day I will cheer with chilled beer.
samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Post by samuel »

Sanjay M wrote:
samuel wrote:And now this:



N-deal not acceptable to majority: Left
Majority? Does that mean Karat may side with -- gasp --the communal forces?
The communists manage, in general and quite nicely, to get caught between the rock and the hard place. The struggle must continue for them whether the situation demands it or not. From my view, as long as they keep up with the harakiri I am guessing is about to happen on this issue, and hopefully in the future, the nuisance should be good entertainment. The BJP won't let them share the "swatantra, swadeshi swabhiman" baton and the cong won't let them share the "PA" part of the UPA. Maybe these commies are really naive and honest to their book. Unbelievable.

On the same page of IE (may have changed), is the BJP swipe:
Prove sincerity...
kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Post by kshirin »

I'm glad I turned to BR for intelligent discussion on the deal. I finally got time to read it a couple of days ago on a flight and was struck by the favourable provisions we wrested from the US, some of them made me gasp. We are IN, and I agree with Enqyoob's excellent contributions that this is an opportunity we shouldnt miss.
sivab
BRFite
Posts: 1075
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Post by sivab »

India wary of U.S. goalpost shift on NSG clearance
[quote]
Siddharth Varadarajan

New Delhi: India will emphasise to the United States that under the terms of the July 2005 joint statement, responsibility for getting the Nuclear Suppliers Group to amend its guidelines to allow nuclear commerce with India rests with Washington and not New Delhi.

Senior officials say this reminder is considered necessary because the U.S. has now started saying it is up to India to convince the 45-nation cartel to change its guidelines.

Same treatment

For example, U.S. Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns told the Council of Foreign Relations on August 2 that “the Indians will need to convince the Nuclear Suppliers Group … that it should give the same kind of international treatment in terms of civil nuclear trade to India that the United States would have just given bilaterally.â€
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Post by ShauryaT »

NRao wrote:123 has broken some ground. Just that there was an opportunity to do far better and never got done.
Very true, and we should have waited a little while, heavens would not have fallen. Our domestic program could be scaled to about 10,000MW, before a deal was necessary. We should have put some more thrust on our 3 stage. We could have stuck to LWR and campaign safeguards maybe even the annual exemptions. We should have realized that there was a political price to pay for this deal. That price is reflected in Hyde and the separation agreement. We should have worked up the ladder a few notches in the perceived vision of American Interests, before asking for this deal.
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Post by Paul »

But on the positive side, the economy will start growing at 10%-11%. Pakistan's Izzat and Ghairat has suffered a massive blow and PRC is coming under increasing pressure to resolve the border dispute with India.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

Paul wrote:But on the positive side, the economy will start growing at 10%-11%. Pakistan's Izzat and Ghairat has suffered a massive blow and PRC is coming under increasing pressure to resolve the border dispute with India.
India is in such a stage that no matter what all this would occur
samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Post by samuel »

Paul wrote:But on the positive side, the economy will start growing at 10%-11%. Pakistan's Izzat and Ghairat has suffered a massive blow and PRC is coming under increasing pressure to resolve the border dispute with India.
Can you please make the causal connections to the conclusions you draw Paul?

Are we not at a place where these advantages are an organic off-shoot of our developmental pathway (in defense, commerce, science & tech).

How would developing a stronger indian nuclear capacity have interfered with these benefits?

Its my personal view, I know, but Chat-mangni-pat-byah is not a broadly successful recipe for love marraiges...
kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Post by kshirin »

I just saw some scare mongering on how the deal could lose Congress the minority vote, so the Left and the minority are acting together after all.
samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Post by samuel »

kshirin wrote:I just saw some scare mongering on how the deal could lose Congress the minority vote, so the Left and the minority are acting together after all.
Where?
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Post by Paul »

Samuel, Acharya: I have always believed that come what may....it is better to be a South Korea than Iran. SoKo stayed under the radar screen all these years, built up the Chaebols and beome an economic superpower while aligning it's foreign policy to that of the west. Only now are there signs of the Sokos having ideas of their own vis-a-vis PRC and NoKo. Iran, from the days of the mongols has been committing diplomatic gaffes ( killing Mongol envoys in Otrar, Kidnapping US hostages in 1979) and has paid a very heavy price.

However I am not asking for India to become a US camp follower and allow US bases on Indian soil, cut relations with Iran etc. That is not in our interests. It may not be a top priority for us NRIs,but MMS also to make sure that employment is being generated for the millions of youth joining the worforce every year otherwise they will all beome naxalites and footsoldiers of the left.


Acharya wrote: India is in such a stage that no matter what all this would occur
Acharya, I disagree. Haven't you mentioned numerous times on this forum that for trade to to expand India must first ensure complete understanding is reached with the western countries. That is what MMS is doing here. For India to grow economically, we have to be perceived as responsible stakeholders in the global world order. Otherwise the west, the islamic world and PRC will combine to make a yugoslavia out of us. If Indian economy were to were to open without these prerequisites (again no choices here) , a repitition of the SEAsian crisis may be forced on India.
Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by Calvin »

India does not have a god father like what Israel has. For Israel Sampson option is a last resort. The comparison must be more reality based.
Is it your contention that Israel's deterrence is based on its "godfather"?
Sparsh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 30 Jan 2007 12:57

Post by Sparsh »

Calvin,

In addition to what you said there is one more thing: Building bigger bombs beyond a certain point is not only useless but actually counterproductive.

You are better off taking the extra fission and fusion fuel you need for the bigger bomb and using it to make more of the smaller ones.

A larger number of 200-300kt bombs are better than a smaller number of >1000kt bombs.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

Paul wrote:
Acharya wrote: India is in such a stage that no matter what all this would occur
Acharya, I disagree. Haven't you mentioned numerous times on this forum that for trade to to expand India must first ensure complete understanding is reached with the western countries. That is what MMS is doing here. For India to grow economically, we have to be perceived as responsible stakeholders in the global world order. Otherwise the west, the islamic world and PRC will combine to make a yugoslavia out of us. If Indian economy were to were to open without these prerequisites (again no choices here) , a repitition of the SEAsian crisis may be forced on India.
What I am still saying is that even after this deal political relationship of India with other big economies is small. Read Krepons article about India in TWQ - Is India Great?
India has reached a certain stage. It will take more than this deal to go to next stage
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Post by ShauryaT »

Paul wrote: Haven't you mentioned numerous times on this forum that for trade to to expand India must first ensure complete understanding is reached with the western countries. That is what MMS is doing here. For India to grow economically, we have to be perceived as responsible stakeholders in the global world order. Otherwise the west, the islamic world and PRC will combine to make a yugoslavia out of us. If Indian economy were to were to open without these prerequisites (again no choices here) , a repitition of the SEAsian crisis may be forced on India.
Is that what MMS is doing here - shitting in his pants, that if he does not behave, Unkil will come with his knives to slice us up. Some stern PM, we have this time. He even has the guts to give ultimatums to the unbeatable lions of rhetoric - the left.

Come on, yaar, grow some goties. No one can stop an idea, whose time has come. I.e: India's rise is unstoppable. This is not me saying this but your lion, MMS. In fairness to MMS - His vision behind this deal as far as energy is concerned is about the maximum number of options available to the Indian economy. Absolutely, nothing wrong, with that vision - the only question is, the price being paid - is it fair?
sraj
BRFite
Posts: 260
Joined: 12 Feb 2006 07:04

Post by sraj »

Manne wrote:I cannot quote numbers but no way will it be in that range. There are very few things where our cost of construction will be anywhere comparable to the west. In one of the articles that was published around the time TAPS-4 went critical, NPC has quoted cost of the project. Compare that with cost of reactor in the west. That should give you an idea.
Thanks. Total cost of TAPS-3 & 4 (generating 1080 mwe of electricity) is reported to be Rs 6100 crore (less than original cost estimate of Rs 6525 crore). At US$1=Rs 40, this works out to about $1.4 per watt as capital cost.

Recent reports suggest NPCIL is looking for 8x1000MW plants estimated to cost US$14 billion (see below), which works out to $1.75 per watt (am I missing something here?):
Areva, GE, Rosatom Vie for $14 Billion India Nuclear Contracts

Applying the same ratio (1.75 international vs 1.4 indigenous) to the $20 billion Japanese reprocessing facility suggests that our capital costs for the new, dedicated reprocessing facility required under 123 would be $16 billion.

Now, presumably, the alternative to a dedicated reprocessing facility would have been using our existing facility (assuming it has adequate excess capacity) under campaign safeguards for imported fuel.

So, additional capital cost of $16 billion for reprocessing (spread over 20 GW? 40 GW? of additional imported reactors whose spent fuel would be reprocessed in this new facility) could add substantially to overall capital costs and therefore power generation costs from imported reactors and imported fuel.

Flaws in the above line of reasoning? I welcome any corrections.
sraj
BRFite
Posts: 260
Joined: 12 Feb 2006 07:04

Post by sraj »

[quote="sivab"]India wary of U.S. goalpost shift on NSG clearance
[quote]
..................
New Delhi is also perturbed by another Burns formulation that suggests the U.S. might try to limit the scope of any NSG rule change to ensure that the terms of international nuclear commerce available to India are not more generous than what the U.S. itself is offering.
........................................

Though Mr. Burns and his team provided explicit assurances last month that the U.S. would not support the incorporation of a “right of returnâ€
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

The First Blink

By Seema Mustafa

Deccan Chronicle, Aug. 11, 2007

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has said that the 123 Agreement will not be re-negotiated. And this is expected to convince the people of India that he is a strong Prime Minister, a man of convictions, a person who does not let down those he has given a commitment to, and somewhere in the midst of all this, he is also a patriot and a nationalist.

This is what the spin masters in his office and the Congress party wanted the message to be. But how have the people of India read it? Going by the majority of their representatives in Parliament, the Prime Minister has sold India's strategic soul to the Americans, he gave the political instructions to his officials to bend over backwards and ensure that the deal was done (Nicholas Burns has said that the Indian team came to Washington determined to complete the deal), and then use double talk, a deviously drafted text, and falsehoods to convince the Indian parliamentarians and media that theirs was a job well done. And that India's interests had been fully protected. The media looking at the government for approval was convinced, with even seemingly independent newspapers falling like skittles, but fortunately, the politicians did not let the country down. The NDA, UNPA and the Left that comprise the majority in Parliament have come out in a resoundingly strong rebuttal of the deal, a complete rejection, and a warning to the government not to proceed with the anti-national pact.

And what was the Prime Minister's response? A telephone call to the Left, after which the men in his office informed the media that he had read out the bottom line, and there was no question of going back on the deal. Really? What an audacious response! The entire Parliament, except for the few in the UPA and the allies, mind you, are completely silent on this, has come out to reject the deal, and the Prime Minister of democratic India insists that he will exercise his right as the executive and will go ahead with the deal. Who is he? A leader nominated to the post by a political party that could not get a majority in Parliament, and could cobble together a government only with the support of a number of regional parties. Even this was not enough and the Left had to extend support to the government from the outside. And this person, unelected, heading a minority government has really the gall to tell India that he will not re-negotiate the nuclear deal with the Americans even though the majority in Parliament has completely rejected what he has to offer. Amazing, and what an example of the Executive acquiring powers not foreseen by the writers of the Indian Constitution who clearly based the country's Bible on the goodness of "man."

Well, now that "man" has proved that he cannot be trusted with national security, it is time for Parliament to amend the Constitution so that all international treaties are brought to it for ratification. This must be done on an urgent basis, in this session itself so that Parliament acquires the same significance for Prime Minister Singh as the US Congress has for President George W. Bush.

What is as, if not more, disturbing, are the possible answers to the question: Prime Minister ko yeh deal itni pasand kyon hai? Why does Dr Manmohan Singh determine to push ahead with an agreement that is not acceptable to his own supporting partners in government, and to Parliament? It is clear from the devious manner in which the deal has been negotiated that Dr Singh knows it is unpopular, that he has a lot to hide, and that he is directing our government to take orders from Washington on not just what does or does not determine non proliferation, but also foreign policy, defence relations, and of course trade and business for the huge US MNCs looking for big markets in a saturated world.

India is formulating a foreign policy "congruent" with that of the US as stipulated by the overarching Hyde Act. The energy deal with Iran is now on the back burner, getting cooler by the day, as the Bush administration and the US Congressmen have made it clear that not even NSA M.K. Narayanan's "God" can save the deal if New Delhi pursues the gas pipeline, or supports Iran at any level. Nicholas Burns has been very clear — and the Americans are far more honest and direct, speaking with the confidence of a secure nation — that he expects the government to, one, support the US policy on Iran, and two, demonstrate this again with direct support when a fresh sanctions resolution comes up for a vote. He has said that the Bush administration has been urging the Indians not to enter into any gas and energy agreements with Iran, but to take the same position as the US against Iran's nuclear programme.

On Pakistan, NSA Narayanan has already proved his mettle by speaking in glowing terms of President Pervez Musharraf's graceful abilities to cope with the internal crises that almost had the general imposing emergency!

The Prime Minister has decided not to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation meet, leaving it to minister Pranab Mukherjee to complete the formalities. New Delhi has been brought into a Quadrilateral brought together by the US with Australia and Japan. China issued a demarche to the four participating nations that virtually ignored the protest. The government here has put its national security at risk as a result, with the giant neighbour in a position to ensure that the present pinpricks — like claiming Tawang — actually begin to hurt. The huge naval exercises — the largest since the end of the Cold War — by the Quadrilateral and Singapore in the Bay of Bengal will definitely hit the India-China relationship further.

Nicholas Burns has made it clear that one of the strategic goals of the deal was also increased military cooperation with India — joint exercises, defence deals, etc etc — that is now being translated into action. The naval exercises — intercept, board, search, seize — are a precursor to India joining the Proliferation Security Initiative, another stipulation of the Hyde Act. In other words, gradually New Delhi under this government is starting to accept Washington's definition of friends and foes, and this is being reflected in the number of high level visits, and the agreements reached and signed with other countries. Subtle but noticeable.

The majority view in this country favours trashing the deal with the US. That is the hard truth reflected in the position taken by the majority of parliamentarians who are concerned about the nation's security, but are also responding to the pressures of the Indian constituency.
Those who sit in the seats of power forget that they are accountable to the people, that they cannot act outside Parliament, and that while the executive legally has the powers to enter into international agreements without ratification by the legislature, the executive certainly cannot act with the abandon of an unaccountable power centre against the expressed wish of Parliament.

The NDA has asked for a Joint Parliament Committee to look into the agreement. It has also asked for a vote in Parliament. The UNPA has also rejected the deal, and asked for a vote in Parliament. The Left has still to determine its strategy in Parliament, but both the CPI(M) and the CPI have made it clear that the Prime Minister does not have the last word in a democracy, that the government cannot go ahead with the agreement, and that the Congress party will have to pay a very heavy political price if it does. The Prime Minister has locked eyes with the rest of the country. Let us see who blinks first.


http://deccan.com/Columnists/Columnists.asp?#The First Blink
Ananth
BRFite
Posts: 346
Joined: 16 Mar 2002 12:31

Post by Ananth »

Ok time for some divergence from whining and chest beating. I was trawling around for updates at BHAVINI, India's FBR and found the following from project updates from June: http://www.bhavini.nic.in/attachments/P ... 006_07.pdf

Some quotes from Sec 12 of the report:
Part #29: Sodium to Sodium & Sodium to Air heat exchanger
Sodium service valves
Large dia pipes and pipe fittings for sodium systems.
From the plant parts listed in section 12, informed people can get a rough picture of what is going into FBR.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25085
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Post by SSridhar »

BARC and a US facility sign pact for irradiation
Even before the Indo-US nuclear deal gets off the ground, collaborations in atomic energy applications between the two countries are gathering pace.

The Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) has signed a pact with the Texas-based National Centre for Electron Beam Food Research of the US for harnessing electron and X-ray irradiation technologies to promote food preservation and phytosanitary applications, Government officials said.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25085
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Post by SSridhar »

Ananth, everyone knows that liquid sodium is the coolant in the PFBR. Is there anything beyond that I am missing ?
enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Post by enqyoobOLD »

Why did someone think up something as wild as liquid sodium to cool these reactors? The stuff is dangerous, isn't it? Any water leak and....

But I hear that liquid sodium has excellent heat transfer properties, and that FBRs presumably operate at much higher coolant temperatures than water-cooled reactors do. In fact the liquid sodium temperature is so high that pretty efficient heat engines can be run using the large temperature difference.

There is also something to do with convenient hydrogen production if you use high-temperature reactors with sodium cooling, but I have never understood what it is. They say that the new generation of power reactors are going to co-produce hydrogen in large quantities, and ppl have plans to transport the hydrogen in liquid form through a tube, whose wall is the conductor to transmit the current from the power station. The hydrogen keeps it cold so that the resistance is kept down to superconductor levels.

This is the ultra-modern way of the 21st century hydrogen economy, apparently. Some Japanese guys thought it up; and a couple of US professor types plagiarized it completely and published it in Scientific American last year or so.
Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Post by Katare »

What else can anyone expect BJP and Left to do? Welcome the deal and make MMS and congress a hero and loose next election? Aint gonna happen no matter whatever the deal is!

They have no other option but to oppose it, the bottom line is if they think its compromising national security call his bluff and you'll face the consequences, not him.

For MMS, this is an encore he has seen even more scathing attacks and ridicules from left, allies and BJP's swadeshi brigade in 1991. He came out victorious then and I have little doubt that 10 years later all would remember him as one of the best PM India ever had.

The man has incorruptible integrity and an impeccable record of life long public service. His brother still takes an auto from railway station to come to PM house and PM himself picks-up and takes his bag inside. National pride and self-dependence are important and rare virtues in India but the reality and benefits of hard macroeconomics and international cooperation cannot be overlooked for false sense of pride coming from reinventing the wheel.

Especially when China will be commissioning 1 to 3 1000MW nuclear power reactors each year with the help of west, for next several decades. We cannot afford to sit outside on our ivory tower as untouchables. We should plan to enter the era where we'll be able to threaten rogue countries with sanctions if our national interests are threatened.
ShyamSP
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2564
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31

Post by ShyamSP »

Katare wrote:What else can anyone expect BJP and Left to do? Welcome the deal and make MMS and congress a hero and loose next election? Aint gonna happen no matter whatever the deal is!
This deal needs to be opposed until we have clarity from IAEA and NSG as Uncle can do mischievous acts till all the deals clear out. It is also better if MMS snubs BJP and does not bring voting for this deal at this time so parliament has wiggle room to take final decision on it at a later stage.
Lkawamoto
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 49
Joined: 26 Oct 2006 09:56
Location: zz_ota-ku

Post by Lkawamoto »

if the 123 agreement eventually helps india's energy needs in next 10 years, its a good agreement. concerns over retraints on testing of nukes should not be the highest in terms of priority. if nuclear co-operation is continued, india could also insist on test data and simulation parameters from hundreds of US N-tests (which, i am sure, israeli's got). if such data makes actual testing less necessary, then its a win-win situation for everyone. afterall, actual tests are not cheap, are provocative, and might carry international panelties with added costs.

then why not let india focus on nuclear energy for its people first and urge the "we should test" lobby see the bigger picture more carefully and then speak.
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Post by CRamS »

Acharya wrote:
Read Krepons article about India in TWQ - Is India Great?
What does TWQ stand for and do you have a link to Krapon's Krap?
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Post by ShauryaT »

Katare wrote:What else can anyone expect BJP and Left to do? Welcome the deal and make MMS and congress a hero and loose next election? Aint gonna happen no matter whatever the deal is!
I agree the opposition in Indian will oppose, no matter, what. But, there has been a consistent line of questioning by the opposition. Instead of calling it whining, EB, etc, try to understand that and then make up your views. Folks, are missing the central point. The costs of this deal are political. A political decision needs to be made by, someone, who has political authority. Not by an appointed PM, unelected, in a minority government. Let there be a vote - without party whips, and see the results. Dal ka Dal aur Pani ka Pani, ho jayega na bhaiya!
For MMS, this is an encore he has seen even more scathing attacks and ridicules from left, allies and BJP's swadeshi brigade in 1991. He came out victorious then and I have little doubt that 10 years later
Oh please...Reforming under the gun, is no visionary act. Similarly, achieving the "minimum" conditions set by the scientists, is no great feat. Surrendering, everything else to the diktats of US NPT goals is a .... ...
The man has incorruptible integrity and an impeccable record of life long public service.
Sorry, this is just not good enough for India. Our nation needs a man, who can do something about institutional corruption, an area, where MMS can take, little credit for. Indeed, if anything, he surrenders to these areas at the press of, remote control buttons.
National pride and self-dependence are important and rare virtues in India but the reality and benefits of hard macroeconomics and international cooperation cannot be overlooked for false sense of pride coming from reinventing the wheel.
No point in reinventing the wheel. Our political flexiblity and economic well being, both, could be better preserved, by a truly visionary, lean and mean statesman, given the current realities of India and its most likely future trajectory.
We cannot afford to sit outside on our ivory tower as untouchables. We should plan to enter the era where we'll be able to threaten rogue countries with sanctions if our national interests are threatened.
Hmmm, there is one, sitting right next door and it has received to my knowledge about $10 billion of arms and armaments in the past 6 years, from guess, who? Let us start with doing someting about that first, shall we?
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

CRamS wrote:
Acharya wrote:
Read Krepons article about India in TWQ - Is India Great?
What does TWQ stand for and do you have a link to Krapon's Krap?
http://www.twq.com/04winter/docs/04winter_perkovich.pdf
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

One has to bash MMS' bad timing to bash left.. (Aug 15th! national integration & MK's sacrificial fire notes) can subdue him below zero.

I am really wondering why this nice fella suddenly going berserk at the meager left. Absolute signs of gray cells.

Anyways.. hope he sees mileage in getting things done the right way that is acceptable to right thinking people.
Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Post by Arun_S »

Calvin wrote:
The perception of a fully tested armament will go a long way that even deploying those weapons.
Actually, this is not the case at all. If it was, Israel would have no deterrence. For deterrence to work, it is necessary for the enemy to know that (a) you have *a* weapon that will get through whatever defenses they have; ;and (b) that you have the will to use it.
Sorry but I find it ridiculous to use Israel's example as counter argument. The challengers and threat perception of Israel and its deterrence need is entirely an different dimension compared to India. It is an apple and pineapple. Isreal does not have any nuclear enemy, no conventially larger more powerful enemy, no nuke armed communist/dictatorship that discounts loss of few hundred thousands citizens and of course is client state and protectorate of bada Bhai. Of course the offensive nuke capability is that of Israel it is not on the receiving end of huge nuclear arsenal armed enemy capable of first strike.

Compared to Indian threat perception and nuke policy ... ... ... ... of earth and mars.

The issue of Indian weapon testing is not for the satisfaction/verification of scientific community it is for Indian Military. The root cause is internal process and integrating Military into nuclear knowhow for certification/verification. Except B Karnad no Indian strategist is demanding full proof yield test.

GOI is shit scared of educating/involving Military into Nuclear weapons. Being in the trade and trying to keep chastity. Oxymoron. The test issue is a problem created by GOI and solving it does not require testing IMHO.
Ananth
BRFite
Posts: 346
Joined: 16 Mar 2002 12:31

Post by Ananth »

SSridhar wrote:Ananth, everyone knows that liquid sodium is the coolant in the PFBR. Is there anything beyond that I am missing ?
Sridhar: last year there was an interview with Dr. Baldev raj and other top honchoes at Kalpakkam and it was alluded to that sodium coolant is still some distance away. Therefore I was somewhat surprised when I saw those parts to handle sodium coolant. Really adds some credence to what RC said in his interview.
Locked