Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Vivek Sreenivasan
BRFite
Posts: 133
Joined: 18 Jul 2008 09:20
Location: Townsville, Australia

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Vivek Sreenivasan » 22 Jul 2008 10:00

Pradeepe, i believe that many people are cringing because it implies that there are no moral or ethical standards in parliament (among the majority). And these are the guys that are supposed to set an example for the rest of us to follow!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby ramana » 22 Jul 2008 10:02

Reading all the nuances of the comments from the NDA folks they are very afraid of Mayawati coming to power. I think most likely quite a few of the BJP will abstain and the UPA wins its confidence vote.

lets see tomorrow.

pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby pradeepe » 22 Jul 2008 10:12

Vivek Sreenivasan wrote:Pradeepe, i believe that many people are cringing because it implies that there are no moral or ethical standards in parliament (among the majority). And these are the guys that are supposed to set an example for the rest of us to follow!


Vivek ji, all I can say is that I am sorry at the "loss of innocence" 8)

Btw, I am curious, have you ever seen anyone's mai-baap ask that their pyare bacche emulate our even pyare politicians - "set an example" as you say. Just wondering onlee :).

archan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6821
Joined: 03 Aug 2007 21:30
Contact:

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby archan » 22 Jul 2008 10:35

ramana wrote:Mayawati coming to power

How could that happen? I mean which permutation-combination can our esteemed leaders come up with in order to make that happen?
I am waiting to see when she will change her stance of "Deal with the US is anti-Muslim" just like she changed from Brahmin-basher to Brahmin-friend. :D
Ah, I hope IMs don't get taken for a ride yet again by yet another politician.

shyam
BRFite
Posts: 1451
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby shyam » 22 Jul 2008 12:05

Let me put some bribe maths here.

Worth of nuke deal = $100 Billion

From bofors scandal we know that,
Accepted rate of commission = 6%

i.e. Money available for bribe and commission for nuke deal = $6 Billion
= Rs 24000 crore ($1 = Rs. 40)

This kind of money will do wonders in Indian politics.

kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 384
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby kshirin » 22 Jul 2008 12:05

archan wrote:
kshirin wrote:I found NSN but couldnt find FATA. What is FATA please?

Lahaul Bila Quvvat,
What is the world coming to? (sorry could not resist this one :mrgreen: )
Here, mr. trainee


Very funny, never mind, I thought it was an original BFR acronym denoting something else.

Avinash R
BRFite
Posts: 1973
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 19:59

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Avinash R » 22 Jul 2008 12:42

Chidambaram taunts Communists, cites China example
New Delhi, July 22

Swiping at the Left parties whose withdrawal of support to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government has prompted a trust vote in parliament, Finance Minister P. Chidambaram Tuesday cited China's ambitious nuclear power plans to push the India-US nuclear deal, saying "there are some people in India who do not want us to catch up with China'.

"There are some people in India who do not want us to catch up with China. There are some people in this country who do not want us to get ahead of China," Chidambaram said in the Lok Sabha on the second day of the trust vote debate.

Making a strong pitch for India to step up its nuclear power production, Chiadambaram pointed out that China had planned to increase its nuclear power production six-fold to 50,000 MW by 2020.

China, which now relies on nuclear power for only two per cent of its energy needs, has ambitious plans to scale up its nuclear power production capacity to 160,000 MW by 2030, he added.

Saying that India should compare itself to "large and complex countries" like China, the finance minister touted India's ambitions to become an economic superpower to hardsell the contentious nuclear deal, which is being opposed by the Left parties who charge it will make India a pawn of Washington.

"I don't want to envy China. I want to emulate China. I want India to become an economic superpower. We must aspire to greater heights," Chidambaram said, while stressing that the purpose of the deal was to end India's nuclear isolation.

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

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Arun_S » 22 Jul 2008 12:55

Arun_S wrote:
Suraj wrote:
Arun_S wrote:Capital cost is the first major issue.

I do not dispute that India can bear lifetime cost; although I challenge to say why settle for high lifetime cost when there is option for lower cost!

Don't your lifetime cost list the combined figure of capital cost and continuous operational costs, rather than just the latter ? What does the $100 billion component for the LWRs constitute, for example ?

Two separate things:
    1) When I said ">>although I challenge to say why settle for high lifetime cost when there is option for lower cost!" I am mentioning only the cost of running and maintain the facilities to operate the reactor I.e. reactor + spent fuel yard for cooling, reprocessing plant and fuel rod fabrication. I am not including the cost of acquiring these infrastructure in the first place that per std project planning are catagorized as Capital Cost.

    2) The $100 billion component is just the capital cost of acquiring the LWR reactor. It is based on internationally accepted (and reported by AK in his PPT) $2000/KWe capital cost per KW electricity generation times the 50GWe that AK's graphs it on page 13 of his PPT presentation for teh year 2020.
    50GWe X $2000/KWe = $100 Billion

Let me also show the basis and breakup of other numbers:

3). 100 year reactor operating life is the norm for new reactors including AHWR (one can easily find reference in DAE/BARC website).

4). To operate 50GWe over the assumed 100 year life time will need from first order approximation ~1,513,000 tonnes natural Uranium. of that :
    i) 1MWe-Year generation in LWR or HWR requires completely fissioning 1.21Kg of fissile material but since Natural U has only 0.7% of fissile U235, that corresponds to needing to buy 173kg of Nat-U (for simplicity let us keep out second order effect like discharge enrichment, that will make the number even worse).
    ii) Now LWR need enriched fuel. So assuming from the 0.7% U235 available in in Nat-U, enrichment process leave a depleted Uranium tail with U235 enrichment of 0.3%, the amount of Nat U required for running 1MWe of LWR is thus = 173 Kg/((0.7-0.3)/0.7) =>303 kg Nat-U to run a year LWR at 1MWe.
    iii) So for 50GWe that AK envisages involves buying and enriching 50,000MWe*303kg = 15,150 tonnes of Nat-U per year, so for 100 year one will need to buy 1.515 million tonne nat U.
    iv) Cost of natural uranium in metal market is $68/Lb assuming it holds for next 6 years and goes down (forget about upside for the time being) so it will cost at current prices $226.5 Billion. Enrichment cost for to LWR level enrichment will cost 77 billion. The net total, assuming no profit for the commercial enterprise and middle man that is = $303 billion.

5). Cost of building FBR is definitely higher than a LWR or PHWR. The conventional wisdom is 2 to 3 times. So I assume it will be $5,000/KWe compared to $2000/KWe for non FBR reactors. AFAIK this does not include the cost of building backend facilities required to run the reactor liek cooling yard, re-processing and fuel fabrication.

So 330 GWe for LWR based FBR capacity that AK perprots (on slide# 13)for 2050 will cost 330,000 MWe X $5,000,000/MWe = $1650 Billion.

6). Indian 3 stage fuel cycle envisages feeding the deficit neutrons of multiple AHWR (based on Thorium) reactors from a FBR. For Wattage to Wattage the ratio IIRC 1:1 or 1:2 (I.e. 100 MWe FBR able to excess fuel to drive 200MWe AHWR) depending on when they reach FBR with metallic fuel rod rather then Oxide or Carbide based fuel element. In the first few decades of technology improvement that ratio will be lower. Assuming an average of slightly lower than 1:1 ratio between FBR and AHWR the average capital cost comes to ~$3750/KWe. Again I am not including the cost of building back-end facilities required to run the reactor like spent fuel cooling yard, re-processing and fuel fabrication.

So 275GWe for LWR based FBR capacity that AK purports (on slide# 13)for 2050 will cost 275,000 MWe X $3,750,000/MWe = $1031 Billion.

That should be enough to start to think about weakness of Shri Kakodkar's power point presentation.

That was a rather long post and given the paucity of time I have fulfilled 7 good deeds quota for the week.

Thanks for listening.


I noticed that the enrichment cost to fuel the LWR was understated by a factor of 2 in my above post. The cost to enrich 1 tonne of Natural uranium to LWR grade enrichment is ~$110K. Thus the cost to enrich fuel for 1GWe-year energy is ~$33 M. So 40GWe power generation by LWR for 100 year will require paying for $134 Billion for fuel enrichment service by foreign vendors. This will be in addition to $181 billion dollars for raw natural Uranium (1.2 million tonnes) required as starting material for the fuel enrichment process. I.e. for 40GWe total lifetime fuel cost ~$315 billion.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 11838
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Suraj » 22 Jul 2008 13:33

What is the annual electricity generation capacity (not power, which is GWe, but the TWh capacity) of the LWRs ? How much do the cumulative revenues over 100 years compare to the estimated lifetime cost of $315, based on various rates of growth of cost, i.e Rs/kWh ?

Costs by themselves are not very helpful. $315 billion lifetime fuel/enrichment cost does not look significant at all. The TWh data would help estimate by just how much the earnings from the electricity supply exceed the costs.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby vina » 22 Jul 2008 13:44

Arun_S wrote:I noticed that the enrichment cost to fuel the LWR was understated by a factor of 2 in my above post. The cost to enrich 1 tonne of Natural uranium to LWR grade enrichment is ~$110K. Thus the cost to enrich fuel for 1GWe-year energy is ~$33 M. So 40GWe power generation by LWR for 100 year will require paying for $134 Billion for fuel enrichment service by foreign vendors. This will be in addition to $181 billion dollars for raw natural Uranium (1.2 million tonnes) required as starting material for the fuel enrichment process. I.e. for 40GWe total lifetime fuel cost ~$315 billion.


Okay . So what will be cost of coal or natural gas to generate the same 1GWe-year energy that you estimated will cost ~ $33m in enriched uranium. Somehow I think it would be much higher than $33m and of course transport costs (bulk carrier /pipeline /railways) etc will be over and above that.

And also when considering overall costs, in nuclear energy, the cost of emissions .. ie wastes etc are fully factored in. Conventional power plants have had a free ride so far. They have been spewing pollutants and CO2 into the atmosphere, free of cost. Applying the "Polluter Pays" principle, factor in the cost of cleanup of the pollutants and the CO2 costs in terms of carbon credits that must be bought and the economics of coal/gas etc start looking suspect. That they get away with "murder" (both literally and figuratively) just distorts the picture, but that doesnt mean that they should be allowed to get away with it and rational decision making be held hostage to such distortions.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby RajeshA » 22 Jul 2008 13:46

There is a debate taking place, whether the end justifies the means, and which means may be justified.

Is it OK for UPA+SP to go all out and bribe the others to vote for the UPA in the motion of confidence, and the Opposition to use similar tricks?

My List of justified means for horse-trading:
1. Offering some ministerial portfolio(s) or some other executive position to an MP or Parliamentary Party of interest or to someone they prescribe.
2. Offering some executive directive of symbolic nature (naming of an airport, for example), if there is no wider resistance to it.
3. Offering some additional support package for the development of the MP's constituency, if possible within the constraints of the budget.
4. Offering to assemble parliamentary support for the relocation of public institutions ( e.g. Coal India Ltd., Domodar Valley Corp.) according to the demands of an MP or a party
5. Offering to assemble parliamentary support for Constitutional changes, advocated by the MP or his/her party.
6. Offering some form of electoral alliance arrangement.
7. Offering a candidature for a constituency under own election symbol
8. Offering full financing of such a candidature.
9. Using jailed MPs, as they still have a constitutional right to represent their constituencies in Parliament.


My List of dubious means for horse-trading:
1. Offering a lump sum of money, bribe
2. Kidnapping, blackmailing, threatening, attacking other's MPs or own rebel MPs
3. Using executive means to favor a certain MP in some bureaucratic case
4. Using CBI or other similar agencies to put pressure on MPs, by bringing cases against them or speeding such cases
5. Putting pressure on jailed MPs through the quality of their living conditions in Jail, be it through more severe or more benign treatment in comparison to other inmates.
Last edited by RajeshA on 22 Jul 2008 13:49, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Arun_S » 22 Jul 2008 13:47

Suraj: Pls refer to the link I posted. It is a great source of info.
http://www.worldenergy.org/
and
http://world-nuclear.org/info/info.html#nuclearpower
this pdf is interesting: http://world-nuclear.org/reference/pdf/economics.pdf

The average IIRC is ~85%.

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

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Arun_S » 22 Jul 2008 13:58

vina wrote:
Arun_S wrote:I noticed that the enrichment cost to fuel the LWR was understated by a factor of 2 in my above post. The cost to enrich 1 tonne of Natural uranium to LWR grade enrichment is ~$110K. Thus the cost to enrich fuel for 1GWe-year energy is ~$33 M. So 40GWe power generation by LWR for 100 year will require paying for $134 Billion for fuel enrichment service by foreign vendors. This will be in addition to $181 billion dollars for raw natural Uranium (1.2 million tonnes) required as starting material for the fuel enrichment process. I.e. for 40GWe total lifetime fuel cost ~$315 billion.


Okay . So what will be cost of coal or natural gas to generate the same 1GWe-year energy that you estimated will cost ~ $33m in enriched uranium. Somehow I think it would be much higher than $33m and of course transport costs (bulk carrier /pipeline /railways) etc will be over and above that.

Find out.

The problem with DAE/Kakodkar's plan is that it is impossible to execute. Just look the mammoth wish list, the super compressed time line, market force perturbations and of course the track record of DAE does not give confidence. So one may throw good money on the table, still that "castle in the air" will remain "castle in the air". 40GWe cant be installed by Kakodkar's Microsoft Power-Point Jinn by 2020. Emperor is Naked.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 11838
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Suraj » 22 Jul 2008 14:21

So 85% is the average load factor ? That would imply annual energy generation is 40 GWe * 8760 * 0.85 = 298TWh .

At ~10c per kWh (roughly current rates, ignoring future appreciation), that entails annual revenues of $29.8 billion. The total lifetime fuel costs would thus pay for itself in roughly a decade. It would pay off the entire capital+fuel+maintenance costs in significantly less than the lifetime duration we're talking about.

A problem with the WNA report is it uses ~2003 gas/coal/uranium prices, all of which are way off the mark today. Further, as Vina stated, pollution costs are not equalized for coal/gas plants as oppose nuclear, where the spent fuel storage costs are accounted for. But that may not be the case in future when you account for carbon credits.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby RajeshA » 22 Jul 2008 16:20

News Flash: BJP MPs claim SP bribed them, show cash in House.

BSR Murthy
BRFite
Posts: 141
Joined: 02 Apr 2003 12:31
Location: Texas

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby BSR Murthy » 22 Jul 2008 16:49

I am shocked! Shocked I tell you - that there is money changing hands in Indian politics. It must be unprecedented. Oh my! the shock and horror. I am inconsolable.
:shock: :roll: :((

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

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby svinayak » 22 Jul 2008 17:10

BSR Murthy wrote:I am shocked! Shocked I tell you - that there is money changing hands in Indian politics. It must be unprecedented. Oh my! the shock and horror. I am inconsolable.
:shock: :roll: :((


Show me the proof.

Tamang
BRFite
Posts: 689
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Nai Dilli, Bharatvarsh

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Tamang » 22 Jul 2008 17:20

So CNN-IBN has those tapes but won't air them. They wouldn't want to harm UPA's chances.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16428
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Rahul M » 22 Jul 2008 17:30

Tamang wrote:So CNN-IBN has those tapes but won't air them. They wouldn't want to harm UPA's chances.

Have I missed anything ? tapes of what ?
all we have seen on TV are 3 BJP MPs waving wads of notes in the LS claiming SP has tried to bribe them and LKA coming out and telling the same to the press. footage was from Parliament TV or whatever it is called.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Rangudu » 22 Jul 2008 17:33

Direct cash for vote was previously done so blatantly by P.V.Narasimha Rao. But some of the same people outraged at this today don't mind PVNR's corruption because he "resisted US pressure."

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby RajeshA » 22 Jul 2008 17:38

I had my day off, so I thought I might as well watch Lok Sabha TV on the internet. I must say, it is not boring. All those MPs running around with huge bricks of money. When the camera went over to some honorable MPs waving those bricks around, I just could not think for quite some time, what the whole ruckus was all about. Why would someone want to make a big fuss about some brown bricks. It even looked like C4 explosives, used in Stargate so often, only bigger. Then the deputy speaker ran out and the house was adjourned, first till 5 pm and then extended to 6 pm. When I started reading the online newspapers, only then did I realise all those bricks were wads of money.

I don't know whether I should be mad at Amar Singh, who is being alleged to be the main briber, to have been playing Santa Claus without researching which children were "achhe bachey" and could be doled out money, without the fear of some drama like this today in Parliament, or should I be mad at Advani for allowing his MPs to bring down the house. He may be saying the truth, but this truth impinges on the most fundamental foundation of India, in her own view and of the world. Any pretense of self-respect came tumbling down today.

Whether it was the machinations of the wheeler-dealer Amar Singh or the self-scripted drama by Advani, the Indian Parliament and thereby India has fell to its nadar.

The self-respect of India has taken such a beating today, I would say scrap the nuclear deal, and the Indian people should choose new MPs who are not part of the 14th Lok Sabha, but are fresh and have a passion for the country and its development. Not a single MP should return to Loksabha. Everyone should be new without exception. Only then can one wash away the kalank.

I have been a passionate supporter of the nuclear deal and have been even of the view that sometimes means justify the ends, and it is not wrong for politicians to do some bending of the norms to get work done. But today all norms have been broken, and no deal is worth this loss.

My head hangs in shame!

archan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6821
Joined: 03 Aug 2007 21:30
Contact:

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby archan » 22 Jul 2008 17:42

RajeshA wrote:But today all norms have been broken, and no deal is worth this loss.
My head hangs in shame!

Why not, I am glad this "nanga naach" happened. I hope someone thinks about some reforms now, some sort of criminal investigations kick in. Isn't this now a case for an investigation?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16428
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Rahul M » 22 Jul 2008 17:48

archan wrote:Why not, I am glad this "nanga naach" happened. I hope someone thinks about some reforms now, some sort of criminal investigations kick in. Isn't this now a case for an investigation?

BJP is pushing for an adjournment of trust vote till some kind of investigation takes place. Don't think that is feasible. somnath is not in a mood to relent, so we may see the vote happening at a later time today.

vijayk
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3240
Joined: 22 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby vijayk » 22 Jul 2008 17:51

archan wrote:
RajeshA wrote:But today all norms have been broken, and no deal is worth this loss.
My head hangs in shame!

Why not, I am glad this "nanga naach" happened. I hope someone thinks about some reforms now, some sort of criminal investigations kick in. Isn't this now a case for an investigation?


Not if the Gandhis do it. Sonia can get away with anything in India.

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

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby John Snow » 22 Jul 2008 17:58

"This is the finest hour of free market economyat work in an institution of a free country, in which the word free has cost built in"

Spinster uvacha

I am traveling to India to catch a bundle before it lands in the hands of anti nationals

From BB

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby enqyoob » 22 Jul 2008 18:13

Very funny, never mind, I thought FATA was an original BFR acronym denoting something else.


It is "Fauji Abducted Taliban Areas" aka "Fidayeen Administered Tribal Areas".

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3404
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby hnair » 22 Jul 2008 18:28

Rangudu wrote:Direct cash for vote was previously done so blatantly by P.V.Narasimha Rao. But some of the same people outraged at this today don't mind PVNR's corruption because he "resisted US pressure."


Everyday one goes without High Fructose Corn Syrup crap they call Coke/Pepsi, we are all resisting US pressure. 8)

I for one, dont mind this horse trading. That is, as long as the cash remains in the local economy. Instead of hanging our heads in shame and try to ban this practice, I suggest we regulate it. Something like 70% of the cash should be spent in your own constituency, 10% to buy that Bentley the guy you have beaten in the last election has, 10% in sprucing up your own standing in the party, 5% in procuring starlets and 5% as fees for the horse-trade regulating body consisting of treasurers of all political parties, the Hon Speaker, CEC, CAG, an odd retired judge or a religious leader (just for the heck of it).

If US and China pumped money from both sides, goddamn it, I am joining one of those little Kerala Congress parties (who have presence in both sides) right away. Add to that the loyalty I see from the thorium pits of Chavara, it is good to be in one of these parties....... <shaking with pleasure>

Advani gave a decent speech. MMS was relaxed, but a bit subdued. And the Dynasty kid needs some more time to sell a joke or two. But total paisa vasool. If all the allegations are true, then thank you Unkil!! Thank you PLA!

Now on to Mayawati at Camp David with Obama....... Now that is something I look forward to. :twisted:

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3144
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Kakkaji » 22 Jul 2008 18:30

OK, folks. Something good is likely to come out of all this sordid drama of 'no no confidence vote'.

Why Somnath Chatterjee is a hero in Bengal

These developments give rise to several questions: Will Chatterjee quit politics after putting in his papers? Not really, say those in the know.

According to the Speaker's aides, the state CPI-M could split into two camps -- pro- and anti-Karat. 8)

The former, say sources, is likely to consist of West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadev Bhattacharya and Biman Bose whereas the latter may include anti-Karat voices like Chatterjee and West Bengal Transport, Sport and Youth Affairs Minister Subhas Chakraborty.

Both leaders are known to be close to CPI-M patriarch Jyoti Basu. Party insiders claim Chatterjee's plans have Basu's tacit approval.


So, if the CPM breaks into two factions in WB, that will be good news for those of us who don't particularly like Communists. :)

The downside of it is that factions within the Leftist conglomerate tend to settle their differences with street violence. If a serious split develops between the Jyoti Basu and Buddhadeb Bhattacharya factions, expect Kolkata's gutters to run red with blood once again. :(

Viswanthan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 14:38

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Viswanthan » 22 Jul 2008 18:38

Rajesh for long you have been playing the role of Congress Parliamentary affairs in-charge in BR by counting the relative strengths of the political forces .Kudos to you

I tend to agree to you- its a drama scripted by ex-film reviewer/movie buff Advani to defame the Manmohan Singh -the man of unimpeachable integrity and unblemished record and his government

PS-The entire episode has been caught on CNN-IBN Tapes.Remember that Rajdeep’S Channel which launched itself gloriously by sponsoring a sting operation against unlettered BJP MP’s from BIMARU states and playing it out ad nauseam The MP's were expelled in no time.It appears that it has suddenly changed its policy and submitted the tapes to Speaker

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16428
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Rahul M » 22 Jul 2008 18:50

Kakkaji wrote:OK, folks. Something good is likely to come out of all this sordid drama of 'no no confidence vote'.

Why Somnath Chatterjee is a hero in Bengal

These developments give rise to several questions: Will Chatterjee quit politics after putting in his papers? Not really, say those in the know.

According to the Speaker's aides, the state CPI-M could split into two camps -- pro- and anti-Karat. 8)

The former, say sources, is likely to consist of West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadev Bhattacharya and Biman Bose whereas the latter may include anti-Karat voices like Chatterjee and West Bengal Transport, Sport and Youth Affairs Minister Subhas Chakraborty.

Both leaders are known to be close to CPI-M patriarch Jyoti Basu. Party insiders claim Chatterjee's plans have Basu's tacit approval.


So, if the CPM breaks into two factions in WB, that will be good news for those of us who don't particularly like Communists. :)

The downside of it is that factions within the Leftist conglomerate tend to settle their differences with street violence. If a serious split develops between the Jyoti Basu and Buddhadeb Bhattacharya factions, expect Kolkata's gutters to run red with blood once again. :(

there is a slim chance that somnath may replace buddha as the next CM candidate.
:don't tell anyone:

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6146
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby CRamS » 22 Jul 2008 18:52

Rangudu wrote:Direct cash for vote was previously done so blatantly by P.V.Narasimha Rao. But some of the same people outraged at this today don't mind PVNR's corruption because he "resisted US pressure."


Saar do you have any evidence of this charge against PVN? He was one of India's finest PM's, he even wanted to test nukes but for some traitors in his midst (and there is speculation on who that was) who let the cat of the bag to Unkil.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6146
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby CRamS » 22 Jul 2008 19:02

Apart from the bribery scams, what makes for such a humiliating spectacle is the sheer volume, the colossal amount of energy India is wasting on this nuclear deal. I mean the cacophony is so deafening. I have watched news media here in US, there is not even a whimper, not even a passing mention of this deal that is causing so much hope and consternation in India at the same time. They say when Unkil gets a cold, the rest of the world gets pnemonia. But in India's case, it apperas that even if Unkil just thinks of India somewhere in his unconscious mind, India gyrates about its hips at that hint of 'attention' from Unkil.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Rangudu » 22 Jul 2008 19:09

Why do you think Shibu Soren went to jail? P.V.N.R was a gentleman but his leadership saw the first open "suitcase" politics scenario.

BTW, as I said before, you can save a lot of time and energy just by posting "Uncle is the Devil, India is doomed" as your signature.

sugriva
BRFite
Posts: 318
Joined: 15 Jun 2005 20:16
Location: Exposing the uber communist luddites masquerading as capitalists

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby sugriva » 22 Jul 2008 19:21

The UPA wins 253-232 , 2 absentions only

sanjaychoudhry
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 00:39
Location: La La Land

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 22 Jul 2008 19:23

Why the Nuclear Deal Should be Refused

Yashwant Sinha is accusing the UPA government of misleading the people over the nuclear deal

In the last three years, much has been said in favor of and against the Indo-US nuclear deal. People participating in this discussion have been trying to project an impression that they fully comprehend the various aspects of the Agreement. But it is painful to see that the UPA government preferred to create a political crises on this issue. It is not hesitating to even resort to lies to buttress its case in favor of the deal. I will raise only three issues on which the government has been attempting to mislead the people of this country.

The UPA government says that under this deal, our nuclear weapons programme is fully safe and protected. This is not correct. America has been claiming since the beginning that the purpose of the nuclear deal is to bring India into the ambit of nuclear non-proliferation regime. Its clear objective is to cap our nuclear weapons programme, roll it back and ultimately finish it off.

America’s tactical aim is to box India into remaining at the lowest level of nuclear weapons technology. This objective will be achieved by taking away forever our right to conduct nuclear tests. The much-ballyhooed need for nuclear power on which the UPA government is laying maximum emphasis is nothing but a charade. The government has been trying to lure the people by painting a rosy picture that with this deal every house in the country will be lighted up with electricity. But it has deliberately not clarified till now as to what cost the country will have to pay for this dream of “electricity for all.”

The American objective is clear by this provision of the Hyde Act which states: “Those countries which have never been a part of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and which are totally outside the ambit of its restrictions are a hurdle toward achieving the objective of global non-proliferation. It is therefore in American interest to ensure to the best of our ability that such states should be held directly responsible for the management of the nuclear capability that they have acquired. It is also in American interest to have a nuclear cooperation deal with any of these countries.” (Section 102 of Hyde Act.)

The provisions of the Hyde Act which are against our weapons programme which are ultimately going to restrain it are as follows:

1. Hyde Act directs India to stay away from any activity that may assist in the development of nuclear weapons. (Section 102.)

2. The objective of Hyde Act is to (a) attempt to curtail the further increase of nuclear weapons in South Asia, reduce their number them and encourage the scheme to ultimately obliterate their presence in the region. (b) To encourage India to not increase the production of fissile material in the reactors that will be under the supervision of IAEA.

3. Under the Hyde Act, the American President is obligated to keep various Congressional Committees fully informed and up-to-date about the following matters: (i) Facts about important activities and developments in India related to nuclear technology (including construction of more reactors), (ii) Any important shift in the production of Indian nuclear weapons or fissile material, (iii) the objectives of developments related to nuclear fuel cycle in non-supervisory reactors and any changes in strategy to achieve those objectives, (iv) Any analysis and investigation that concludes that American cooperation in civilian nuclear energy matters is in any way helping India’s nuclear programme, (v) Matters related to mining of uranium in India and the quantity that is being put to use, or how much quantity of uranium was assigned to be used for the construction of nuclear bombs, and the rate of production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons, and (vi) any assessment that clarifies if the imported uranium has affected the rate of production of nuclear weapons in India. (Section 104)

As far as nuclear testing by India is concerned, the Hyde Act clearly states that if the American president discovers that India has conduced a nuclear test after the Act has come into force, the nuclear deal will no longer be valid. According to 123 Act, what will happen next is that India will have to return all imported equipment and infrastructure, even though it was being strictly used for peaceful purposes. American officials, especially John Holmes a political-military analyst who was working as the Assistant Secretary of State in the US State Department in charge of weapons control, said in a special meeting of CTBT organized on April 7, 1998, a few days before Indian conducted nuclear tests: “A ban on nuclear weapons testing is a great help to us. This is a big obstacle put in the way of states aspiring to have nuclear weapons and they find it very difficult to surmount this ban”

In his capacity as a senior advisor to the State Department, this same official while attending a meeting of Foreign Policy Association in New York, said on February 16, 2000: “America has conducted a thousand nuclear tests. All weapons in our nuclear arsenal have been tested to perfection. We can now create a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons without the need to conduct any nuclear tests. In this situation, isn’t it necessary that we strive to totally restraint other countries of the world aspiring to get nuclear weapons?”

This makes it clear what America’s true intentions are. American has conducted 1030 nuclear tests, Russia 715 and China 45. It is therefore essential for India to keep its options open to conduct more nuclear tests in the future.


Translated from Dainik Jagaran

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby shiv » 22 Jul 2008 19:28

edited
Last edited by shiv on 22 Jul 2008 19:33, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: error corrected

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3144
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Kakkaji » 22 Jul 2008 19:30

sugriva wrote:The UPA wins 253-232 , 2 absentions only


So, the vote wasn't even close.

Only 2 abstentions? That doesn't sound right. From the final tally it seems close to 50 MPs must have abstained. :-?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby shiv » 22 Jul 2008 19:33

Correction: 54 more votes expected.

So the vote isn't over

Editing message above

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby ramdas » 22 Jul 2008 19:33

Unfortunately, the sellout has happened. This caps our weapons program forever, unless we test in the next five years to break this deal. This will require a leader of calibre who does not care for the vested business interests whose money power ensured that thi deal goes through. The very methods used to make this deal go through are enough proof that this deal is against national sovereignity. Those who welcome this deal welcome the capping and eventual rollback of our weapons status and hope for a sputh korea/japan like humiliating future for the nation.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Nuclear issues - News and Discussion 16 july 2008

Postby Rangudu » 22 Jul 2008 19:34

487 MPs only? That sounds bogus. What happened to the 50 odd remaining MPs?

I did not think our parliament will be bad at mathematics of all things :shock: :-o :cry:
--

ramdas et. al, pls wait for the vote before pouring the bile. Thank you.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests