India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby shiv » 23 Jul 2008 09:33

No politics
No whines or celebratory lungi dances
Wonleee nook noos pliss.

BSR Murthy
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 02 Apr 2003 12:31
Location: Texas

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby BSR Murthy » 23 Jul 2008 09:53

Council on Foreign Relations. Daily Analysis.
An Uncertain Deal with India
Updated: July 22, 2008
Author: Jayshree Bajoria

Some analysts object to the deal because it fails to restrain India's nuclear weapons program. Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, argues in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that "fueling India's civilian reactors with foreign fuel is not all that peaceful." The Bush administration has tried to convince Congress that the enabling U.S. legislation for the nuclear deal, the Hyde Act, has mechanisms to check India's nuclear weapons ambitions. However, the Indian government is indicating the opposite. To win over its parliamentary allies, the prime minister's office insists the nuclear deal overrides the Hyde Act (Hindu). A July 15 government statement says, "the agreement will in no way impinge on our [India's] strategic programme, which is entirely outside the purview of the IAEA safeguards agreement."

http://www.cfr.org/publication/16822/uncertain_deal_with_india.html?breadcrumb=%2F
Last edited by Rahul M on 23 Jul 2008 17:47, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Edited to normal fonts. Please don't shout.

BSR Murthy
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 02 Apr 2003 12:31
Location: Texas

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby BSR Murthy » 23 Jul 2008 09:57

CFR
Symbolism Tops Substance in U.S.-India Nuclear Agreement
Interviewee: Leonard S. Spector, Deputy Director, Monterey Institute of International Studies' James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Interviewer: Bernard Gwertzman, Consulting Editor

The real reason for the agreement on the American side, I believe, is to shore up relations with India and to establish our close relationship for the future. The agreement carries considerable symbolism and I'd say that's even more important than any business that may be obtained by American vendors.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/16803/
Last edited by Rahul M on 23 Jul 2008 17:47, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Edited to normal fonts. Please don't shout.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Singha » 23 Jul 2008 10:09

so all the serpents crawl out for the last time to keep themselves relevant?

in a down economy with no easy target like India to beat, they must brush
up resumes.

taco bell is taking applications.

BSR Murthy
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 02 Apr 2003 12:31
Location: Texas

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby BSR Murthy » 23 Jul 2008 10:27

taco bell is taking applications.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:


Negotiating India's Next Nuclear Explosion
By HENRY SOKOLSKI
FROM TODAY'S WALL STREET JOURNAL ASIA
July 10, 2008
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121562768791139877.html

But there's more: Earlier this year, Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee suggested India "delink" finalizing the U.S. nuclear deal from getting the IAEA and the NSG approvals. His idea was to get the U.S. to convince the IAEA and NSG to allow India to do business with any nuclear supplier state. This would then allow India to import Russian and French nuclear goods, instead of American goods which would be laden with troublesome nonproliferation conditions.

His pitch was more than hype. The U.S. actually has been twisting arms at the NSG, threatening to leave and so dissolve the group if countries critical of the India deal did not fall into line on India. Also, as a practical matter, U.S. reactor sales to India won't happen even if New Delhi refuses to buy Russian or French. Why? No private U.S. nuclear firm would risk doing business with India until it establishes a sufficient amount of Indian nuclear damage liability coverage. Given India's horrific experience with the American-built Union Carbine chemical-plant accident at Bhopal, when this will occur is anybody's guess.


This article in The Telegraph expands on the above WSJ op-ed:

America ‘twists arms’, nuke rivals bristle
US ‘threat’ to quit NSG if it delays nod
K.P. NAYAR
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080711/j ... 533797.jsp
Last edited by Rahul M on 23 Jul 2008 17:47, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Edited to normal fonts. Please don't shout.

BSR Murthy
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 02 Apr 2003 12:31
Location: Texas

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby BSR Murthy » 23 Jul 2008 10:58

What Should We Expect from India as a Strategic Partner?
A book chapter By Ashley J. Tellis

http://carnegieendowment.org/files/tellis_chpt08.pdf

In his chapter, "What Should We Expect from India as a Strategic Partner?" in Henry Sokolski (ed.), Gauging U.S.-Indian Strategic Cooperation (Strategic Studies Institute, March 2007), Carnegie Senior Associate Ashley J. Tellis analyzes the historical "sine wave" nature of the U.S.-India relationship and outlines the value and practical consequences of the transforming bilateral relationship. Touching on various aspects of U.S.-Indian strategic collaboration, he argues that bilateral cooperation between Washington and New Delhi is "eminently possible" on many issues vital to U.S. interests in Asia and the world.
Last edited by Rahul M on 23 Jul 2008 17:46, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Edited to normal fonts. Please don't shout.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby NRao » 23 Jul 2008 17:03

(Murthyji, Is there a need for larger headlines. Besides, most, if not all, have been posted before.)

US welcomes UPA's confidence motion win
Saran travels to Dublin to enlist support in IAEA board
India to launch lobbying campaign among NSG nations

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby sunilUpa » 23 Jul 2008 19:10

Rice to canvass support for NSG `waiver' for India

US is expecting to get a `clean' waiver from the NSG for India by the end of August

SureshP
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 10 Apr 2002 11:31

Postby SureshP » 23 Jul 2008 20:43

It will be a short conversation. Pakis havn't the balls to stand up to to the US. They will try there utmost to extract some favours though. Dont pursue AQ. Give us same deal. Give us weapons and lots and lots of $$$. And the perenial "give us Kashmir" :roll:


US will make Pakistan see IAEA issue in true light: Envoy
July 23rd, 2008 - 9:48 pm ICT by IANS
New Delhi, July 23 (IANS) Amid reports about a plan by Pakistan to block consensus in the IAEA over the India-specific safeguards pact, the US Wednesday said it will talk to Islamabad and hoped that it would see the proposed pact in “the right light”. :rotfl: “That is a particular issue which will have to be addressed. And we will do it,” US ambassador David C. Mulford told reporters when asked what he thought about reports suggesting Pakistan was creating hurdles in the path of approval of the safeguards pact at the IAEA board meeting set for Aug 1.

“We will talk and hope that they see things in the right light,” he stressed.

The IAEA secretariat will circulate the text of the India-specific safeguards agreement to all its members Friday before the board of governors to take a decision on approving the safeguards pact Aug 1 in Vienna.

Pakistan, a member of the IAEA board, has already raised objections to the proposed safeguards agreement that India has sought with the UN nuclear watchdog.

India has therefore stepped up its diplomatic efforts to ensure that Pakistan and other sceptics like Ireland do not force voting in the IAEA on the India-specific safeguards pact.

The voting in the IAEA, which only happens rarely - the last one being the vote on the Iranian nuclear programme two years ago, may embolden sceptics in the NSG to air their opposition. That is why India wants to doubly ensure that Pakistan’s designs do not succeeds and the board approves the safeguards pact unanimously.

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/us-will-make-pakistan-see-iaea-issue-in-true-light-envoy_10075132.html
Last edited by SureshP on 23 Jul 2008 20:54, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ramana » 23 Jul 2008 20:47

Noor-e-truth?

SureshP
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 10 Apr 2002 11:31

Postby SureshP » 23 Jul 2008 21:06

'N-deal will liberate India from technology denial regime'

Kalpakkam (PTI): The Indo-US nuclear deal would liberate India from a technology denial regime since 1974 enforced after the country first tested its nuclear device and pave the way for "two-way traffic of exchange of inventions and discoveries," a top nuclear scientist said on wednesday.

M R Srinivasan, former Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), said the deal would help India import Light Water Reactors (LWR) and ensure continued supply of enriched uranium.

Talking to reporters here after participating in the silver jubilee celebrations of the Madras Atomic Power Station (MAPS), Srinivasan said the nuclear isolation period from 1974 helped India build its own ability in the field.

"Developed nations have realised India is on the path of building a robust nuclear technology in strategic and civilian fields and therefore it makes no sense for us to be kept out", he said.

Srinivasan said operationalisaton of the deal would make India a global nuclear player, enabling it to invest in nuclear technology in other countries as well as help setting up such facilities in "friendly countries." "We can build and maintain nuclear reactors which will net us a lot of revenue. In that regard, the deal is an important step," he said adding the 70,000-strong workforce of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) was prepared for this task.

With India having a mismatch of supply and demand of uranium, it was imperative that the country clinched the deal, he said adding it would also relieve the burden of too much dependence on petroleum products "whose reserves are dwindling," leading to skyrocketing prices of the same.

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/001200807232077.htm

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ramana » 23 Jul 2008 21:37

The vote is over why is he on overdrive. Or is it the lag effect?

HariC
BRFite
Posts: 358
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby HariC » 23 Jul 2008 21:46

ramana wrote:The vote is over why is he on overdrive. Or is it the lag effect?


If he had said that BEFORE the vote, we would have seen accusations of corruption, bricks of cash , pandering to congees etc etc come from stalwart netas. So he did the smart thing to do - make his thoughts public AFTER the vote.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ramana » 23 Jul 2008 22:07

Somehow I knew I would get a reply from you first. 8)

jerry
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 22 Jul 2007 20:40
Location: DXB

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby jerry » 23 Jul 2008 23:07

'N-deal will liberate India from technology denial regime'

Kalpakkam (PTI): The Indo-US nuclear deal would liberate India from a technology denial regime since 1974 enforced after the country first tested its nuclear device and pave the way for "two-way traffic of exchange of inventions and discoveries," a top nuclear scientist said on wednesday.

M R Srinivasan, former Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), said the deal would help India import Light Water Reactors (LWR) and ensure continued supply of enriched uranium.

Talking to reporters here after participating in the silver jubilee celebrations of the Madras Atomic Power Station (MAPS), Srinivasan said the nuclear isolation period from 1974 helped India build its own ability in the field.

"Developed nations have realised India is on the path of building a robust nuclear technology in strategic and civilian fields and therefore it makes no sense for us to be kept out", he said.

Srinivasan said operationalisaton of the deal would make India a global nuclear player, enabling it to invest in nuclear technology in other countries as well as help setting up such facilities in "friendly countries." "We can build and maintain nuclear reactors which will net us a lot of revenue. In that regard, the deal is an important step," he said adding the 70,000-strong workforce of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) was prepared for this task. [i][color=#BF0000]What he says here is very true. Even oil rich countries like Saudi, Qatar, and U.A.E. hace signed nuclear power project agreements with Unkil. We are the only country with such a large and cheap nuclear manpower poised to take advantage of the situation in the world.[/color][/i]With India having a mismatch of supply and demand of uranium, we all know our uranium situation rt now it was imperative that the country clinched the deal, he said adding it would also relieve the burden of too much dependence on petroleum products "whose reserves are dwindling," leading to skyrocketing prices of the same.

I feel this is the most liberating moment MMS has taken for India just as he had done after he was made Finance minister by N.R.
Morever the strategic benefits are incalculable

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby svinayak » 23 Jul 2008 23:33

We had one poster who woke up and bashed Bharat Karnad for not supporting the deal.
This deal does not have everybody in the establishment on board.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4441
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby putnanja » 24 Jul 2008 00:43

IAEA safeguards grant India ‘nuclear weapons status’: Pakistan


Siddharth Varadarajan

Wants Indian template to apply to "other non-NPT states"

BoG and NSG should carefully weigh consequences

“Agreement may provide incentive to India to conduct further testing”

New Delhi: In a four-page letter addressed to Board members of the IAEA, Pakistan has attacked the draft Indian safeguards agreement for envisaging termination conditions and fuel supply arrangements which could allow India to “divert part of [any imported] fuel for weapons purposes.”

At the same time, it said that the Indian model should not be “discriminatory” and should be applied to states such as itself.

Pakistan is a member of the 35-strong Board of Governors. The letter, written by its Ambassador to the IAEA, Shahbaz, was sent out on July 18, though the Indian mission in Vienna has yet to formally receive a copy. A similar letter was circulated by Pakistan’s Ambassador to the U.N., Munir Akram, on July 15. The BoG will meet August 1 to consider the Indian agreement.

Apart from raising procedural objections to the convening of a Board of Governors meeting at short notice, Pakistan is strongly opposing a number of specific provisions in the agreement. It says both the BoG and the Nuclear Suppliers Group should “carefully weigh the consequences that may ensue from succumbing to ‘expediency’ over ‘principles’” if the “drive to steamroll”this agreement was not “resisted.”

According to Indian officials, Pakistan has sounded a number of BoG members on the possibility of putting the Indian draft to a vote on August 1 rather than approving it by consensus. Though indications are that so far the Pakistani proposal does not have takers, Islamabad would be within its rights to call for a division when the Board meets.

Ambassador Shahbaz’s letter, a copy of which is with The Hindu, says a “disturbing feature” of the agreement is the reference in the Preamble to a phrase from the Indo-U.S. statement of July 2005 “specifically [noting] India’s ‘willingness’ to ‘identify and separate its civilian and military nuclear facilities.’ Thus, the IAEA Board is being asked to recognise and accept India’s nuclear weapons status,” the letter says.

The Pakistani envoy’s missive demands that this preambular reference be deleted because it runs counter to the purpose of IAEA safeguards and “is in itself unique, as similar provisions do not exist in other such agreements.”

Curiously, though the letter condemns the Indian safeguards agreement on proliferation grounds, it argues that Pakistan should be afforded the same treatment. In one place, it warns the BoG that the Indian text “is likely to set a precedent for other states which are not members of the NPT and have military nuclear programmes.” But elsewhere, it also demands that “any safeguards agreement adopted by the BoG in respect of India should be available as a model for other non-NPT states.”

Among Pakistan’s other objections: - “Despite India’s refusal to place its Breeder Reactors and Thorium-based programme under safeguards, the draft recognises India’s three-stage nuclear programme. This is gratuitous legitimisation of potential nuclear proliferation and contrary to the IAEA’s objectives.”

- The draft contains “ambiguous provisions regarding conditions for the termination of the Safeguards Agreement,” provides India access to international fuel markets and provides for “unspecified ‘corrective measures’ which India would be allowed to take to ‘ensure uninterrupted operation of its civilian reactors.” This contravenes “the continuation of IAEA safeguards in perpetuity.”

- “The agreement may indeed provide an incentive to India to conduct further nuclear weapons testing, since future termination of the Safeguards Agreement, after India has built up an adequate fuel reserve, would resolve India’s problems relating to the shortage of nuclear material for both its civilian and nuclear weapons programme.”

Pakistan has also objected to the reference in the agreement to “a restricted document, GOV/1621” and said the BoG “cannot approve an Agreement with secret clauses.” It was vital, it said, for the conditions for termination of safeguards to be “expressly incorporated.” [In fact, GOV/1621 is available to all IAEA member states and has also been published in a 1985 book].

Criticising the IAEA draft for not providing for termination of peaceful nuclear cooperation in the event of a nuclear test by India, Pakistan said the agreement “threatens to increase the chances of a nuclear arms race in the sub-continent.”

The Pakistani letter says IAEA rules prevent the Indian agreement from being considered “at the earliest, 45 days later, i.e. 25 August 2008” and that “the political expediencies of either India or the U.S. are not sufficient reason” for “the 45 day rule” to be waived.

Indian and IAEA officials told The Hindu the 45 day rule was not “hard and fast” and that several safeguards agreements have been approved in less time. According to sources, Pakistan’s safeguards agreement for the Chashma reactor was itself cleared within 48 hours of the text being circulated to the Board in November 2006.

During the recent visit to Delhi by Pakistani Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir, the Indian side sounded Pakistan out on its objections to the safeguards agreement. Mr. Bashir said there was “nothing personal” in Islamabad’s stand and that the country was acting in its own national interest.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ramana » 24 Jul 2008 00:46

I think somewhere I remarked that the deal means Iran has to be taken care off. Now looks like TSP will be earlier.


RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 24 Jul 2008 01:06

May have been posted earlier. Not sure.

US will convince Pak not to vote against India at IAEA: Mulford

I would expect a couple of articles in the Post or Times about the A.Q. Khan Network and that he should be allowed to be interrogated by the IAEA........ or something on these lines.

After all, this always helps the Pakistanis to see the world in better light and better appreciate their status and respect in the world.

Either that or Mulford would have to send another General to have a talk with Zardari and Musharraf.


SureshP
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 10 Apr 2002 11:31

Postby SureshP » 24 Jul 2008 03:02

Paladin chief predicts uranium supply shortage for one to two decades

In an outspoken presentation in Fremantle, Paladin Mining's managing director had some choice words of disdain for the World Nuclear Association. Perhaps more importatly he said the supply side for uranium would be in deficit for one to two decades.
Author: Ross Louthean
Posted: Wednesday , 23 Jul 2008

PERTH -

The managing director of the major new uranium miner Paladin Mining Ltd (ASX & TSX: PDN), John Borshoff told the Australian Uranium Conference in Fremantle today that Australia would have a big learning arc in the technical and bureaucratic areas - particularly in Western Australia and Queensland - where mining of uranium is still prohibited.

He felt the impasse on uranium mining would end earlier in Queensland than in Western Australia, not because the current Premier Anna Bligh had a differing view than predecessor Peter Beattie (she was from the same left-thinking "chardonnay set sitting on the hill"). The change, probably after 2010, would come through pressure for change from the Federal Government. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who led the breaking of the Australian Labor Party's 25 year old "No New Mines" policy, is also a Queenslander.

He warned that some perceptions of global growth in nuclear power - another 150 to 200 nuclear reactors - would have to take in developments pangs in the new uranium power countries, including China and India. There would, he said, be a huge "learning arc."

Some charts on nuclear power growth in the near term predicting a rising rate of 45% may actually begin at around 15%.

He said the supply side is ill prepared and that with the exception of KazAtomProm all majors appeared to be behind their original schedules due to technical problems, costs or political issues.


The supply side was expected to be in deficit for one to two decades. Borshoff said the objective of Paladin was to become a Tier One supply company and to establish a trading arm to service and exploit new requirements that evolve in a globalising uranium market.

He told delegates that the company's Langer Heinrich mine in Namibia had got behind in its production ramp up but was catching up.

Development of the company's next mine at Kayelekera in Malawi was progressing and the company was well set, having $US340 million in cash and $US167 M project debt facility for the mine.

Paladin is looking ahead at its Australian projects which include an 82% stake in Summit Resources which has projects in the Mt Isa region including Skal and Walhalla, a stake in the Bigryli uranium project in the Northern Territory and the new joint venture on the Angela-Pamela project in the same region with Cameco.

Borshoff also had a few choice words to say about the World Nuclear Association (WNA) in that he felt that the Association was doing a dreadful job in representing the industry. It was geared to the supply side but did not understand the demand side Borshoff told the conference. Calling it the World Uranium Association, he said it should be re-christened The Worst Uranium Association. The WNA was invited to comment on Borshoff's views but declined to do so

http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page38?oid=57545&sn=Detail

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby sunilUpa » 24 Jul 2008 03:09


A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1144
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby A Sharma » 24 Jul 2008 03:40

Project in peril
Thorium, long seen as crucial to energy security, is now debunked as having properties that do not allow fast growth of power generation.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Sanjay M » 24 Jul 2008 03:49

A Sharma wrote:Project in peril
Thorium, long seen as crucial to energy security, is now debunked as having properties that do not allow fast growth of power generation.


So what he's saying is that this 1.2 breeding ratio is a bunch of nonsense, in practical reality.

He's saying that you can probably barely break even, when it comes to fuel produced relative to fuel consumed.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ramana » 24 Jul 2008 03:51

So reactors be khokla hain?

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby John Snow » 24 Jul 2008 04:58

So we go to U cartel from O cartel with a wheel barrow and stand in que?


RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 24 Jul 2008 05:46

Pakistan warns of new nuclear arms race with India

Now Pakistan wants to scare off the gullible Austrians, Swedes, Irish and the Kiwis. But who knows, may be even our non-proliferation friends think differently in the meantime!

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Arun_S » 24 Jul 2008 05:50

ramana wrote:So reactors be khokla hain?


After sizzling fizzle of nuclear weapon test in Pokhran, Kakodkar also delivers to India the fizzled nirvana of 3 stage nuclear power plan. :rotfl: :rotfl:
Tell me what is new!

Now we have India-US Civil Nuclear deal and India can swim in cheap imported nuclear fuel and change Indian Nuclear power program to a "2 stage nuclear power program" based on FBR. No one asked the "Emperor is Naked" question to Shri Anil Kakodkar: "If the nuclear deal allows India access to cheap nuclear fuel what is stopping DAE/Kakodkar from jumping straight to Thorium based AHWR with imported enriched fuel to start up and sustain it? After all the garden path shown by J18 agreement and 123 Hyde is India will have access to cheap imported nuclear fuel? "

Excuse me, but why do we need these non-performing GoI employees, that are no different from CPWD and Jal Nigam professionals and Haryana Police and who have also dedicated their lives to serving the people of India and GoI in punery?

Heck when they create and control the levers to the $100 Bn LWR investment windfall over next 6 years, what do they care!
    Chitt bhi mera, Patt bhi mera.
    Aur Bharat gaya bhaad main.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby NRao » 24 Jul 2008 05:53

India's Outstretched Hand

Wash Post editorial:

New Delhi does its part to salvage a nuclear pact; now it's Congress's turn.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008;

UNTIL RECENTLY, it seemed that an ambitious Bush administration bid to restore nuclear cooperation between the United States and India might be dead, a victim of domestic Indian politics. Anti-American communist parties that support Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's centrist government were blocking the deal. But Mr. Singh took a bold risk to salvage the pact, trading communist support for that of a smaller regional party in hopes of assembling a new majority. Yesterday the gamble paid off, as Mr. Singh's government survived a parliamentary no-confidence vote. Now, the question is whether the pact can survive the American political process.

There isn't much time; under U.S. law, Congress must be in session continuously for 30 days to consider the deal. Before that clock can start, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group must give India a green light. While those approvals are likely, they won't happen instantaneously. And because of the long August recess, there may not be more than 30 "legislative days" left before Congress adjourns on Sept. 26. The deal raises many legitimate questions. But, on balance, it is in the United States' interest, and Congress should find the time to say yes -- in a lame-duck session after the November election, if necessary.

U.S. nuclear cooperation with India ceased when India, which had refused to sign the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty, exploded a nuclear "device" in 1974. The sanctions were intended to show India, and the world, that there was a price to be paid for flouting the treaty. Times change, though, and the Bush administration's logic is that the benefits of a "strategic partnership" with India outweigh the risks of waiving the old rules. If booming India uses more nuclear energy, it will emit less in greenhouse gases. Unlike Pakistan, India has developed its nuclear arsenal without leaking materials or know-how to others. Perhaps the fact that India is a democracy that shares not only values but interests -- checking China, fighting Islamist terrorism -- with the United States matters more than its signature on a treaty. It's a bet worth making, especially since the agreement creates more international supervision of India's nuclear fuel cycle than there would be without it.

To be sure, it is a risk. The deal weakens the U.S. threat to cut off uranium if India conducts another nuclear test. India's economic ties and military-to-military contacts with Iran are worrisome, as is its stubborn habit of taking "nonaligned" stances against U.S. interests. But the fact that Mr. Singh successfully ditched the communists for the sake of closer ties with Washington is a hopeful sign that the agreement is already inducing moderation. At this point, if Congress rejects the deal, the likeliest outcome -- in addition to much ill will in New Delhi -- is that India, freshly approved as a customer for technology and fuel by the IAEA and the Suppliers Group, will simply buy its planned 25,000 megawatts of nuclear capacity from France or Russia. After much delay, Mr. Singh has done his part; now it's Congress's turn.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby NRao » 24 Jul 2008 08:19

Project in peril
Thorium, long seen as crucial to energy security, is now debunked as having properties that do not allow fast growth of power generation.


Too many holes IMHO.

If the graphs were out a day earlier - from the PMO - then it it more than likely that the PMO is directing traffic. This is a political statement and not a technical one.

As I have stated before, I am inclined to believe that the West is out to kill the FBR process. Paint the rest of the picture.

I am not convinced by this article - yet. I am certainly not surprised by it....... just surprised it came out so early in the game.

The West cannot survive a FBR, forget on teh world stage, even just in India.

From that article:

This new rationale of energy security to justify the deal appears to have been presented to the Samajwadi Party (S.P.) for its support even before Kakodkar presented it at the academy. The (five) graphs that formed part of his lecture on July 4 were already with journalists in Delhi the day before. These, which originated from the Prime Minister’s Office, were handed out to select journalists by Amar Singh’s office. Only, one did not know at that time what their original source was.


The graphs clearly state "DAE"!!!!

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Sanjay M » 24 Jul 2008 08:58

FBR is not the be-all-and-end-all of development.

We can live with the foreign controlled civil reactors for some time, as we develop our economy and our wider technology base and skillset.

Why knows, in a decade it may be found that solar and wind are even more economical forms of energy than nuclear. In which case, if our energy base is diversified far beyond nuclear, then Hyde Act and the civil reactors may ultimately be inconsequential.

Even if India stayed with its autonomous route and made the NPT irrelevant, it's not clear to me what benefit we gain from doing that, since our need is only for credible minimum deterrent. Bringing down NPT does not suddenly put money in our pockets, nor does it translate into more security for us.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Katare » 24 Jul 2008 09:12

A Sharma wrote:Project in peril
Thorium, long seen as crucial to energy security, is now debunked as having properties that do not allow fast growth of power generation.


I do not agree with his readings of kakodkar's presentation. He is using selective reading and taking things outta context to show a potential scenario where 3-stage program gets back tracked due to abundant supply of imported uranium.

Simply ain't gonna happen. As of now things will happen as planned if they can meet time schedule.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby NRao » 24 Jul 2008 09:16

Well, if I understand this article .... he is saying that FBR has no future. Or at least not the future that was painted!!

On alternative sources, dunno. India does not have a vision. Having been involved with solar in India, India has a long way to go. It is not a technical issue - that can very easily be overcome. It is political and social. And, of course infrastructure.

Katare,

I agree. He is misrepresenting stuff. Besides, the timing looks like a plant.

However, ike plenty of other, he has not tackled the problem associated with infrastructure.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby shiv » 24 Jul 2008 09:30

I think Kakodkar is right. The 3 stage program was never going to be "fast' - and India's development has increased the energy requirement projection so much that we have to grab as much as we can from every possible source. I fully sympathize with that.

Now that the vote is won and it looks like the deal is going through I might as well state my personal opinion plainly. Of course in a time pass forum we are allowed to say anything we like for or against anyone or anything.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Sanjay M » 24 Jul 2008 09:58

Katare wrote:I do not agree with his readings of kakodkar's presentation. He is using selective reading and taking things outta context to show a potential scenario where 3-stage program gets back tracked due to abundant supply of imported uranium.

Simply ain't gonna happen. As of now things will happen as planned if they can meet time schedule.


I thought one of the backroom deals inside this 123 Deal was that India mothballs the FBR program.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Singha » 24 Jul 2008 10:17

I keep reading of this "vast deposits" of thorium in some kerala beaches.

if we are serious about this line of work, isnt it time to dredge and dig out all
the material thats lying there, transport it inland to storage pens and replace
the lost beach with normal sand shipped in from elsewhere like gulf?

arent the yearly monsoons eroding it ? sea water rise will surely lead to more
violent currents and submergences?

surely kerala does not sit on a bottomless plate of thorium does it?

shouldnt we constantly use these storage pens to produce the raw material
thorium and stash it in a cave somewhere?

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5811
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Dileep » 24 Jul 2008 11:37

Firstly, it is not vast deposits. Here is the official story.

Secondly, do any of you believe that those could be mined if your life depended on it? How much lal chanda? How many hartals? This is Kerela yaar!!

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby svinayak » 24 Jul 2008 12:02

Acharya: I would like to remind you that the first post of this thread says no politics. Please post your cartoons elsewhere.
Last edited by Suraj on 24 Jul 2008 12:24, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Deleted due to inappropriate content


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests