India nuclear news and discussion

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 04 May 2009 03:19


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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Arun_S » 04 May 2009 10:18

RaviBg wrote:Koodankulam sets off chain reaction

The biggest apprehension voiced against imported nuclear reactor-based capacities planned in the country, in the wake of the Indo-US nuclear deal, has been on the pricing front. The fear, essentially, is that the project cost entailed in setting up these new, gargantuan imported reactors could push final retail electricity tariffs to levels that consumers will find difficult to pay, creating an Enron kind of a situation.


Facts (satya) speak for itself, one can't hide pregnant promiscuous daughter forever behind the garb of pimple on the stomach.

Sardar Man Mohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi and DAE's Anil Kakodkar were selling snake oil to Indian citizens all along.

And Rahul Gandhi was selling vaporware to all poor people not just Leelavati and Kalavati. :evil:

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 04 May 2009 21:52


RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby RamaY » 04 May 2009 22:42

Arun_S wrote:Facts (satya) speak for itself, one can't hide pregnant promiscuous daughter forever behind the garb of pimple on the stomach.

Sardar Man Mohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi and DAE's Anil Kakodkar were selling snake oil to Indian citizens all along.

And Rahul Gandhi was selling vaporware to all poor people not just Leelavati and Kalavati. :evil:


[sarc]

Nooknomic hitmans Arun-ji!

No wonder our beloved Ironman-neta shot to national-leadership without any (leadership or electoral) qualification and still protecting the nuke deal.

[/sarc-off]

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby negi » 04 May 2009 23:03

Arun ji while your point about the costs is well taken ; the fundamental question about an alternative way to meet India's energy demands in the same time frame remains unanswered.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby RamaY » 04 May 2009 23:24

negi wrote:Arun ji while your point about the costs is well taken ; the fundamental question about an alternative way to meet India's energy demands in the same time frame remains unanswered.


If pursued with same vigor as the nookdeal, a combination of solar/wind/bio-diesel in congruence with indegeneous nuclear power path will achieve what India needs in next 10-15 years.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby negi » 04 May 2009 23:41

Rama ji while I do not do this kind of thing for a living I am definitely sure that Solar/Wind or even Bio :eek: generated power cannot substitute Baseload powerplants i.e. Nuclear/thermal/Hydroelectric , we are talking of thousands of MW of electricity here and ofcourse which is available 24*7 for 365 days a year.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13651
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Suraj » 04 May 2009 23:46

Solar and wind are merely supplementary energy sources. They cannot serve as a base load source, unlike geothermal or hydroelectric ones. India needs significant base load capacity augmentation, regardless of how much we invest in supplementary energy sources. Nuclear power remains the primary base load power source after coal fired plants.

Further, any technology with a very high setup capital component will not be cost effective unless implemented expeditiously and on a significant scale, regardless of the source of either the technology the capital. A policy that results in couple of reactors from here, and a couple from there, will put a greater cost burden upon us, than one that allows a supplier and/or investor greater scale.

We *will* 'have an Enron' if we put in so many hurdles upon a project that we end up with one mega nuclear plant with unstable fuel supply and assorted other restrictions. It is equally possible regardless of who builds the plant - some dyed in the wool Indian company or an American one. There is no substitute for either efficient implementation or scale.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 05 May 2009 00:03

Suraj wrote:Nuclear power remains the primary base load power source after coal fired plants.

Small correction Sir: Hydel and Gas, would earn that distinction after Coal - and before Nuclear as the base load power source, today. It is a policy to try to make Nuclear the choice for such power, in the future.

sivabala
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 83
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 10:55

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby sivabala » 05 May 2009 00:08

...a combination of solar/wind/bio-diesel ...

Many people fall for this claim of non conventional energy sources (NCES) by reading mass media. Even with current cutting edge knowhow, it is impossible to replace or effectively substitute hydroelectric, coal & other fossil fuel energy sources even for another 20~30 years. (B'ing a researcher in the field I know the #s and can make such bold statements)

The energy from NCES are peanuts for investment cost. Several breakthroughs are required to effectively substitute the current power sources. It is not coming anytime soon. The way to increase sustainability is to improve energy efficiency across the board and hoping for the significant break throughs in NCES research.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Rangudu » 05 May 2009 00:10

Nuclear is cost prohibitive only if electricity as a whole is not subsidized. Despite huge cleanup and decommissioning costs, Nuclear plants supply 20% of US demand and a large % of baseload needs in several US regions, including the crowded Northeast.

Even with all the subsidies and technology investments, Wind and Solar combined provide ~1% of needs in the US. So to talk of wind/solar in India is not practical given our growth needs.

If India has to grow, we will have to pay for electricity and we meaning farmers, consumers and industries. If we don't want to pay for electricity then we will have to pay for the lack of electricty through stunted growth.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby RamaY » 05 May 2009 00:17

RamaY wrote:If pursued with same vigor as the nookdeal, a combination of solar/wind/bio-diesel in congruence with indegeneous nuclear power path will achieve what India needs in next 10-15 years.


I was talking about a right-mix of conventional and renewable-energy sources. I am not an expert, but my research shows that this can be achieved in a meaningful way.

But I could be wrong.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby negi » 05 May 2009 00:27

Rama ji with all due respect perhaps you missed out the major part of the debate on the nuke deal ; the new generation reactors use HE Uranium and it was for this fuel for which India required the NSG waiver ; Indo-US deal was closely coupled with this waiver.

Secondly I would have appreciated the pov of the critics of the deal had India demonstrated/operationalised a working nuke plant in the same class as the one's in Koodankulam (I am not even talking about the latest one's from Areva) . How can we talk about going all alone with sub 500 MW Candu type plants ?

sivabala
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 83
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 10:55

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby sivabala » 05 May 2009 00:34

RamaY wrote:...


RamaY, my intention was not to nitpick you.
But to tell a point that the mass media is creating a rosy picture about solar, bio-diesel,etc.. and many people have invested money in solar and other stuff. I just want to let them know we are not there yet to replace conventional energy sources.

Many people have lost a load of money by investing in venture capitalists for NCES. Just want to caution people against those predators.
As this is a nuclear thread, let us stop the discussion here and go to appropriate thread.


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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Arun_S » 05 May 2009 02:26

Suraj wrote:Solar and wind are merely supplementary energy sources. They cannot serve as a base load source, unlike geothermal or hydroelectric ones. India needs significant base load capacity augmentation, regardless of how much we invest in supplementary energy sources. Nuclear power remains the primary base load power source after coal fired plants.

Further, any technology with a very high setup capital component will not be cost effective unless implemented expeditiously and on a significant scale, regardless of the source of either the technology the capital. A policy that results in couple of reactors from here, and a couple from there, will put a greater cost burden upon us, than one that allows a supplier and/or investor greater scale.

We *will* 'have an Enron' if we put in so many hurdles upon a project that we end up with one mega nuclear plant with unstable fuel supply and assorted other restrictions. It is equally possible regardless of who builds the plant - some dyed in the wool Indian company or an American one. There is no substitute for either efficient implementation or scale.


Anil Kakaodkar is no idiot on the subject matter of nuclear power generation. But it is HE who has put on record cheap Rs 3 /KWH power from glorious Nuclear plants, power nirvan and that too cheap power that is matching or lower then thermal power. And he is proven is wrong (so soon) by actual numbers coming from the business world.

What is there to argue against data? and non-performance ? or selling #420 snake oil ?

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 05 May 2009 02:57

Securing funding by giving overly optimistic project costs? The horror!
Pack Kakodar off to Lawrence Livermore with the rest of his kind! These damn nukular engineers!

Why Thomas Friedman is wrong about the National Ignition Facility
he never mentions that Livermore originally promised that the NIF would cost $1.2 billion and open for business in 2001. Instead, it has cost around $4 billion (estimates vary depending on what you count) and construction wasn't completed until this year--eight years behind schedule. In other words, buyer beware when it comes to Livemore's cost estimates for such technology. I once asked a senior manager for the NIF how they came up with the initial $1.2 billion cost estimate. I naively thought he'd tell me that they added up all of the costs for wiring, steel, glass, and labor, but somehow underestimated. Instead he told me, with astonishing frankness, that they decided how much they thought Congress was willing to spend and worked back from there.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13651
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Suraj » 05 May 2009 03:22

Did Kakodkar refer to the cost basis at the time of completion or beforehand, it at some intermediate stage of completing N reactors ?

I don't see how anyone 'from the business world' can make a claim about cost benefit when not even one of the reactors in question has been constructed. It is pointless to parse the Hindu Businessline quote as 'large reactors from foreign sources will be costly'. Any businessman who talks like that is blowing smoke out of his rear. One can make any number of vague statements of that at kind. The fact remains that without efficient, timely implementation on a large scale, a capital and technology intensive energy source will be costly.

If you just waste time arguing about cost escalation, there will be a cost escalation anyway, because you wasted time - it would be a self-fulfilling prophecy of your own design. Clearly, if Kakodkar's plan were to become mired in all manners of opposition, it will not be as cost-effective as he estimates. Further, anyone else's cost estimate is no better than Kakodkar's, for the simple reason that it estimates the cost of an investment two decades into the future. In that sense, such an argument is a red herring, and IMHO, pointless smoke and mirrors.

Far more important is what is being done *now* to invest in construction on the largest possible scale. I'd rather accept a costlier plan to build N reactors/MW addition in M years than the same capacity at lower cost but greater time. There more there's lack of progress in building scale now, the more pronounced it will be in the future. It takes electricity to generate the economy activity to implement more sources of electricity...

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21166
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Prem » 05 May 2009 03:37

Another Fundamental to be considred in Future Nuke Energy Production cost , Hope GOI has secured enough U at low price since Mid 2008 .
http://seekingalpha.com/article/134264- ... -begun-rbc

Uranium Turnaround Has Begun - RBC 3 comments
"We believe that the uranium market is in the early stages of a bull market rally that could last three to four years," he said in a note to clients.

From recent trough levels, Mr. Schatzer noted uranium equities have recovered by about 225% but still remain about 68% below historic peak values. He thinks it will take about two years to reclaim those peaks and points to the looming supply/demand shortfall as one of the keys to recovery.

We think the uranium market will be facing substantial deficits and that utilities will have to pay higher and higher prices to secure both spot and long-term supplies. We also believe that the longer the spot price remains depressed (e.g. below $70/lb), the more dramatic the price run-up will be.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 05 May 2009 20:52


Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 06 May 2009 04:59


Sanatanan
BRFite
Posts: 481
Joined: 31 Dec 2006 09:29

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Sanatanan » 06 May 2009 10:31

Published in The Japan Times (Online), May 6, 2009:

Nuclear spin in Indian polls

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 561
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby ramdas » 06 May 2009 23:10

I read in rediff that the BJP is saying that implementation of the nuclear deal is conditional on the U.S not obstructing outsourcing. Better stand than the INC, but not good enough. Is'nt there a danger of our signing the CTBT and FMCT ?
What does this link say ?

http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/may/ ... gn-npt.htm

I quote from the link.

However, later she praised India's willingness to proceed with a fissile material cut-off treaty in cooperation with the United States and its willingness to pursue the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) as well as other lesser, but important measures such as improving its export control.


This seems to indicate a danger of our falling for the CTBT and FMCT. To prevent this, the nuclear deal must be scrapped at the earliest, before imported reators are constructed.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby NRao » 06 May 2009 23:22

The issue is not, and, never has been, India signing any of them. It has always been under what/which circumstance/s to sign. NPT/CTBT/FMCT - all are fine - provided certain conditions are met.

The US does not say this and the GoI says it off and on, so people tend to forget more often then remember - even Indians.

GoI should make a big noise about this, not to make others shut up, but to get everyone on the same page. It is no use IF the US keeps saying 'India must sign', when India has all along said 'India will sign IF .................'.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 561
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby ramdas » 07 May 2009 00:51

CTBT may be acceptable after a new round of successful thermonuclear tests. Nothing less. FMCT should be completely unacceptable for the next twenty years. It is risky to say that we are willing to sign a FMCT that is fully verifiable, etc. What if such a treaty comes up in 2 years ? We will be left with a puny deterrent.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 07 May 2009 02:35


Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 07 May 2009 03:07


Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2556
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 07 May 2009 03:20

IMO a very good stance. We have to realize that we also have the U.S by the short & curlies. Now that the nuclear trade door has been opened & the Russians and the French have come through it, it will be extremely difficult for the U.S to close it shut. Plus they will piss off their GEs and Westinghouses. So, India should now play hardball with them and demand tons of concessions before buying a single reactor from them.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 08 May 2009 05:37


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby ramana » 08 May 2009 06:21

US Strategic Posture

158 page report

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7134
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Amber G. » 08 May 2009 23:22

I read in rediff that the BJP is saying that implementation of the nuclear deal is conditional on the U.S not obstructing outsourcing.

Obama tax move won't impact Indian firms, Murthy to president
ndian IT firms would not be impacted by the tax reform proposal of US President Barak Obama, Infosys Technologies chairman and chief mentor N.R. Narayana Murthy told President Pratibha Devisinh Patil on Friday.

"Obama's tax proposal will not impact Indian firms as they already pay taxes in the US. It is only American firms operating in India who would have to repatriate taxes on profit earned outside the US when it becomes a law," Murthy told Patil at an interactive session at the Infosys campus.
<snip>

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby ramana » 09 May 2009 00:33

While India is lost in elections US studies

Ten years after POKII

And UPA will most likely let the anniversary go un-noticed except for CRM and ussual wonks wrting inane articles.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6999
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Anujan » 09 May 2009 00:38

ramana wrote:While India is lost in elections US studies

Ten years after POKII

And UPA will most likely let the anniversary go un-noticed except for CRM and ussual wonks wrting inane articles.


From the "findings" of the conference

# Pakistan is far more advanced in preparations to conduct nuclear operations.

# India is lagging in all categories of nuclear development.
:roll:

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 09 May 2009 03:08

The University of Reading's School of Law
http://media-newswire.com/release_1090886.html

School of Law to research US/India nuclear agreement

Dr Green is one of four experts from the University's School of Law who have just secured a grant with the British Academy for £30,000, to run a three-year project with regard to the 2007 US/India '123' nuclear agreement. This deal aims to facilitate the exchange of civil nuclear technology between India and the US, and is exceptional because it goes against the grain of several decades of US non-proliferation practice.

Dr Green said: "Several critics have argued that this agreement unravels the Non-Proliferation Treaty regime and sends the wrong message to allegedly nuclear-aspirant states such as Iran and North Korea. Given the current unstable climate it's essential that the various implications of this unique agreement are properly examined."

The project involves research and teaching collaboration between Reading and Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University in India. Students from both institutions will study a course on the agreement and research papers will be presented during three workshops.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 10 May 2009 03:00


Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 10 May 2009 23:04


Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 12 May 2009 07:22

India-NSG troika meet on reprocessing
It took place against the backdrop of the NSG considering a total ban on the sale of enrichment and reprocessing equipment for non-Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) signatories.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Arun_S » 13 May 2009 00:17

ramana wrote:While India is lost in elections US studies

Ten years after POKII

And UPA will most likely let the anniversary go un-noticed except for CRM and ussual wonks wrting inane articles.

Is it not mandated that all Indians must trust the force of Anil Kakodkar and MM Singh's bravado in lieu of real deterrence??
After all those who occupy the PMO chair and DAE superemo are automatically conferred super-natural power and infallible competence to protect India.

India is totally oblivious to 1962 fiasco where similar credence was given to bravado of Krishna Menon and his cohorts.

Indians get what they deserve. :oops:


Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion

Postby Gerard » 13 May 2009 07:22

http://www.robertawohlstetter.com/writings/BuddhaSmiles

Roberta Wohlstetter, The Buddha Smiles: Absent-Minded Peaceful Aid and the Indian Bomb, in Albert Wohlstetter, et al., Can We Make Nuclear Power Compatible with Limiting the Spread of Nuclear Weapons?, Vol. II-1, draft final report prepared for the US Energy Research and Development Administration in partial fulfillment of E(49-1)-3747, PH-78-04-370-23 (Los Angeles, CA: PAN Heuristics, November 15, 1976; Revised November 1977). Available online at the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center's website.

Indeed any attempt to define Indian behavior as in violation of any agreement, American, Canadain, or IAEA, met with the same legalisms and fuzzy talk that have characterized the history of our relations with that country. Indian bickering and redefinitions have left their mark on many negotiations and institutions involving atomic energy, including those, like the NPT, to which India is not a party.

Morarji Desai seems likely to be skeptical of the sort of technocratic idyll that has animated the nuclear energy program in India in General and that in particular might give some shred of plausibility to such dubious gadgetry as Plowshare....This is a particularly opportune time, then, to induce a revision in Indian thinking and to move her away from nuclear explosives.

The Indian program proceeded slowly over a very extended period under nominal cover... It is conceivable that they may proceed with a missile program at the same stately pace
Dr. Bhabha.. argued steadily in this vein against the economic arguments of Francis Perrin, IMD Little and others
Bhabha's figures, however, were subjected in that same year to a very close and sophisticated scrutiny by IMD Little, the British economist who had done outstanding work not only in basic welfare economic theory, but had been specializing in the economics of development... Little was not very impressed by the fact that the low end of Bhabha's range of atomic energy costs almost exactly coincided with the costs of conventional energy..."All this is rather a coincidence" he said "and suggests a bias on the part of the estimators who may feel bound to get their estimates for nuclear energy down to the level of conventional energy


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest