India Nuclear News And Discussion

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 26 Feb 2010 11:03

WTF is going on???!!!

Another Nuke scientist missing

Is it a Gora/Jehadi/TSP/Chipanda job?

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 26 Feb 2010 11:25

Someone said they might be whistleblowers

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 26 Feb 2010 12:10

Jarita wrote:Someone said they might be whistleblowers

About what? The fake h-bomb?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Feb 2010 16:23

lakshmikanth wrote:WTF is going on???!!!

Another Nuke scientist missing

Is it a Gora/Jehadi/TSP/Chipanda job?

His body is now recovered from a railway track.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Feb 2010 16:24

nukavarapu wrote:
Nuclear health hazards are often suppressed. A 1993 UN report found occupational hazard in nuclear plants in India was over six times the world average.

How authentic & scientific is this report ?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 Feb 2010 03:38

There were claims of birth defects, illness, cancer etc from Domiasiat, yet the DAE had not mined one kg of Uranium there.
The DAE just has to announce they are thinking about a facility somewhere. The next morning a foreign funded NGO will be there to educate the population. By that evening there will be headache, nosebleed, stillbirths etc.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Feb 2010 05:04

Missing scientist run over by train

Ananthanarayanan (37), Scientific Officer of the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, who had been reported missing by his family, was run over by an EMU near Guduvanchery railway station 12 days ago.

There was no identity card or papers on the victim’s body and they were unable to establish the identity.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Feb 2010 06:31

nukavarapu wrote:
Nuclear health hazards are often suppressed. A 1993 UN report found occupational hazard in nuclear plants in India was over six times the world average.

I am sure it will be a lovely article when I read it. I would just like to ask - the article boasts that it has figures for the whole world and that India's is bad. I would like to see specific figures for Korea, Pakistan and China to know exactly how much worse we are. Surely they do have world figures no? Unlike my uncle who sells pickle and says they are "world's best"

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Feb 2010 08:55

nukavarapu wrote:Everybody (including myself) is amused by the amount of investment and growth planned in the civil nuclear energy in India. But there are some very surprising and disappointing facts about safety. Here are some articles that I came across:

http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/node/4989

http://www.downtoearth.org.in/full6.asp ... 4&sec_id=9

The most interesting aspect:

Nuclear health hazards are often suppressed. A 1993 UN report found occupational hazard in nuclear plants in India was over six times the world average.

One aught to be very careful when posting such reports. The first one seems to be from 1999. The second one I could not find a date on it.

However, India has hosted multiple conferences on nuclear safety on behalf of the UN. The most recent I found: http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/blnus/14111593.htm (2008). There have been others prior to that. Some have actually involved Indian nuclear facilities too.

I am quite confident that there are issues - how many and how serious I do not know. But nothing that prevents the building of more nuclear facilities I would think. I am not a fan of nuclear techs, but they are here to stay.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 27 Feb 2010 15:27

Incredible!!!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Feb 2010 16:47

nukavarapu wrote: But if there is a probability 1% being that article true, its still a concern.

Well 1% of the truth may be enough for you but I am looking for a measure of how the author actually gained "facts" from China and Porkistan to make the claim that Indian stats are the "worst in the world", and I am looking for signs of certainty higher than the 1% that satsfies you. Despite claims to the contrary China and Pakistan are still part of the world, unless you believe that a 1% chance that they are not part of this world is good enough for you to exclude them from the comparison and the need for accountability from the author.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 Feb 2010 17:09

nukavarapu wrote:. The article or claim may be true or false, is uncertain as I am still not able to find a credible and authentic source of the claim. But if there is a probability 1% being that article true, its still a concern.

nukavarapu, do you have a PhD in Technology Strategy?

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 27 Feb 2010 21:29

nukavarapu:

.. if 1% truth ....

Which 1% of the report (in your opinion) is true? Can you highlight it? Thanks.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 Feb 2010 22:12

nukavarapu wrote:Do PhDs have the only rite to talk here???

Perish the thought.

Avik · Post by **Avik** » 27 Feb 2010 22:57

^^^^^^^^^^
Nukavurapu Garu,

To my simple brain, it would appear that:

1% truth + ( Less than) 100% Scholar + (Less than) 100% Analysis = (Tends To) 100 % Fiction

Or as a Pakistani Politician once said,

Zero Plus Zero is always Zero

Or as Plato ( or was it Aristotle) once said,

Fiction + Fictional Character + Fictional analysis = More Fiction

So, where is the fact here ??

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 28 Feb 2010 01:06

Gerard wrote:
nukavarapu wrote:. The article or claim may be true or false, is uncertain as I am still not able to find a credible and authentic source of the claim. But if there is a probability 1% being that article true, its still a concern.
nukavarapu, do you have a PhD in Technology Strategy?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Feb 2010 09:26

@ all, any progress on the drinking water contamination incident ?
TIA.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Feb 2010 17:30

nukavarapu wrote:
Rahul M wrote:@ all, any progress on the drinking water contamination incident ?
TIA.
The last update was that they are conducting a formal inquiry into the incident. IIRC the investigation was stuck because there were no CCTVs to monitor the water dispenser. After that no news at all.

thanks, but this is not good news at all.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 28 Feb 2010 20:17

Sanatanan wrote:From The Hindu, 16 Feb 2010. OpEd by Brahma Chellaney
Ignoring lessons of Bhopal & Chernobyl
Brahma Chellaney

The government’s nuclear-accident liability bill seeks to burden Indian taxpayers with a huge hidden subsidy by protecting foreign reactor builders from the weight of the financial consequences of severe accidents.
. . .

This does not follow economic principles, if we raise the liability to lets say 10 billion$, the companies will just pass on the cost of their increased insurance to us. So we pay any way.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Feb 2010 20:25

Guddu wrote:
This does not follow economic principles, if we raise the liability to lets say 10 billion$, the companies will just pass on the cost of their increased insurance to us. So we pay any way.

But US has made the region more dangerous by its own policies and made the risk of doing business high in the region. They do not want to build any relations with the business owners inside India and want to only work with large customers such as the govt.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 28 Feb 2010 20:40

Rahul M wrote:
nukavarapu wrote:
The last update was that they are conducting a formal inquiry into the incident. IIRC the investigation was stuck because there were no CCTVs to monitor the water dispenser. After that no news at all.
thanks, but this is not good news at all.

Apart from the CCTV issue, the investigation is fruitless because the number of people who had access to the water dispenser space is counted in the thousands.

Civilians, contractors, workers, staff all inclusive.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 28 Feb 2010 21:29

The Russians and French will cap their liability in any post-accident negotiation with the GOI. There is no open tap into their treasuries.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Mar 2010 04:39

It is far better to exercise, eat right, etc than to depend on an insurance during catastrophic times.

I would rather inform all parties (including Indian inspectors for instance) that they better take this entire process seriously in all respects - deliver quality product on time and one which will work without ANY major flaws.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 01 Mar 2010 04:47

Gerard wrote:The Russians and French will cap their liability in any post-accident negotiation with the GOI. There is no open tap into their treasuries.

More likely they would not even pay a dime to begin with regardless of what promises they make.

Foreign reactors = disaster waiting to happen (where India will be left holding the bag much like afte Bhopal).

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 01 Mar 2010 05:05

France operates 59 nuclear power plants. These produce 78% of France's electrical power.
Japan operates 54 nuclear reactors. These provide 30% of Japan's electricity.
Neither country has had a catastrophic accident. There has been no disaster with any of their reactors in many decades of operation. Neither country has regular blackouts due to a severe shortage of power. Neither country's economy suffers due to power shortage.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 01 Mar 2010 07:01

Neither country has had a catastrophic accident.

that's because the ceo of nuclear corporations in those countries know they will be hung if there was an accident.

no such danger exists to their personal well being when exporting reactors overseas.

what would be the consequence if a union carbide type situation happened in the US? The chariman of the company would be charged with homicide for sure and reduced to a pauper. That alone is strong incentive not to skimp on quality control or doing the job right. Once again no such compulsion exist when exporting stuff overseas as they can always blame the operators using the logic you just presented. If not, why do they want their liabilities capped?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 01 Mar 2010 07:31

Neshant wrote:no such danger exists to their personal well being when exporting reactors overseas.

Has there been any disaster at any overseas nuclear reactor built by these French or Japanese companies?

Sanatanan · Post by **Sanatanan** » 01 Mar 2010 09:11

Guddu wrote: . . .
, if we raise the liability to lets say 10 billion$, the companies will just pass on the cost of their increased insurance to us. So we pay any way.

My understanding on the "liability" issue with respect to imported npps is as follows:

NPCIL, as the Operator, is being made the scapegoat to weather the aftermath of an accident caused by an imported NNP, in the conceptualisation / design / manufacture / construction of which it had no (or had only very very limited) part to play.

Now, I believe, NPCIL is not free to fix the cost (into which cost of insurance would be factored-in) of electricity it sells. The selling price is also controlled to a large extent by various organs of the Government (such as the Central Electricity Authority). In order to force the Central Government to subsidise electric power, often, State Electricity Boards tend to refuse to buy electricity generated (by non-SEB plants) at realistic prices even when they are facing severe load-shedding in their territory (not that the seller is trying to take advantage of a market-situation in in this case). {Purely as an example - Bangaluru may be having brown-outs, but the required power from Kaiga may not flow into the Karnataka Grid}

In such a scenario, the Central Government would have to take the burden of the cost of compensation arising out of an accident caused by the imported npp. This in effect would ultimately mean that the tax payer would have to bear the brunt while the foreign designer / manufacturer / constructor of the npp goes 'scot free' as it were. If the liability were to be loaded on the foreign supplier (as it ought to be), then, such an npp might become economically unviable.

Sanatanan · Post by **Sanatanan** » 01 Mar 2010 10:42

From Business Standard, March 1, 2010
Budget support for nuclear power down 10%

At a time when the government has renewed focus on nuclear power generation as a means to cut carbon emissions and achieve energy security, the fund allocation for nuclear power in the Budget 2010-11 has been slashed by over 10 per cent.

The Union Budget for the next financial year, tabled in Parliament by Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee last Friday, provides for a support of Rs 1,848 crore for nuclear power schemes, as against an allocation of Rs 2,065 crore provided in the revised estimate of 2009-10.

While the Budget increased the overall plan outlay for nuclear power by over 29 per cent to Rs 4,739 crore over the revised estimate of the last financial year, this increase has been mainly on account of the over 81 per cent jump in the Internal and Extra Budgetary Resources (IEBR) { } of Rs 2,891 crore during 2010-11.

. . .

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 01 Mar 2010 10:49

^^^

This was expected to happen as NPCIL started generating a surplus from the electricity produced from the existing plants. The fact that NPCIL cannot build plants fast enough is being tackled by having other companies join NPCIL as builders.

“For the last four years, we (NPCIL) have not drawn any budgetary support. We have a cash surplus of Rs 14,000 crore and can support around 10,000 Mw of projects from our own resources in the future. There is no possibility of any negative impact on our projects,” said a senior official from NPCIL.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Mar 2010 02:02

Looking at this situation, I would place my bets on French and Russians compared to capitalist cronies of Ameerkhan.

Two American reactors (Bechtel/GE) have been operating in India for the past 40 years.
Capitalist crony technology is apparently quite safe and reliable?

The Russian reactors are still being built. The French is in planning stage.
Perhaps we should wait for a few years before passing judgment on the relative merits of US/Russian/French reactors?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 03 Mar 2010 05:47

India moves on U.S. nuclear deal with new law

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 04 Mar 2010 19:26

27-year-old woman BARC scientist commits suicide

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 04 Mar 2010 20:04

Once again in India, someone throws away their life for nothing. Someone should drum into many Indians the idea that life is too rich, diverse, full of possibilities- economic and social- to end it like that.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 05 Mar 2010 00:37

Couple of interesting theories going around since this has truly gone beyond mere conincidence

These folks were whistleblowers of sorts
- Nuke black market and we might have got embroiled
- Related to holes in Nuke deal

What is happening is bad stuff

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 05 Mar 2010 00:45

Why has it gone beyond mere coincidence?

If these people were working in the garment industry, we would be reading nothing about their deaths. Take a group of people from the general population with the same size as India's nuclear establishment. In a year, how many suicides is normal? How many murders normally occur?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 05 Mar 2010 00:46

Nuclear Liability Bill ignores Finance, Environment Ministries' objections

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 05 Mar 2010 00:47

7th nuke scientist dead in last 1 year max.
All of unnatural causes.
Forget about the Kaiga episode
How many nuke scientists do we have? Simple statistical analysis will tell you if this is beyond the pale

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 05 Mar 2010 02:58

Do an online search and you'll see how pakistani media is using the deaths of the scientists to claim that India's nuke program is unsafe. That makes things very interesting indeed
If there is hanky panky going on with the deaths and anyone has the motive it is our two illustrious neighbours. Given the clumsiness with which this is executed if at all, illustrious neighbour to the west might be the proxy.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 05 Mar 2010 03:21

They were claiming that Loknath Mahalingam was a 'top nuclear scientist' as well and that he had access to nuclear weapon secrets. The reality was that he trained interns and new recruits in the simulator.