India Nuclear News And Discussion

arun · Post by **arun** » 10 Mar 2010 22:12

I thought fast neutron reactors were the dinosaurs of the reactor world with interest being limited to efficiently decommissioning them.

Any idea why fast neutron reactors have caught DAE’s attention ? :

India seeks greater nuclear cooperation with Russia – official

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Mar 2010 22:53

Indian nuclear energy chief: Russia has an advantage: it has a reactor, others can only show papers

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 10 Mar 2010 22:55

What's the surprise? Fast neutron reactors are an important part of India's 3-stage program because of the lack of uranium. Already there are plans of building a total of 5 fast neutron reactors by 2020.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 10 Mar 2010 23:13

^^^ Regrading FNR:

Though the Idea of FNR is quite old (Manhattan Project days), and some commercial reactors were decommissioned but R&D in this technology is not dead ... far from it. ( Can find reference or one can do google to look for it - one place to start - http://www.ans.org/pi/ps/docs/ps74.pdf)

IIRC in one scenario France is talking about replacing 50% of its present nuclear capability being replaced by FNR's by 2050)

Basically, from what I know, FNR were conceived because theoretically they will burn uranium more efficiently (60 x times or so) (in old days uranium supply was thought to be much less than now). (India being not having plentiful of U was/is interested in technology - Homi Bhabha's vision even in 50's had such consideration for India etc - He talked about it ).

But lot of technical problems were encountered and not to mention by 70's it was realzed that there is more U in the world (or at least availably to the countries who designed developed that technology) so by 80's FNRs went out of fashion (not commercially competitive)

But there is renewed interest again.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 10 Mar 2010 23:30

^^^ Not sure if the following was posted before:
It talks about FNR's, Thorium reactors, etc. This is a popular article from recent Scientific American,
worth a read.
Are New Types of Reactors Needed for the U.S. Nuclear Renaissance?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 10 Mar 2010 23:58

http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/i ... 17187.aspx

The Supreme Court had clearly said the polluter pay principle was for "absolute liability" and obligation to adopt remedial measures for environmental damage, Sorabjee said.

"Importantly, the Supreme Court ruled that the precautionary principle and the polluter pay principle have been accepted as part of the law of the land and is referred to in Articles 21, 47 and 48-A of the Constitution," the former attorney general said.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 11 Mar 2010 00:16

Wiki says Russia has a contract to build two fast neutron reactors in China. So there is an opportunity for DAE to cooperate with the Russians since both sides are constructing FNRs. They may be able to get costs down if a Indo-Russian joint venture is set up for construction in India and China.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 11 Mar 2010 03:54

From Scientific American article (link posted above):

Fears of such a uranium shortage led India, which has limited natural supplies of the nuclear fuel, to explore another fissile element, thorium, as an alternative. Wrapping highly fissile plutonium in a thorium blanket could produce enough nuclear fuel indefinitely, according to the vision laid out by the architect of India's nuclear program, physicist Homi J. Bhabha, in 1954. The Indian government is currently building such a prototype fast breeder reactor, despite limited success with a precursor, said Princeton physicist M. V. Ramana during the IPFM call. "The cost of electricity is 80 percent higher than from heavy-water reactors," he added. Uranium prices would need to increase 15-fold from current levels of roughly $80 per kilogram to make it economically attractive.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 11 Mar 2010 03:59

From a blog
http://cbcnn.blogspot.com/2010/03/manmo ... llout.html

Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Manmohan's nuclear sellout
Under the din of the Women's reservation bill, Manmohan Singh has tried to surreptitiously pass the nuclear-accident liability bill. You can tell there is something terribly wrong with our "honest" PM. Brahma Chellaney points out the failings of the nuclear deal (and our "honest" PM). Excellent article. Highly recommended.
India's nuclear-accident liability law: An anti-market bill that weakens safety

The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill is an unparalleled piece of legislation: It aims to make foreign builders of nuclear reactors in India immune from legal action, however culpable they may be for a catastrophic accident. And it caps their liability at a ridiculously low Rs500 crore ($109 million) despite the billions of dollars in profit they are set to make. Yet, the government set the parliamentary process for the Bill’s consideration in motion under unusual circumstances—it circulated it to members on 8 March when Parliament was in turmoil over the women’s reservation issue.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 11 Mar 2010 06:35

Hello, Jaritaji - A few post above I requested you to do statistical analysis on the issue of your previously posted hypothesis/concern about murder/suicides of nuclear scientists etc. I certainly would hope to see some chi square analysis.

Also, I believe, as you said the matter is serious, and one needs to get to "bottom of it" (again your words) so could you please share some more light on who was sending all those tweets and more importantly why? I mean why spread what seems to be wildly baseless rumors here?

Thanks in advance.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 11 Mar 2010 07:19

http://www.livemint.com/2010/03/1020441 ... y-Bil.html

Kill the nuclear liability Bill
Brahma Chellaney

Low accident liability and legal immunity mean reactor builders will have perverse incentives for malpractices

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 11 Mar 2010 10:39

India to get 510 tonnes of Uranium from Kazakhastan & Russia

India has firm commitments for 510 tonnes of natural uranium from Kazakhstan and Russia in 2010-11. During the current fiscal, the country had received 478 tonnes from France and Russia. Additionally, to augment domestic supplies, the Uranium Corporation of India Ltd (UCIL) has initiated the process for developing new uranium mines and processing plants at two sites in Andhra Pradesh and Meghalaya.

According to officials, the expected quantity of uranium to be imported during 2010-11, for which deals have been tied-up, are 300 tonnes of natural uranium from Kazakhstan and 210 tonnes from Russia. During the current financial year, 300 tonnes of natural uranium came in from France and 120 tonnes of natural uranium and 58 tonnes of enriched uranium were received from Russia.

In terms of overall supplies, Russia has entered into an umbrella agreement for supply of 2,000 tonnes of nuclear fuel starting from 2009. Kazakhstan has also entered into an umbrella agreement for supply of 2,100 tonnes of fuel. However, France's consignment of 300 tonnes of fuel last year was a one-time supply, officials said.

With uranium supplies perking up, nuclear power generation surged 39 per cent in December 2009 and 19 per cent for the April-December period this fiscal.

During April-December, Kaiga's load factor, or operational efficiency, rose to 56.10 per cent from 49.91 per cent last year, MAPS's was up 52.06 per cent (39.29 per cent) and Tarapur's rose to 64.31 per cent (49.84 per cent).

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 11 Mar 2010 16:16

Once the PFBR is complete, India will become one of three countries that can claim to run a commercial grade FNR.

Incidentally four more FBRs in the 500 MWe class are set to come up with two co-located with the PFBR at Kalpakkam.

This same design will be scaled up to 1000 and then 1500 MWe in the next two decades. heading into the 2030s , 1000 MWe FBRs will be the most common type of large reactor built in India.

Even the Yamrikis are getting serious about FNRs . they are in the process of sewing up co-operative agreements with the Japanese in this area.

Everybody knows that if the nuclear renaissance has to be sustained, the overall neutron economy must grow. And that can happen only via the FNR - breeding route, despite the claims that new generation LWRs will achieve very high breeding ratios (0.8-0.9) level.

ankit-s · Post by **ankit-s** » 11 Mar 2010 18:47

Gagan wrote: Why is the Indo-US nuclear deal stuck on the re-processing thing, when the US dosn't hold that tech, and the French and others have it?

Gagan when it comes to reprocessing, US has its attitude problem whereas Russians are quite forthright on this.

Russia is supplying the country's first large nuclear power plant, comprising two VVER-1000 (V-392) reactors, under a Russian-financed US$ 3 billion contract. The AES-92 units at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu state are being built by NPCIL and will be commissioned and operated by NPCIL under IAEA safeguards. The turbines are made by Leningrad Metal Works. Unlike other Atomstroyexport projects such as in Iran, there have been only about 80 Russian supervisory staff on the job. Russia will supply all the enriched fuel, though India will reprocess it and keep the plutonium.

According to the terms of the US Indo deal India can have reprocessing rights on condition it establishes a national facility to safeguard nuclear material that is monitored by the IAEA. Also, India must put in place "arrangements and procedures," under which reprocessing of U.S. fuel can be carried out.

As for as the technology is concerned, where a country like France has edge over other nations with several types of extractions namely; PUREX (Plutonium and Uranium Recovery by EXtraction) DIAMEX SANEX, India like other western nations uses PUREX method (even advanced PUREX). Hence technology wise India is good, but it is the (reprocessing) right which is not being granted (by US) against the spent fuel - and thats what matters.

See here list of countries using PUREX type process:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reprocessed_fuel

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 11 Mar 2010 19:47

ankit-s wrote:See here list of countries using PUREX type process:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reprocessed_fuel

Thanks ankit-s,

No China in that list?

ankit-s · Post by **ankit-s** » 11 Mar 2010 20:42

Gagan wrote:
ankit-s wrote:See here list of countries using PUREX type process:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reprocessed_fuel
Thanks ankit-s,

No China in that list?

China has had only limited success with extracting plutonium from enriched uranium spent fuel. China has not developed the sophisticated mechanical and chemical processes required to separate spent fuel from zircalloy cladding past the experimental stage. China attempted this process once in April 1977.

China plans to reprocess spent fuel and to recycle mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel for use in its pressurized water reactors (PWRs) and fast reactors. China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) has announced plans to construct a facility to reprocess spent fuel with a capacity of 400-800 tons per year, and China has pledged that its new plutonium extraction facilities will be open to international inspections.

When you see that countries like Korea del Norte and Pakistan are engaged in reprocessing fuel, the master can not be left behind.

China is mediating between the US and North Korea to end Pyongyang’s nuclear programme under certain conditions after the Communist North claimed that it had finished reprocessing all the 8000 spent fuel rods stored at its Pyongyang nuclear complex which will give it the capability of manufacturing at least six nuclear devices. After US Secretary of State Colin Powell rang up his Chinese counterpart, Li Zhaoxing, in Beijing, Chinese Vice-Foreign Minister Dai Bingguo will be flying to Washington to brief the State Department of his talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il. Dai is believed to be carrying a letter from Chinese President Hu Jintao for President Bush.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 11 Mar 2010 21:08

Kota Nuke Plant Supervisor found dead

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/vide ... 671058.cms

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 11 Mar 2010 21:17

Jarita wrote:Kota Nuke Plant Supervisor found dead

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/vide ... 671058.cms

This is alarming. We already have 3-4 such deaths in the past one year.

ankit-s · Post by **ankit-s** » 11 Mar 2010 22:26

Jarita wrote:Kota Nuke Plant Supervisor found dead

Human resources critical to Indian nuclear plans

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Mar 2010 03:09

India, Russia may ink nuclear energy pact: Uday Bhaskar

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 12 Mar 2010 05:41

Govt to introduce Liability Bill in LS

...
A top government source told The Indian Express that the Bill, which seeks to define the financial compensation due from an operator of a nuclear reactor in case of an accident, would most probably be introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.

“We are going ahead with it. We will introduce the Bill on Monday or Tuesday. There is no plan to hold it back,” the source said.
...
The BJP and the Left parties, which had supported the Women’s Reservation Bill, have made it known that they are opposed to the Liability Bill in its present form.
...
...
Critics of the Bill oppose it on these very grounds, alleging that it is designed as a favour to American companies and that the cap of Rs 500 crore was too low, considering the large-scale damage that any nuclear accident can cause.

The source said the government was yet to initiate a process of consultation with other political parties to garner support on this Bill.

He hinted that this might be done during the three-week recess that Parliament gets into from Tuesday before reconvening for the rest of the Budget session in the first week of April.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Mar 2010 06:53

It was expected that the US would get a share of the reactor market. How can there be a US-India nuclear deal if no deals are made?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Mar 2010 07:06

Why should the Indian Government formally assume liability?

In the (unlikely) event of an accident, after the foreign compensation (either private or government), it will still be the GOI and state governments that are responsible for taking care of people. In the end, it ends up at their door.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 12 Mar 2010 07:17

the fact that limited liability demand has been put forth means the risk of a nuclear disaster is a real possibility.

IMO foreign built nuke reactors are just not worth it as they pose a severe risk from all angles, not least of which is terrorism.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Mar 2010 07:33

Indian built reactors are more safe than the foreign ones? They are immune from terrorism?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Mar 2010 07:35

How are the companies being given a free run?

These are reactors that will be under the control of NPCIL and the DAE, that will be overseen by the AERB.

Or is India some special place, where reactors that run safely in countries all over the world just blow up? All these foreign suppliers have built reactors in locations all over the world. Where are the disasters?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Mar 2010 07:44

But there is someone who has shoulder the responsibility viz BARC and DAE

It is the DAE that will operate the foreign built reactors.

The same way they operate other foreign reactors like CIRUS, like the 2 Tarapur (US built) units, like the 2 CANDU (Canadian) units.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Mar 2010 07:47

the countries either have their own nuclear liability fund or part of the international nuclear liability fund.

In both cases, liability is capped. The state becomes insurer of last resort.
How will this be different in India?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Mar 2010 07:54

Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Docume ... pcomp.html

Article III
Undertaking

1. Compensation in respect of nuclear damage per nuclear incident shall be ensured by the following means:

1.
1. the Installation State shall ensure the availability of 300 million SDRs or a greater amount that it may have specified to the Depositary at any time prior to the nuclear incident, or a transitional amount pursuant to sub-paragraph (ii);

2. a Contracting Party may establish for the maximum of 10 years from the date of the opening for signature of this Convention, a transitional amount of at least 150 million SDRs in respect of a nuclear incident occurring within that period.

2. beyond the amount made available under sub-paragraph (a), the Contracting Parties shall make available public funds according to the formula specified in Article IV.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Mar 2010 07:59

Nuclear liability limit needed to enter global trade: Kakodkar

He said India is keen to join the Convention of Supplementary Compensation (CSC) and a law limiting the equipment manufacturers liability is necessary for that.

The convention members will share the nuclear liability above a certain limit - sort of an insurance pool.

“The payment of compensation by different parties will be different. Up to a certain sum the equipment maker will be liable and above that the respective government and the CSC members will share,” Kakodkar said.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 12 Mar 2010 16:56

Greenpeace on Nuclear Liability Bill: Drop it

Greenpeace has also launched a petition addressed to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [ Images ], which the organisation claims has been signed by over 21,000 people.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Mar 2010 17:35

Greenpeace again... some things never change

1983.....
LEGAL CHALLENGE TO BLOCK NUCLEAR EXPORTS TO INDIA ANNOUNCED BY SIX PUBLIC-INTEREST ORGANIZATIONS

Washington--- Six public-interest organizations today challenged as illegal the Reagan Administration's plan to provide more nuclear assistance to India despite India's continuing program to develop nuclear weapons.
The coalition joined in a legal action to block export of reactor components for India's nuclear powerplant at Tarapur, near Bombay. The groups filed a petition today with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to intervene in an export- licensing proceeding involving the spare parts for the U.S.- supplied plant.

Joining in the legal action were the Nuclear Control Institute, Federation of American Scientists, Union of Concerned Scientists, Greenpeace, Energy Research Foundation and Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy (SANE).

1998...
Greenpeace Urges India to Renounce Nuclear Option, Sign CTBT

Greenpeace U.S.A. Executive Director Kristen Engberg sent a letter to Naresh Chandra, Indian ambassador to the United States, saying India "must act urgently to repair the damage its testing program has done this week."

According to the environmental group, India risks facing the kind of global outrage that France had cause in 1995 with its resumption of testing at Moruroa. The two further nuclear tests conducted today condemn India to international isolation

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 13 Mar 2010 01:15

Russia signs India nuclear reactor deal

Russia has announced it will build 16 nuclear reactors in India as part of defence and energy deals.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 13 Mar 2010 05:00

For perspective about Liability etc two thoughts/analogies:

1. Consider, say, Indian Railways -their safety records/ liabilities etc. If I am not mistaken more than 3K people needlessly die in Mumbai only. By any comparison (even accidents per user) shouldn't this be order of magnitude more serious?

2. Consider a scenario where we (India) are setting up a reactor (or any other technology - say a hospital) in other country - what will be reasonable liability we would like to take before we say it is unreasonable.

Just some thoughts only - Also don't forget, like abuse of medical malpractice in US the cost of all that kind of Insurance will ultimately be passed to consumer (read - Indian Janata)

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 13 Mar 2010 05:27

Hillary gets certification power on Indo-US nuke deal
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/hilla ... ../589638/

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was on Thursday named as the new certification authority by US President Barack Obama to verify the Indo-US Civilian Nuclear Act for the US Congress after every six months. “I hereby delegate to you (Secretary of State) the functions conferred upon the President by section 204(c) of the United States-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Nonproliferation Enhancement Act (Public Law 110-369),” Obama said in a signed memorandum issued to the Secretary of State. Under the Act, the US President needs to certify to the appropriate congressional committees that it is the policy of the US to work with members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, individually and collectively, to agree to further restrict the transfers of equipment and technology related to the enrichment of uranium and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 13 Mar 2010 05:38

Amber G. wrote:For perspective about Liability etc two thoughts/analogies:

1. Consider, say, Indian Railways -their safety records/ liabilities etc. If I am not mistaken more than 3K people needlessly die in Mumbai only. By any comparison (even accidents per user) shouldn't this be order of magnitude more serious?

Amber, just wanted point out that this is not valid comparison. Too much radiation causes cancer and other terrible conditions, and it also contaminates the surrounding ecology including underground water supply, trees etc, with chances of mutation of plants/animals genes being a possibility too. The long term effects of radiation are much worse, and the clean up of that will be more expensive than just compensating injured/killed people. JMHO

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 13 Mar 2010 06:30

^^ Like any analogy you take into account what is (and what is not) valid.. it;s just some thing to think.

Sure, radioactivity causes cancer, but what is bad about cancer is, that it kills, just like lack of safety in trains. (If you like, think of trains, which will transport nuclear - or other hazardous materials

- they can have the same safety issues)

In that sense, it is very valid comparison.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 13 Mar 2010 06:58

Amber, you know very well what I am saying. the clean up in the aftermath of nuclear accident is much worse. Sure, we have had railway accidents, but the number of accidents involving chemicals etc in railway accidents is very less. And we don't even know if they transfer radioactive material in cargo trains.

The Exxon-valdez spill in alaska cost almost $2 billion just to clean up. The compensation to people etc was only around 500-600 million dollars. In US, the courts enforced the agreement. If we sign away the compensation limit, we will be left holding the bill.

I am not against the nuclear liability bill, but the 500cr limit is way too less!

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 13 Mar 2010 08:19

No progress in Kaiga investigation

The investigation into the incident of mixing of tritium with water at the Kaiga Atomic Power Station here has not come to any conclusion as the matter involved technical issues.

The police department had requested the Nuclear Power Corporation (NPCL) to depute experts to help the police in the investigation.

The NPCL nominated two scientists from Bhaba Atomic Research Centre but they have not visited Kaiga till date despite repeated requests by the police, said Raman Gupta, Superintendent of police, Uttar Kannada district. {What is happening here ?}

Mr. Gupta told journalists that if the scientists failed to respond to the requests, his department was left with no option but to write to the government to refer the case to the CBI.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 13 Mar 2010 09:22

SSridhar wrote:No progress in Kaiga investigation
The investigation into the incident of mixing of tritium with water at the Kaiga Atomic Power Station here has not come to any conclusion as the matter involved technical issues.

The police department had requested the Nuclear Power Corporation (NPCL) to depute experts to help the police in the investigation.

The NPCL nominated two scientists from Bhaba Atomic Research Centre but they have not visited Kaiga till date despite repeated requests by the police, said Raman Gupta, Superintendent of police, Uttar Kannada district. {What is happening here ?}

Mr. Gupta told journalists that if the scientists failed to respond to the requests, his department was left with no option but to write to the government to refer the case to the CBI.

Monitored saar,

Let me check with the paanwalla again.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 42#p835142