India Nuclear News And Discussion

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 23 Oct 2009 21:53

India to ease radioisotope shortage for nuke medicine

Bhabha Atomic Research Centre is planning to embark on production of user-friendly Moly99 through a fission route with LEU, as soon as possible, by augmenting processing capacity to increase the needed production of fission Moly99,"

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Oct 2009 23:46

How about Mn 54?

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 24 Oct 2009 00:16

ramana wrote:How about Mn 54?

Oh we produce that already.

Just that nobody knows how much.

Sanatanan · Post by **Sanatanan** » 26 Oct 2009 06:57

Same old story, this time in a new context:
From TImes of India

A Nuclear Flashpoint
Achintyarup Ray, TNN 26 October 2009, 04:53am IST

Not every car is welcome to the village of Haripur. So, as soon as you steer right from Junput More near Digha Bengal's popular sea resort your
vehicle is surrounded by a group of enquiring villagers who want to know your identity; their searching eyes scan inside the car. If you try to ignore them and venture along the mud road atop the sea dyke, conch shells start blowing from roadside houses, and hundreds of people come running from the villages to block your way.

Tension is mounting with every passing day at this coastal hamlet of East Midnapore some 160 kilometres from Kolkata and not too far from Nandigram. It was only around a week ago that they came to know that the central government has finally given the nod to set up a nuclear power plant at Haripur. Around 10,000 {perhaps with time, we can expect this number getting inflated; it is all about cornering compensation} villagers two-thirds of them fishermen are now gearing up to prevent any move of the government to acquire land for the project, to be built on an area of 15 square kilometres. They have decided not to allow into the village anybody who comes with an intention of surveying the land before setting up the plant.

In November 2006 even before bullets started flying in Nandigram these villagers had forced a team from the department of atomic energy (DAE) to return without entering the village. Thousands had gathered behind barricades put up on the sea dyke to stop officials from proceeding to Haripur.

This time too, they have vowed to do the same. "It's a do-or-die battle," said Debashis Shyamal, convener of the Haripur Paramanu Bidyut Prakalpa Protirodh Andolan (movement to resist nuclear power plant at Haripur). "The villagers know that they have no other option but to resist," he added.

Shyamal's colleague Sujoy Jana said: "The project will affect at least 10,000 people, 80% of them dependent on fishing. At least five khotis' (fish unloading points) which yield a business of Rs 15 crore per annum, will have to be removed. If the project finally happens, no less than 10 villages will be affected. And apart from proximity to the sea, the land here is quite fertile. The main agricultural produce of the area include paan and tomato."

On October 16, the Centre awarded the contract to build the Haripur power station to the Russian state-owned firm Atomstroyexport. The Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) is planning to begin the civil construction work by 2010. "We will start work on the project as soon as possible," said Sudhinder Thakur, executive director, corporate planning, NPCIL.

"But the project has just been announced by the government and we are yet to work out the details. A lot of things will have to be done now. One of the most important things is to get in touch with the state government for the land," Thakur told TOI from Mumbai.

"The villagers are counting moments. We have news that an official team will come for a recce very soon. But we are on alert and won't let them enter the village," said Shyamal. "The fishing season has started and all these activities will hamper our business," he said.

Will the villagers move away if they are paid enough compensation? Shyamal smiles. "Will the government be able to give us a sea? Every person in this village is dependent on the sea. No monetary compensation will be enough for them," he says.

The state land and land reforms department is blissfully unaware of the developments. "Nuclear plant? What nuclear plant? I don't have any information regarding that," said Abdur Rezzak Mollah, the minister in charge of the department.

Local Trinamool Congress, however, is in a fix. During the 2006 movement, Trinamool leader Subhendu Adhikary led the anti-nuclear plant agitation in Haripur. But this time, the decision to set up the plant has been taken by a government of which his party is the second largest constituent. Subhendu, however, put up a brave face. "Whatever be the decision of the government, I will be with the villagers. We won't allow them to be evicted," he said.

But his father, seasoned politician Sisir Adhikary (who is also the Union minister of state for rural development) rubbished all these "claims" made by the media. "The Centre

has not taken any such decision. It's a CPM conspiracy. Whatever you people are writing is planted by that party," he said.

CPM's East Midnapore district unit leader and former MP Prashanta Pradhan was not surprised with the Trinamool stand. "Everybody knows that they are against industry be it in Singur or Nadigram or Salboni or Nayachar or Haripur. Trinamool will always throw a spanner in the project. Our party, however, will always fight for industrialization, for industry," he said.

But whatever the leaders say, the people of Haripur have already decided to launch an agitation. The Haripur Paramanu Bidyut Prakalpa Protirodh Andolan is mobilising them. As a first step, they are sending postcards to the Prime Minister, with a message in protest against the move to set up the nuclear plant. The organisation is also seeking support from all sections of people across West Bengal, including NGOs, environmentalists and intellectuals.

Added later:
Need to find out how far the nearest coal mine is from this site. A nuclear power plant at any site would be uneconomical, as per DAE's earlier averments at different points in time, if it is nearer than 800 to 1000 Km from a coal field (by the way, I do not, just now have a link for this data point).

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 26 Oct 2009 07:14

I can confirm what you are saying. ( i.e about the 800 km thingy).

The figure was released in a monograph titled - " Light Water Reactors in India - A perspective".

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Oct 2009 07:08

Indian Nuclear Test Agenda Could Shape U.N. Status, Former U.S. Official Says

Friday, Oct. 23, 2009

India's policy on future nuclear-weapon tests could help determine whether the country becomes a permanent, veto-wielding member of the U.N. Security Council, a former U.S. arms control official told the Indo-Asian News Service yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 5).

A decision to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty could improve India's chances of gaining a permanent seat on the body, said Rodney Jones, who helped negotiate the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty while at the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.

Before the treaty can enter into force, it must be ratified by 44 "Annex 2" nations. Nine holdouts remain within that group -- China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan and the United States.

“If China ratifies the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the spotlight will fall on Pakistan and India,” Jones said, noting that possible U.S. ratification of the document could be delayed for as long as two years by other legislative priorities.

Calls by some Indian scientists and officials for New Delhi to conduct additional nuclear tests might have been aimed at bolstering domestic opposition to ratifying the treaty, he suggested. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is expected to discuss nuclear matters with Obama administration officials during a visit to Washington late next month (Indo-Asian News Service/Thaindian News, Oct. 22).

Of course.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Oct 2009 07:09

Oct 26, 2009 :: The nuclear disconnect

Four recent meetings brought India back under the nuclear nonproliferation searchlights.

As the strident debate on whether India’s thermonuclear tests of May 1998 subsided or began to fizzle-out into stalemate over whether or not India really needed thermonuclear weapons for deterrence, these four meetings early this month seemed to trigger a rethink its strategic positioning.

The innings began with US President Barack Obama Chairing a Special UN Security Council Summit session, which endorsed Resolution 1887, which asks all countries “ to sign and ratify” the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) early last month.

Perhaps to reassure India that this resolution was not specifically aimed at New Delhi, President Obama, the host of the follow-up G20 Pittsburg summit, ensured that Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was seated next to him at the official banquet. This seating was interesting as Obama chose to have no bilateral meetings on the sidelines of the Pittsburg meet.

The second significant meeting at the UN Security Council was to review of its Resolution 1540, passed in 2004. This essentially sought to find new ways and means to prevent the proliferation of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, particularly to non-State actors (read terrorists). This too had a clear South Asia-centric orientation. While the exposure of the A Q Khan nuclear network in October 2004 had put Pakistan on the defensive, India had passed its WMD Act in May 2005, changing the course of its nuclear history.

But even as the Indian media was debating the intent and implications of these two events at the UN Security Council, two equally significant conferences were held in New Delhi. One was the three-day International Conference on ‘Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy-2009, inaugurated by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh September 29. Dr Singh chose this platform to herald his vision of increasing India’s nuclear-power by one-hundred times over the next 40 years i.e. to raise it from about 4,000 MW today to 470,000 MW by 2050.

In doing so he reposed his faith in indigenous nuclear know-how and technologies, especially Dr Homi Bhaba’s visions of three level fuel cycle which would enable India to use its enormous reserves of thorium to ensure relative autonomy for India’s nuclear industry. More interestingly, he not only sought to press on India’s commitment to evolve sustainable and climate friendly energy strategies by making nuclear power generation central to it, he also sought to address the discourse of western powers and whet the appetite of their business lobbies. This marks a fundamental shift from India’s conventional strategy of taking a high-moral ground on disarmament and/or raising the bogey against the “discriminatory western sponsored nonproliferation regimes” to doing business in a more pragmatic fashion.

Organized by Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) to commemorate the birth centenary of the father of Indian nuclear science, Homi Jahangir Bhaba, this conference also hosted El Baradei – Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency – who was conferred the 2008 Indira Gandhi Prize for Peace, Disarmament and Development. But while El Baradei praised India’s disarmament credentials and urged New Delhi to take the lead, he also suggested that India may be able to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) if not NPT in the near future.

This comment echoed the views of Gareth Evans – former foreign minister of Australia – who was in New Delhi as the Co-Chair of International Commission on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament (ICNND) that also held a weekend of parleys with South Asia’s strategic community.

The ICNND meeting was an apt climax to the nuclear humming and fuming taking place at the time. Chaired jointly by the two of the closest friends of the United States – Australia and Japan – the commission was set up in June last year to “reinvigorate international efforts on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament” before the May 2010 NPT Review Conference.

However, instead of pious ‘global zero’ paradigms or efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons from earth, it focused primarily on India-Pakistan polemics. So while the conference press release underlined that support from India would be “vital to global efforts to stem proliferation” of nuclear weapons, the subtext could be seen in the extensive press coverage and delegate media bytes, where the basic refrain was that India will never be allowed to enter NPT as a nuclear weapon state. This was backed up with veiled warnings on how entertaining any thoughts on further nuclear tests could prove extremely costly.

As India moves from victimhood to a stakeholder profile in the nuclear sweepstakes, several fundamentals need to change as well.

To begin with, the subtle changes in our nuclear strategy need to trickle-down from the leadership and sync-in with India’s rather small strategic community. This disconnect was obvious last month when prime minister heralded his new vision while India’s strategic warriors continued to press old slogans. Either they did not comprehend that variables of India’s nuclear trade unionism have changed for long, or find it tough to comply with this subtle change in India’s disarmament diplomacy. Perhaps it was also a case of difficulty to publicly undermine our longstanding USP (unique selling point) of being the rebel, alas often unsolicited.

But unless India’s strategic community backs this vision of change it will be difficult for change to maximize India’s advantages or even to sustain it vigour. Moreover, this has to be done with care as there will always be different voices which will seek to dilute our position on such a critical juncture of change. Not to forget that promise of change was recently recognized strong enough by the Nobel peace prize committee that conferred this years award on US President.

(Prof. Swaran Singh, is Professor of Diplomacy and Disarmament School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Oct 2009 07:18

off course.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Oct 2009 07:19

Will not join NPT as non-nuclear weapon state: India

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Oct 2009 11:59

(Cross posted exceprt from the China thread.)

Interestingly on the BBC's Hard Talk this morning,Richard Perle and Ambassador Burke were exchanging their different viewpoints on Obama's international nuclear disarmement plans,with neo-con Perle saying that it was impossible to achieve (total N-disarmament by 2030).The Pak,India ,China N-triangle was discussed and the fear of states like Pak,having their nukes ending up in terrorist hands.Burke was firmly of the view that the two superpowers,the US and Russia could start the process by reducing their arsenals (possessing 94% of the world's N-weapons),which could see a possible cap on the N-ambitions of the other N-powers.If there was no progress on this front,in anotherd ecade or two we could see about 20 N-weapon states emerging.

This was also a feature of the latest USNI proceedings magazine (Oct.issue),where the "two Normans",Polmar and Friedman wrote on the IN's new toy,the Arihant and its significance.One view expressed was that the N-sub without a credible TN warhead (Santy's doubts analysed) on its missiles,could not be considered a successful strategic asset as modern cities were not made of wood like Hiroshima and Nagasaki,which is why large TN warheads were developed and deployed by the two superpowers and major N-powers with warheads "ten or more times their explosive power".The dilemma of India which definitely needed to test again to validate its TN designs (as it did not have access to the vast data that the US,Russia,China and others had which allowed them simulation capabilities while designing their weapons),without upsetting growing relations the US,etc.,was analysed.One view was that Pak actually had an advantage over India in this situation.We are at a signal disadvantage against China in strategic terms and the synergy of the Sino-Pak nuclear nexus has put us in an extremeley dangerous state of vulnerability.It appears therefore that to truly protect ourselves against attack from China,we must conduct a series of N-tests to validate our TN warhead designs for use on various sized missiles before we embark upon joining any international N-weapons cap,cutback,FMCT or test ban treaty.

Interestingly the ambassador mentioned "the father of the Indian bomb,KSub.",as saying that our acquisition of a N=deterrent did not bring with it the desired results vis-a-vis Pak,because Pak's N-weapons nullified India's conventional military superiority."

*I don't find this alleged viewpoint of KSwholly accurate as the Indian deterrent is also a guarantee against the PRC and that despite both sides having N-weapons,it was India's conventional military superiority that defeated Pakistan at Kargil!"

Has KS in the evning of his life gone over in his N-philosophy to the US side?

Norman Friedman:"A Great Equalizer?"

Friedman says that India's N-weapons have "Not enough Bang".

"The Indian scientists correctly described the1998 tests as a beginning rather than the achievement of full technical maturity."

"The problem for the Indians is that the current US govt. takes nuclear non-rpoliferation verys eriously.It is trying to convince countries not to test N-weapons.Although computer simulation may suffice for experuienced US and Russian wepaons deisgners,they certainly will not for those without much experience and without access to the sort of secrets US and Soviet (and Chinese) designers have learned."

*Now this means that the US and NATO nuclear weapon nations AND the Chinese have full access to TN warhead design secrets,but that India does NOT.It places us at a decided disadvantage,when China can launch a pre-emptive TN strike against us,safe in the knowledge that our missiles do not have TN warheads and cannot cause massive damage.

"They face a cruel dilemma because the US sees India as a key future ally,it is willing ,in theory,to sell the country much current technology.However,the equalizer against China,which the new submarine symbolises (ATV Arihant),requires exactly that kind of technology needing tests that would in turn cut off US non-nuclear weapons".

"Pakistan's advantage":

Pak has modified US supplied Harpoon missiles.The US has supplied Pak with weaponry to fight terrorism,ignoring Pak's very real ENMITY towards India and their desire at least to maintain a deterrence against India.

"In this test of will the Pakistanis enjoy an interesting advantage."
Mentioned as the supply corridor by land through Pak for the US/NATO forces to fight the war in Afghanistan.
"Just how much leverage does the US have as it tries to eliminate what the Pakistanis see as a vital equalizer against India,with which the country has fought four wars?"

Friedman also mentions Burma's N-ambitions and says that Burma is acquiring from and following the NoKO method of becoming a N-weapon state burying most of its N-installations in tunnels.

Truly we are on the horns of a dilemma.We want modern military tech,from the US if possible too.If we test this tech will become unavailable,but we will be at far greater risk from the Sino-Pak-NoKO nuclear proliferation axis where they have access to TN designs from China, while we cannot without testing validate our designs.

Therefore,there is no alternative to India having to test further in the future,a series of tests that can give us a variety of TN designs with which to arm our delivery systems.Without a credible TN warhead,the ATV/Arihant is in reality the equivalent of a stunted strategic dwarf!

To overcome any future US sanctions,we must therefore NOT rely on US military technology for major weapon systems for the future and acquire what we want from elsewhere.Russia,Israel and other EU nations might be less worried about an Indian TN testing event.The speed with which the O-Team is bent upon ushering in a N-free world and wants progress on the CTBT,FMCT,NPT etc,etc.,armtwisting nations into falling in line,means that the window of opportunity for India to test again is rapidly closing.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Oct 2009 06:59

First Koodankulam Unit to generate power by mid-2010

The first of the two 1,000 MWe reactors of the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Project is expected to start generating electricity by mid-2010, according to the Station Director of the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNPP), M. Kasinath Balaji. . . the second reactor of the KKNPP would attain criticality a couple of months after the first reactor became fully operational.

Umrao Das · Post by **Umrao Das** » 29 Oct 2009 07:12

Dont trust Santanam trust N guru and Shiv guru, all others are not reliable multiple 20kts are enough proved by N rao garu also not to mention other lumanaries in M lok...

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Oct 2009 07:47

Bloomberg :: Oct 28, 2009 :: India’s Nuclear Power Output to Rise as Fuel Ban Ends

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Oct 2009 07:48

ATimes :: Oct 27, 2009 :: India's nuclear drive sparks safety fears

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Oct 2009 07:53

Book:

India in a Changing Global Nuclear Order

Content in Detail

About the Editor/Contributors

Preface

1. Introduction
— K. Subrahmanyam

Section I:
Relevance of Nuclear Energy

2. Role of Nuclear Energy in India’s Energy Mix
— R.B. Grover

3. Nuclear Energy for India’s Energy Security
— Manpreet Sethi

4. Technological Challenges Associated with Global Resurgence of Nuclear Energy — Amitav Mallik

5. Global ‘Renaissance’ of Nuclear Power: Drivers, Issues, Prospects
— S. Samuel C. Rajiv

Section II:
Perspectives on the Indo-US Nuclear Cooperation

6. The Indo-US Nuclear Deal: Opportunities and Challenges
— M.R. Srinivasan

7. The Indo-US Civil Nuclear Cooperation and Safeguards
— Rajiv Nayan

8. India and the Nuclear Suppliers Group: From Estrangement to Engagement?
— Arun Vishwanathan

Section III:
India and International Non-Proliferation Efforts

9. India’s Nuclear Diplomacy and the Global Order
— C. Raja Mohan

10. Crisis in the NPT, Counter-Proliferation Regimes and India’s Approach
— Arvind Gupta

11. India and the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT)
— Arundhati Ghose

12. A Counter-Proliferation Strategy for India
— A. Vinod Kumar

13. Criminalisation of Proliferation
— Arun Vishwanathan

Section IV:
Conclusion

14. Conclusion: India in a Changing Global Order
— Rajesh Rajagopalan

Section V:
Appendices

A-1 India-US Bilateral Nuclear Cooperation Agreement

A-2 ‘Non-Papers’ Circulated by Israel in the NSG

A-3 Official Text of the Hyde Act

A-4 Proliferation Security Initiative: Statement of Interdiction Principles

A-5 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, 1988

A-6 United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004)

A-7 Third and Final US Draft Circulated to the NSG Members at the September 4-5, 2008 Meeting

A-8 India-IAEA Safeguards Agreement (Draft Text)

A-9 The Weapons of Mass Destruction and their Delivery Systems (Prohibition of Unlawful Activities) Act, 2005

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Oct 2009 08:16

Indian nuclear sector needs 19k employees to meet power projections

arun · Post by **arun** » 29 Oct 2009 19:59

Canadian PM to visit India in Nov, N-deal on agenda

STAFF WRITER 17:53 HRS IST
Bal Krishna

Toronto, Oct 29 (PTI) Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper will visit India next month, his maiden official trip to the country during which the two sides are expected to finalise a civil nuclear deal …………………..

PTI

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 30 Oct 2009 02:17

Pervez Amir Ali Hoodbhoy's

The Flight to Nowhere: Pakistan’s Nuclear Trajectory

This unpublished piece is an excerpt of the forthcoming book of Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung ( Nov 09)

Pakistan - Reality, Denial and the Complexity of its state.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 30 Oct 2009 02:23

Amber G. wrote:Pervez Amir Ali Hoodbhoy's

The Flight to Nowhere: Pakistan’s Nuclear Trajectory

This unpublished piece is an excerpt of the forthcoming book of Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung ( Nov 09)

Pakistan - Reality, Denial and the Complexity of its state.

Entschuldigung!; Entschuldigen sie bitte.

Die richtige URL sollte:

http://www.boell-india.org/download_en/ ... hoy_GE.pdf

Krishna_V · Post by **Krishna_V** » 30 Oct 2009 03:58

Vessel Lowering for Indias FBR at Kalpakkam in 2 weeks

Sanatanan · Post by **Sanatanan** » 30 Oct 2009 21:04

From DD News(30 Oct 2009)

Kakodkar to step down as AEC chief on 30th November

Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), Chairman Anil Kakodkar, the only one to get three extensions in the post, will demit office on 30th November.

Kakodkar will also retire from the post of Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) on the same day, when his term ends.

"This is the last time I am addressing you from this podium and I wish to thank you all for your strong commitment to the programme and your support to the efforts to sail through the fuel supply crisis," Kakodkar said, addressing the staff during a customary speech at the founder's day celebrations at the Baba Atomic Research Centre (BARC).

Coincidentally, today is also the birth centenary of BARC founder Homi J Bhabha.

"Let us resolve with dedication and respect for timeliness and realise the dreams of Homi Bhabha before it is too late and this will be a fitting homage to the memory of Bhabha on his 100th birthday," he told DAE scientists, technologists and administrators.

Kakodkar took over as Chairman, AEC from Dr R Chidambaram in November 2000 and was the first chairman to get three extensions in 2003, 2005 and 2007 in the history of India's nuclear programme. (ST-30/10)

Sanatanan · Post by **Sanatanan** » 01 Nov 2009 07:31

From Washington Post:
In rural India, resistance to nuclear plants
Villagers' refusal to sell land is yet another obstacle for government
By Rama Lakshmi
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, October 31, 2009
MITHI VIRDI-JASAPARA, INDIA

Standing precariously on the thin edge of a newly dug well, Ajitbhai Narela looked out proudly at his groundnut and mango saplings.

For decades, he said, his family has tilled the soil here, working the land and producing sweet-tasting fruit. But soon, he noted, the fields may disappear. If Indian officials have their way, land in this seaside village will be paved over for a nuclear power plant.

"This is our birthplace. We have farmed this land with our blood and sweat over generations," said Narela, 55. "The government can cremate us right here, but we will not sell our land."

The proposed nuclear plant is to be designed using American technology, making it one of the first projects made possible by last year's historic civilian nuclear agreement between India and the United States. But villagers here are determined not to let that happen.

Their objections -- Narela recently signed a collective farmers' petition -- mark yet another stumbling block for India's government as it seeks to benefit from an agreement that has proved highly controversial both here and in Washington.

The accord was drafted to allow India access to global nuclear technology and fuel supplies after three decades of isolation. Before its signing, though, officials in the United States were forced to overcome reservations from nonproliferation experts, while backers of the agreement in this country had to overcome concerns that the pact would tie India too closely to U.S. strategic interests.

Now, in rural communities like this one, the implementation of the deal has raised concerns about land and livelihood, as farmers are being asked to sell their land to make way for reactors. The deal has also raised concerns about safety. In New Delhi, a debate is raging about elements of a proposed liability law that would cover claims in the event of a nuclear accident. Until India passes the law, U.S. companies such as GE and Westinghouse cannot operate here.

Anti-nuclear activists have {Who are they? How are they funded?} distributed pamphlets and shown films about the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident to villagers here, and protests have been held at a site set aside for the French nuclear company Areva.

Narela said that he does not know what a nuclear plant is but that he has seen the graffiti that have sprung up on the walls of his village warning of dangers from such a facility. "They say that the air will turn poisonous, cows will be born without legs and children will be born blind," he said.

India is likely to introduce the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill next month in Parliament, according to an official familiar with the process. The bill would place the liability for a mishap on the government-owned Nuclear Power Corp. of India and set a cap on the maximum amount payable for damages. The official said the provisions correspond with common international practices.

Still, activists familiar with the draft say it is problematic.

"The proposed draft is totally unacceptable because it lets the foreign companies who supply equipment and design to India go scot-free. An accident can occur because of faulty design or substandard supplies, too. Will the law take away our right to sue them?" said Satinath Sarangi, an activist who represents survivors of the 1984 industrial accident in the city of Bhopal, in which poisonous gas leaked from a Union Carbide factory, causing 14,000 people to die from illnesses.

Many activists have urged the government to enact legislation that would afford more protections to those living near any new reactor. But Mohit Saraf, a member of a task force established by the Confederation of Indian Industry and the U.S.-India Business Council, defended the liability proposal, saying it is necessary if India expects businesses to establish reactors here.

"The debate in India is emotional," Saraf said. "People mistakenly see the bill as benefiting only American companies."

In addition to the domestic liability law, the U.S.-India Business Council wants India to sign the Convention on Supplementary Compensation, under which a global pool of funds will kick in if the damages from an accident exceed $480 million.

But some in India oppose the convention because it would prevent Indian lawsuits from being filed in U.S. courts.

India hopes to generate 63,000 megawatts of nuclear power by 2030 with the help of American, French and Russian nuclear companies. Tens of thousands of jobs are expected to be created in India and the United States as a result of the nuclear agreement.

Here in Bhavnagar district, officials say the proposed nuclear plant would not only boost the economy, but also help improve the local infrastructure.

Still, the promise of economic development has done little to assuage the fears of opponents. Residents in this area say disasters such as the ones in Bhopal and Chernobyl have convinced them that the risks are too great.

"We will do with one light bulb instead of two but will not allow a nuclear plant in our back yard," said Bhupat Parekh, a 66-year-old retired engineer.

Sanatanan · Post by **Sanatanan** » 01 Nov 2009 20:14

From Letters column of Outlook India Magazine (Issue of Nov 09, 2009):

Non-Fissile Doubts Nuclear Toothless
Mr P.K. Iyengar’s comments about me in his opinion piece in Outlook (Non-Fissile Doubts, Oct 26) are incorrect and unfounded.

S.K. Sikka, Faridabad

Here is the link to the Dr P.K Iyengar's article referred to above. I think this has been posted earlier in the Pokhran - 3 Thread.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2009 21:24

Sanatanan wrote:From Letters column of Outlook India Magazine (Issue of Nov 09, 2009):

Non-Fissile Doubts Nuclear Toothless
Mr P.K. Iyengar’s comments about me in his opinion piece in Outlook (Non-Fissile Doubts, Oct 26) are incorrect and unfounded.

S.K. Sikka, Faridabad
Here is the link to the Dr P.K Iyengar's article referred to above. I think this has been posted earlier in the Pokhran - 3 Thread.

Thanks for pointing that out

My SRR article about the sizzle-fizzle debate is online
http://brmsrr.blogspot.com/

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 02 Nov 2009 00:50

India Designs Thorium-Fueled Reactor for Export

http://www.powermag.com/nuclear/India-D ... _2260.html

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 02 Nov 2009 04:18

Neshant wrote: India Designs Thorium-Fueled Reactor for Export

Construction on the first AHWR is scheduled to start in 2012 — though no site has yet been announced.

Civil construction of the nation’s first 500-MW prototype fast breeder reactor at Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu, meanwhile, is under way, scheduled for completion in 2011.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 05 Nov 2009 03:02

Nuclear deal is India's passport to the world: Bush

India, EU may ink civil nuclear pact

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Nov 2009 03:17

Gerard wrote:Nuclear deal is India's passport to the world: Bush

"(By signing the deal) the US recognised India's nuclear weapon's programme. It is India's passport to the world," said Bush.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Nov 2009 07:21

India, EU may ink civil nuclear pact

Swedish Ambassador Lars-Olof Lindgren and Head of the Delegation of the European Commission Danièle Smadja said the proposed agreement on civil nuclear energy cooperation would offer India a window to fully join the ITER, an experimental reactor that will reproduce the physical reaction — fusion — that occurs in the sun and stars.

The EU, Japan, China, South Korea, Russia, India and the U.S. would be the participants of one of the largest international scientific projects ever.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Nov 2009 07:24

NPCIL to start building 2 PHWRs of 700 MWe each in Gujarat by December end

The ground-breaking ceremony for the construction of two indigenous nuclear reactors of 700 MWe capacity will take place by next month end at Kakrapar in Gujarat, according to chairman and managing director of the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) S.K. Jain.

This is the first time the NPCIL will be building the two Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRs) of 700 MWe.

“The excavation of the foundation for both the 700 MWe units will take place simultaneously by December-end. They will be completed in six years,” Mr. Jain said.

The indigenous PHWRs use natural uranium as fuel and heavy water as both the coolant and moderator.

The Union government had given financial sanction for the construction of two more 700 MWe PHWRs at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan.

The fifth PHWR at Rawatbhata (RAPS-5), with a capacity of 220 MWe, would be commissioned by November 20.

“The fuel-loading in the reactor has been completed. It is imported natural uranium fuel and it has been fabricated at the Nuclear Fuel Complex, Hyderabad.”

The RAPS-6, which would also generate 220 MWe, would be commissioned by February 2010.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 05 Nov 2009 12:15

Lapang defers mining --- Expert panel to find pros and cons in 3 months
http://telegraphindia.com/1091105/jsp/n ... 699506.jsp

Meghalaya today decided to keep in abeyance for three months activities related to uranium mining and form a joint committee, involving pressure groups, on the issue. The government’s move came after a meeting, chaired by chief minister D.D. Lapang, with the Khasi Student’s Union (KSU) and the Co-ordination Committee of Social Organisations, a forum of anti-uranium mining groups. The meeting decided not to undertake the Rs 209-crore pre-mining development projects at the mining sites of West Khasi Hills for three months.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 05 Nov 2009 14:43

High fissile fuel in nuclear submarine lasts long
Thursday, Nov 05, 2009
K.S. PARTHASARATHY
Raja Ramanna fellow, Department of Atomic Energy

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Nov 2009 07:31

Indo-French Pact Assures Lifetime Fuel Supply to French Reactors

The Indo-French Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, signed by the two countries in Paris on September 30, 2008, explicitly allows for reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel from French nuclear reactors under safeguards, and gives an assurance of lifetime supply of nuclear fuel for these reactors.

Significantly, the agreement does not explicitly bar the transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technologies, the so-called ENR technologies or Sensitive Nuclear Technologies. Transfer of these to India from the United States requires a special amendment to the India-U.S. Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement (the 123 Agreement) and congressional approval of the same.

The agreement still needs the approval of the Parliament’s lower chamber, the National Assembly, for its final ratification. The Assembly, according to the French Embassy’s press information officer Allen Perier, took up the review of the Agreement on October 28. It is hoped that this should happen by the end of November and the agreement should enter into force by the end of the year.

Now that India has unconditional reprocessing rights from both Russia and France — except for requiring that reprocessing be done under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) — the U.S. would seem to be at a disadvantage vis-À-vis these two.

However, the Agreement requires the establishment of a civil nuclear liability regime, as has been insisted upon by the U.S. as well. Article VIII (2) says: “The Parties agree that, for the purpose of compensating for damage caused by a nuclear incident involving nuclear material, equipment, facilities and technology [transferred under the Agreement], each Party shall create a civil nuclear liability regime based on established international principles.” It is known that a draft Indian bill for a civil nuclear liability law is ready and is under inter-ministerial discussions before it comes up before the Parliament for its enactment.

biswas · Post by **biswas** » 06 Nov 2009 14:58

I'm sorry if this has been asked before but, why does India need to import Uranium, when we have massive Thorium reserves and a functioning Thorium powered plant.

Also can Thorium be refined into weapons-grade nuclear fuel?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Nov 2009 15:09

Biswas, you can easily find answers by Googling.

Thorium is not fissionable, unlike natural Uranium. For example, the Indian AHWR (Advanced heavy Water Reactor) or the FBRs (Fast breeder Reactors) will convert Th into fissionable U233.

biswas · Post by **biswas** » 06 Nov 2009 15:30

SSridhar: I knew that Thorium wasn't immediately fissile, I was asking whether it could be made into something that could be used as weapons grade fuel. Perhaps the use of the word, 'refined' wasn't correct.. Thanks for the info

Also, why does India want to import Uranium from reluctant Australia, when it could pursue the development of Thorium based nuclear plants. Is it more cost effective to import?

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 06 Nov 2009 15:38

biswas wrote:SSridhar: I knew that Thorium wasn't immediately fissile, I was asking whether it could be made into something that could be used as weapons grade fuel. Perhaps the use of the word, 'refined' wasn't correct.. Thanks for the info

Also, why does India want to import Uranium from reluctant Australia, when it could pursue the development of Thorium based nuclear plants. Is it more cost effective to import?

biswas,
As SSridhar mentioned, google for "india 3 stage nuclear fuel". It will help you understand the various stages, and how we can leverage Thorium in long run.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Nov 2009 15:44

Biswas, how do you convert Th into fissionable Uranium ? By using Th as a blanket around the bundle of another fissionable material in a reactor. You have to understand the 3-stage process of the Indian nuclear fuel cycle. The second stage FBRs use Pu from the first stage Uranium-based reactors to convert Th into U233. The U233 so produced will be used in 3rd stage with more Th to get more U233.

alexis · Post by **alexis** » 06 Nov 2009 15:52

Our first prototype AHWR reactor using Thorium will get commissioned in 2011. After that only we can be sure if the technology is viable and can be replicated to the extent envisioned by late Homi Bhabha.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 06 Nov 2009 20:08

Biswas,

th-232 is one hell of a neutron absorber and it takes a while before you can breed sufficient U-233 in situ to drive a reaction at equilibrium. So you need a continuous source of neutron irradiation for the th-232 till you breed sufficient U-233 in situ. this is of course a reference to what is called neutron economy.

U-233 is inherently proliferation resistant as it is almost always contaminated with traces of U-232 which is one hell of a gamma emitter.U-233 has been used in weapon cores before at an experimental level.The U.S did some testing under operation Teapot and one of the sub kt devices tested at pokharan II may have contained U-233 as well.

by the way the first PHWRs in India loaded with Th-232 were kakrapar I and II to achieve uniform power density across the core.