The N-Deal : Need to look at the Bigger Picture
Posted by: Amit Abhyankar on: September 6, 2008
This post of mine is in response to a comment posted by S. Sam Daniel, IPS to my earlier post: “Nuclear Deal: What’s in it for India’? I was about to post a reply in the comment section. But then thought of inditing about it in details. Hence this post.
Mr. Daniel’s contention is that why we need to surrender ourselves to George Bush & US? With all due respect to his opinion, let me put forth the bigger picture.
First, India is not going for this deal in order to become an obedient US ally. After the Pokharan II, this potential superpower and a key political power in South Asia was left out of the global nuclear commerce and plethora of impositions were inflicted by the whole world. India is desperate to break these shackles in the wake of its ever-increasing energy needs. And this Indo-US deal is the gateway to enter into global nuclear mainstream, to end the present boycott and to earn the position of a responsible nuclear player. In this context, the significance of deal cannot be lowballed.
Secondly, what transpires between Bush & his Cabinet or Congress is of little importance in light of scope & binding nature of the 123 agreement. True, the letter leaked to Washington Post does reveal the ulterior intentions of the US regime. But we need to look at the bigger picture.
After Pokharan II, the then Vajpayee government through Brajesh Mishra had confidently announced that ‘India now has the technical know-how for conducting the nuclear tests’. If we are to believe this, and there isn’t any reason why we shouldn’t, India finds herself in no immediate need of conducting any nuclear tests. So why should we make this one issue a central point of our debate to the extent of compromising the possibility of getting the deal through. Having said that, India does not lose its sovereign right to conduct nuclear tests, if the need ever arises, even in the light of the letter leaked. It’s just that the America, in that case, may use its own sovereign right to withdraw from the deal (after a year’s notice, of course). This however, is least likely to happen. Because once we enter the global commerce of nuclear power, America & the business firms therein, cannot afford to be left out of the lucrative business opportunities in India.
Finally, international diplomacy & politics has no place for egos or being swollen-headed. As McCain’s punch-line says…’Country First’. If the deal is in interest of the country, which is the case with impugned Indo-US deal, we need to look at the bigger picture I believe, turning a blind eye to certain hole-in-corner affairs.
Nuclear Deal: What’s in it for India?
Posted by: Amit Abhyankar on: September 4, 2008
The much-debated India-US nuclear deal cleared its first international hurdle when the 35-member board of IAEA unanimously approved the India-specific safeguards agreement. Of course, India’s impeccable nuclear non-proliferation record did help. The next step is the 45-nation NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group) approval. (And just as I am typing this, NSG meeting has started and it seems that the presence of opposition is formidable. If NSG decides to meet again, which is more likely to happen, Indian wait will be prolonged and as more time goes by, it is going to get difficult). Now if India crosses this hurdle, it shouldn’t worry too much about George Bush leaving the office. It is true that both Obama & McCain have backed the deal; but it may not be on their priority list once they enter the office. However if India, by that time, clears the NSG hurdle, India may accelerate nuclear development by trading with other countries, leaving the US locked out of any deals.
India aims at producing 20000mw atomic power by 2020 and for this international cooperation is a must considering the Victorian-age nuclear technology India is languishing in. The three-stage nuclear programme was setup immediately after independence. But even after 60 years we haven’t progressed ahead of the first stage of Natural Uranium fuelled Pressurized Heavy Water Reactors.
The Impact of the Deal
A look at the probable impact of the Indo-US deal on India’s nuclear technology paints a favourable picture. Since 15 out of the 17 reactors in India use natural Uranium (instead of enriched Uranium), we will need a constant supply of natural uranium. Though India is relatively rich with thorium reserves, our uranium reserves (which aren’t of much high quality anyway) would be spent in few years time. At present India’s annual production of uranium is about 200 metric tones while current functional reactors, assumed to be running at 75% of the capacity need 510 metric tones of supply. And if we are to expand and buy advanced reactors, this demand would go up. Once the deal is in place, we can be assured of continuous supply of uranium. But can we afford the import cost? The answer is yes. The cost of mining uranium in India is much higher than many countries. While most of the uranium recoverable in India is at $130/kg, in countries like Kazakhstan, Canada, Niger, huge reserve is recoverable at less than $40/kg. Thus importing becomes cost-effective.
Light Water Reactors, the most common type of reactors found worldwide require enriched Uranium (U-235 at a concentration of 3% or more instead of about 0.7% in natural uranium). And with new lesser enrichment technology, several economic advantages can be gained as it involves lower energy input, lower capital costs & lower depleted uranium waste. The deal may secure access to this technology as well as supply of enriched uranium from open market.
Even though we have developed indigenous fuel fabrication technology for mixed plutonium/uranium oxide (MOX), US’s cutting-edge technology & the experience in the field can work wonders for India. Reprocessing the fuel is very important stage in nuclear production. Since spent fuel is 96% of its original uranium, the recovered uranium can be returned for subsequent re-enrichment. US have got a dual-use nuclear technology and India can buy this including materials & equipments that could be used to enrich uranium & reprocess spent fuel. The advanced technology would also assist in finding final geological repository for nuclear waste disposal.
Though Civilian Reactors to be kept under IAEA inspection cannot be used for producing nuclear weapons, the agreement does not seem in any way to be an obstacle in way of India’s strategic needs from other reactors. Thus everything looks hunky-dory with the agreement.
The Problems
But a word of caution is warranted here. Washington’s denial to offer similar deal to Pakistan has made Islamabad declare with vengeance that it will continue to expand its nuclear arsenal. India too can use reactors, which are not under ’safeguard agreement’ to build nuke-weapons. China already has strong nuclear muscles. Is this all leading to more instable South Asia?
Further, the economics of the deal might not work exactly in India’s favour. The deal is hardly going to assist the present Indian reactors and the myriad problems hobbling it, apart from supplying regular fuel of course. India will have to buy Light Water Reactors; but the cost of generating electricity out of these is roughly $ 1.5 billion to $2 billion per 1-GW reactor, which is much higher than the cost of the present Heavy Water Reactors (about $1.2 billion). Thus unit cost of electricity generation increases by around 25%, thus diminishing their utility for average Indian consumer.
Pros & Cons of Nuclear Energy
Present Manmohan Singh government was ready to further the agreement at the cost self-existence. Is nuclear power that important? There is no doubting the significance of energy availability for economic development. By 2030, India would be third largest consumer of energy. India will need to quintuple its electricity-generation capacity from 1600 GW to 8000 GW. With limited supply of coal and rising prices of oil & natural gas, for a viable solution to the prevailing ‘energy crisis’, India has to look at relatively more sustainable sources of Energy…nuclear power being one of them.
Nuclear power is less pollutant and relatively safer than coal, gas or oil plants, provided we discount the rare possibilities of deadly meltdowns & radiations. It is more lengthy solution as world stocks of uranium & thorium are expected to last for 1000 years. Lesser fuel input needs of nuclear plants bring in the reliability factor. Nuclear energy also seems to be an apt reply to challenges of reducing green house emissions. Nuclear energy is also cheaper than renewable sources of energy.
There is a flip side to the coin as well. Apart from the possibility of repeat of Chernobyl (especially under shadows of terrorism), problem of nuclear waste disposal is an ominous issue as well. The byproducts of fission remain radioactive for thousands of years and special underground sites need to be constructed to lock away these products from harms way. Insufficient storage facilities limit the amount of nuclear fuel that can be used per year.
Huge initial costs, long gestation periods are other impediments. The notion that there is nuclear renaissance underway is ill-formed. Thus nuclear energy is neither sustainable nor green.
Conclusion
Getting the deal through various global occlusions would indeed be a diplomatic triumph for Indian think-tank. But the search for affordable energy should not stop with nuclear ties. India has tremendous potential, waiting to be harnessed in renewable energy sector. Wind power, solar power, biomass & small-scale hydropower would render a befitting solution to India’s vast energy needs. Relatively softer yet infinitely significant steps would be improving efficiency of current coal plants and taking measures to reduce power transmission losses.
Nuclear power is essential and with this deal opening doors for newer technology, India can hope that it will be in a position to use its huge thorium deposits to their potential. One should never forget though, that nuclear energy is not a panacea for all energy problems in India. It is one step ahead… but there’s still long way to go!
Attempt to Commit Suicide: Permissible?
Posted by: Amit Abhyankar on: September 3, 2008
Did you know that attempt to commit suicide is punishable in India at present? It is… under section 309 of the Indian Penal Code. But now the Law Commission has proposed to delete the section thereby decriminalizing the act of suicide attempt.
The Law Commission had recommended this reform way back in 1971 and had also got government’s nod. But somehow the move fell through in 1972. The Section 309 was challenged in the Supreme Court in many cases as well. In 1994, SC had in one case termed the section as unconstitutional; but then later a five-judge bench set-aside the decision upholding the constitutional validity of the provision.
Justice Lakshmanan, Chairman of the Law Commission along with other members observed that there is no gain to punish a person, who under extreme duress attempts to end his life, albeit unsuccessfully.
Legalizing Mercy Killing
Posted by: Amit Abhyankar on: September 3, 2008
“Life does not mean mere animal existence”, Supreme Court has observed in plethora of cases and this view got a deserving support from the country’s Law Commission, when it decided on June 29 that they would further the recommendation of legalizing euthanasia (mercy Killing) in favour of those who are terminally ill.
The Law Commission makes sense when it observes in its reports, “If a person is unable to take normal care of his body or has lost all the senses and if his real desire is to quit the world, he cannot be compelled to continue with torture and painful life. In such cases, it will indeed be cruel not to permit him to die”.
Thus premature termination of one’s life to relieve him from long suffering could be possible if government decides to act on the report, to be submitted to it soon.
Not such a ‘Nano’ Problem!
Posted by: Amit Abhyankar on: September 3, 2008
Ok, finally TATA has said ta-ta to West Bengal. Nano is going to some other ’safe place’ as Ratan Tata has ‘officially’ declared the suspension of all works at Singur plant. All overseas engineers have already left for Japan/US and TATA is trying to absorb remaining employees in other projects across the country. The decision, though unfortunate, isn’t very surprising considering TATA’s track record of pulling out of projects enmeshed into hostile politics (Remember the original Banglore Airport project?).
Mamata Banerjee, energized by her good show in Panchayat elections of the State and an apparent anti-Left wave, is trying to use Singur, local administration of which is under her control, as a springboard to launch herself into power. But now that TATA is moving out, will her stand backfire? Because Nandigram was different. The general public opinion was sympathetic towards farmers & tribals there. But the current mood suggests that general people of the State, a generous 85% of them, want the Nano to roll out from Singur Plant (Ref: Survey by Assocham, published in Business Standard). The loss of job opportunities will further add to the resentment in young Bengalis, who are feeling like pawns in hands of politicians. And the current Left regime, though highly guilty of letting the issue get out of their hands, might walk away clean putting all the blame on Mamata. At the end of it all, whoever might come out smiling, but the damage has already been done.
What started as a petty altercation between the State Government and land-owners dissatisfied over the amount of compensation, has turned with the intervention of political games by Mamata Banerjee, into something grave enough to raise serious & bigger issues. It’s not just the question of TATA’s 1500 crores of investment or vendors’ 500 crores of commitment, nor the fact that reallocation of plant will result in inevitable delay in the proposed launch of much-awaited dream car of masses. Bengal’s credibility amongst the industrial class and thus its future is at stake. Just when West Bengal, freshly coming out of the shadows of ‘militant trade unionism’, was looking at brighter skies with many business groups looking at it as a favoured investment destination, Singur misfortune has put the clock back.
After two decades of so called free-reforms & delicensing, if a squeaky-clean group like TATA faces an exile thanks to some pointless politics, the possibility of industrialists queuing up to set up their shops in the State looks pretty bleak. A.M.Naik, Chairman of L & T has already raised the concern, “If TATAs pull out of West Bengal, it will adversely affect investment in West Bengal“. Many others like Chnadrajeet Banerjee (Director General, CII), K.V.Kamath (CEO, ICICI Bank), Pawan Ruia (Chairman, Dunlop India) aren’t denying this possibility.
TATA’s prestigious Nano project, often labeled as ‘banner project’ is being watched by the entire world and this political drollery has resulted into some stinging criticism from Western Media. “The project to build world’s cheapest car,” New York Times writes, “has driven into a quintessentially Indian ditch“. True that the prepossessed Western Media need not be given prodigious weightage. But the serious question it has raised cannot be ignored altogether either. Calling the incident as a slap on the face of Brand India, the paper wonders, “Which foreign company will want to come in when India’s most respected group cannot set up industry in a state?” Not such a nano-problem for sure!
Recent Comments