*Important details
- ZADesk
***
*Nuclear Deal should be scrapped forthwith** *
*Leo Rebello ***
The nuclear deal, over which the Left is shouting hoarse while the
politically agile Dr. Amar Singh tries to shore up a dilapidated
Congress, should be scrapped forthwith. India needs electricity for its
citizens, not nuclear power. We must dispassionately examine why the nuclear
deal is not good for India and the world; sadly, so far the debate has been
one-dimensional.
*Confidentiality:* On the one hand, the Government is going *ga-ga* over
bringing in the Right to Information Act to help citizens expose corrupt
officialdom. On the other hand, truth is dangerously concealed, even from
people's representatives in Parliament, on the issue of the N-deal, which
will affect Indians for generations to come. A bogus agreement promising
illusory energy security, the deal will prove to be the death-knell to our
sovereignty, non-aligned movement, SAARC progressing into Asian Economic
Council, and all that we have built over the years.
*Context:* Dr. A.N. Prasad, former director of the Bhabha Atomic Research
Council (BARC), hit the nail on the head when he pointed out that all talk
regarding "uninterrupted fuel supplies" and "corrective measures" if they
fail, are mentioned only in the preamble references of the text, and do not
form part of the operative portion of the agreement. In other words, they
are meaningless in reality. A preamble is only an expression of pious
intent. When it comes to legal niceties, it is the operative part of the
agreement that counts. And here, Prasad points out: "There is no exit
clause." This means India can never walk away from the clutches of America.
Prasad adds that the "corrective measures" seem limited going from one
source of fuel to another, this is absurd since the Nuclear Suppliers Group
functions as a cartel: "all for one and one for all". That means there are
NO corrective measures at all.
*The Lobby:* American Nuclear Energy plant manufacturers have a strong and
rich lobby, which is on the verge of extinction as it has had no market for
the last 20 years. Hence India is being cajoled; if India succumbs, it may
spur more demand from other countries, raise the lobby from imminent
extinction to thriving business. It is pertinent that once the obsolete
nuclear plants are sold to India and the US companies enriched, they will
hide behind the Hyde Act. This means the thorium-cycle based technology
independently developed by Indian scientists would be abandoned due to
change in the power-cycle and under one or the other pretext, much like the
manipulation of oil prices. America will also increase the costs and further
increase India's debt burden.
*Thorium v/s Uranium:* Energy experts know America lacks thorium-cycle
technology, and is adamant that India not only gives them these secrets, but
that India does not make any further progress in its independent
technological areas. USA is trying to kill many birds with one stone. Sadly,
the Indian establishment comprising major political parties and pro-US media
are hiding these facts from the Indian people.
*Plutonium and Thorium Economies:* T*he fuel (low enriched uranium for the
common commercial light water reactors) that will be imported will cost
about *$1000 billion, for some 30 odd reactors. This will kill *India's
pioneering efforts in plutonium and thorium economies envisioned by Homi
Bhabha**. **And when India is down on this, the US and Western advances in
them will force a second cycle of dependence.*
*Control:* The Hyde Act will exert control over India's scientific progress;
undermine India's foreign policy by forcing India to indirectly support USA
against Iran; reduce India to an unwilling partner in the likely attack on
Iran, and thereby unleash Islamic fury against us.* * And what of control of
US navy on Indian waters? Far from emerging a strong nation by 2020, India
would be reduced to play second fiddle to America by stunting our growth and
international profile.
*Destabilise:* Once the N-deal agreement is formalised, the sinister CIA and
FBI will seek a free run in India. America will seek military bases in
India, and the world knows that once America occupies a space, it hardly
ever leaves, witness the situation in Japan, the Philippines, Somalia, South
Korea, et al.
*Technology transfer:* We don't need uranium; we don't need bombs; we don't
need 123 agreement. India's energy output can be doubled by using technology
to raise the current efficiency of 50% in production to 95%.
*Alternative technologies and Self-sufficiency:* There are small Hydel,
Wind-Energy, Sea-back-water Energy, Solar Energy, and other indigenously
developed technologies waiting to be deployed to make India self-sufficient
in energy sector. There is simply no need to turn towards discarded, unsafe
nuclear energy. With adequate investments, alternative technologies will
become the main technologies in less than 10 years.
*Ram-Setu:* We have enough raw material on our southern sea-banks, mixed
with sand and vast reserves of thorium. In fact, the *Ram-setu* conspiracy
should be viewed in this light, or this rich resource will be lost forever
due to greed, ignorance or connivance of a few puny leaders, who rather than
helping the country progress, further American interests.
*Accidents:* Nuclear Energy is neither clean, nor cheap, nor safe as is made
out. Nuclear Plants are very costly and dangerous - Chernobyl, 3-Mile and
Japanese nuclear accidents, for instance.
*N-utilization:* India's current nuclear energy capacity utilization is less
than 30%, yet we are going for additional nuclear plants which will take
minimum seven years to start producing nuclear energy. Nuclear plants
process uranium and plutonium, which are used to produce bombs. India has
enough uranium, which could last another 50 years. An unstated aspect of the
nuclear deal is the safety management of nuclear-waste whose half-life is
over 28,000 years. This is a multi-million dollar industry in its own right,
and we have not been told which American firm will secure these rights!
*Old, Costly and Unsafe Technology:* When Europe, Japan, Australia, Russia
and the USA itself have stopped commissioning new nuclear plants for over
two decades, why is India running after old, discarded and unsafe
technology? Is there a scam here – we have the right to know?
*Dr. David Victor,* Director, Program on Energy and Sustainable Development,
Stanford University, testifying before the US Senate Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources on 17 July 2006, noted *inter alia* that India has vast
options to meet its energy needs in Hydroelectricity, Renewables, Natural
Gas, Coal and Nuclear energy. He did not make a case for shifting to Nuclear
energy. Briefly this is what Dr. Victor said:-
*On Hydroelectric:* Official Indian plans call for much greater use of
hydro…. [there are] possibilities of hydro imports from Bhutan and Nepal….
That means no shortage on energy front. On Renewables: India makes extensive
use of biomass digesters in rural areas and wind and solar energy in a few
states. On Natural Gas: Most analyses of the Indian power sector envisioned
that gas would play a much larger role in the future. Gas is the cleanest of
fossil fuels and the capital cost of gas plants much lower than nuclear,
coal, and hydro. Gas plants have been especially attractive to private
investors who are wary of sinking large amounts of capital into projects
where regulatory rules are in flux. Nearly all foreign-owned private power
plants in India are fired with gas.
*On Nuclear:* Until now, nuclear power has been controlled by the central
government, mainly for non-energy purposes (weapons), and not exposed to
commercial accountability…. So long as India's nuclear industry remains
isolated, it is hard to see that India will build more than the occasional
reactor as the cost basis for nuclear equipment will be too high and fuel
needed for such reactors will not be available….
*On Coal:* In the foreseeable future coal is expected to provide most of
India's electricity. In fact, coal has not met its full market potential in
the last decade… India has (therefore) begun to encourage private investment
into coalmines and pithead power plants that will send the coal "by wire" to
the national electric grid rather than via railcars. India has adopted
favourable rules to encourage investment in the inter-state power grid,
enabling movement of much larger quantities of electricity. Changes in
import tariffs are making it easier to import high quality coal, and also
inducing India's domestic coal industry to perform better. India is
soliciting bids for five new 4 GW coal-fired power projects ("ultra mega
power projects") – two of which will produce electricity at coal pitheads in
the interiors and three coastal plants that will import foreign coal
supplies.
*Dr. David Victor concluded:* "The question for India's energy future
centers on the rivals to coal…. On the one hand, high prices have
discouraged (but not stopped) investment in plants that use gas. Indeed,
some investors who would have built gas-fired power plants are now looking
closely at coal. On the other hand, barely a month passes without the
announcement of new gas discoveries in India (in particular the large
resources discovered off the country's east coast). These new gas supplies
may eventually help to lower the price of gas, which in turn will allow for
a much larger gas-fired generation capacity".
*The UPA's eagerness to finalize the nuclear deal is intriguing to say the
least,* especially as nuclear energy would meet only a small fraction of the
country's energy needs. India should improve its energy production regime
using currently available technologies and take the production efficiency to
a minimum of 95%. In concert with SAARC nations, India must invest heavily
in non-conventional technologies and change the energy scenario within the
decade.
Many experts who have studied the cloak-and-dagger Indo-US nuclear deal call
it "No Clear Deal". After Nagasaki-Hiroshima, three nuclear accidents, the
Bhopal gas tragedy, and global warming, neither India nor the world needs to
dabble with unsafe technologies and the destruction of civilization itself.
I conclude with a remark of late Indira Gandhi, who in the early 1970s
said: "At present 97% of the world's research is not relevant to us because
it is earmarked for the priorities and to the induced appetites of
technological leaders". Will someone heed this profundity?
**
