Precambrian Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 A very thought provoking article today in the Hindu http://m.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/nuclear-deal-no-cause-for-celebration/article6839852.ece/?secid=3010 Even accounting for lower construction costs in India we showed — in a detailed study “Cost of Electricity from the Jaitapur Nuclear Power Plant†published in the Economic and Political Weekly — could translate into electricity tariffs that are as high as Rs. 15 per unit. If the government is looking for cheap electricity to promote development, importing American reactors hardly seems like a smart choice. That unit price looks just too high. And even sources otherwise give the impression that nuke power is not exactly cheap. Given the trade off, why then are we pushing so earnestly through this program? This is an apolitical question - I hope some experts provide me answers.
G_B_ Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 hmm who wants to import american reactors when we can get the S koreans to build one for a cheaper rate!!! The americans nepotism and corruption aside have been turfed out of the nuclear industry by France and S Korea. The reactor in question is French. Nuclear power is more about security of supply than just about the costs. Its also better for the environment provided the waste is disposed of in a safe manner. You need to read up about peak demand for electricity whereby electricity spikes for certain times during the day. Nuclear power plants in conjunction with other means of production can be switched on just during those peak times. India should invest in all types of electricity production. From Hydroelectric to Nuclear to Wind/Solar to even dirtier forms such as natural gas and the dirtiest coal.
bulbul Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 hmm who wants to import american reactors when we can get the S koreans to build one for a cheaper rate!!! The americans nepotism and corruption aside have been turfed out of the nuclear industry by France and S Korea. The reactor in question is French. Nuclear power is more about security of supply than just about the costs. Its also better for the environment provided the waste is disposed of in a safe manner. Alstom is now merged with GE.
G_B_ Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 Alstom is now merged with GE. i thought it was Areva? In any case i think in this particular case they need to reconsider the location. Jaitapur (i have been there on the way to Goa) is like prime agricultural area. Alphonso Mango territory. I am sure there are other places along the coast where the reactor will make more sense.
Kalia_Test Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 http://scroll.in/article/702944/The-%E2%80%98breakthrough%E2%80%99-in-Indo-US-nuclear-deal-will-bleed-Indians-every-which-way The above link is much more elaborate and touches upon very important aspects. Read on Mr. Modi's insurance pool proposition quoted below :- "Details about the insurance pool are not available yet. But if it is set up, Indian taxpayers will be made to pay to cover risks associated with GE and Westinghouse’s technologies. A Reuters report talks of a kitty of $244 million, with the government-run General Insurance Corporation of India and a few public sector companies contributing one half and the government contributing the other. The Indian taxpayer will have to pay even if the plants do not blow up. If the supplier is asked to contribute to the pooled fund, that increased project and electricity cost would be passed on to Indian consumers. Anyway you cut it, we are screwed." Precambrian - I highly recommend the link for you. Unit cost is a relatively small issue as it obviously does not take into account the revenue made by Indian companies/workforce ( which will add to India's GDP ), tax that Govt. will get, employment through operators of the reactors ( which will be Indians ), stability of supply compared to fossil fuel based generators, environment impact cost,etc.
hhunaeh Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 i bet the japanese and russians come really cheap.
bulbul Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 Americans needed because of NSG & no objection.
randomGuy Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 i bet the japanese and russians come really cheap. Americans needed because of NSG & no objection. Right I think cost, nsg, no objection, wish to increase trade with usa,trade imbalance with USA - the govt. Will have to measure all factors n proceed appropriately
Precambrian Posted January 31, 2015 Author Posted January 31, 2015 hmm who wants to import american reactors when we can get the S koreans to build one for a cheaper rate!!! The americans nepotism and corruption aside have been turfed out of the nuclear industry by France and S Korea. The reactor in question is French. Nuclear power is more about security of supply than just about the costs. Its also better for the environment provided the waste is disposed of in a safe manner. You need to read up about peak demand for electricity whereby electricity spikes for certain times during the day. Nuclear power plants in conjunction with other means of production can be switched on just during those peak times. India should invest in all types of electricity production. From Hydroelectric to Nuclear to Wind/Solar to even dirtier forms such as natural gas and the dirtiest coal. Hmmm I am aware of this, but should we be investing this deep and long term (As I understand the gestation period of setting up nuke plants are like 10 yrs at the min) to create what? Backup? Interesting to note the advancements made by S Korea. Qn - why are we not looking at developing indigenous technology? Surely if we can send a craft to Mars we can develop alternatives? Or is it just that we don't have raw materials?
Precambrian Posted January 31, 2015 Author Posted January 31, 2015 http://scroll.in/article/702944/The-%E2%80%98breakthrough%E2%80%99-in-Indo-US-nuclear-deal-will-bleed-Indians-every-which-way The above link is much more elaborate and touches upon very important aspects. Read on Mr. Modi's insurance pool proposition quoted below :- "Details about the insurance pool are not available yet. But if it is set up, Indian taxpayers will be made to pay to cover risks associated with GE and Westinghouse’s technologies. A Reuters report talks of a kitty of $244 million, with the government-run General Insurance Corporation of India and a few public sector companies contributing one half and the government contributing the other. The Indian taxpayer will have to pay even if the plants do not blow up. If the supplier is asked to contribute to the pooled fund, that increased project and electricity cost would be passed on to Indian consumers. Anyway you cut it, we are screwed." Precambrian - I highly recommend the link for you. Unit cost is a relatively small issue as it obviously does not take into account the revenue made by Indian companies/workforce ( which will add to India's GDP ), tax that Govt. will get, employment through operators of the reactors ( which will be Indians ), stability of supply compared to fossil fuel based generators, environment impact cost,etc. Thank you for the link. Interesting. I am bit confused about the quote you pasted from the article. I understand that damage costs shall be borne equally by govt and the Insurer. But isn't this a worse case scenario? How's it going to add to the costs unless of course there is a disaster? Also isn't the chance of a disaster statistically very miniscule? I read somewhere that to date there have been only 3 major nuke accidents - and only 1 of them - Chernobyl one causing significant human loss of lives. I'd live with that percentage honestly. Further on the "unit cost" - Hmm I am not s convinced about it adding to India's GDP. Rather such pricing might spark inflation which would nullify any value additions won't it?
Precambrian Posted January 31, 2015 Author Posted January 31, 2015 Americans needed because of NSG & no objection. Sorry to sound like a dummy (which I pretty am much on this topic) - but we already have nuke plants set up and working don't we? What is that Americans /NSG etc would bring to the plate in addition? I also acknowledge RandomGuy's post talking about trade imbalance etc, but what guarantee do we have which helps us achieve that?
Kalia_Test Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 Thank you for the link. Interesting. I am bit confused about the quote you pasted from the article. I understand that damage costs shall be borne equally by govt and the Insurer. But isn't this a worse case scenario? How's it going to add to the costs unless of course there is a disaster? Also isn't the chance of a disaster statistically very miniscule? I read somewhere that to date there have been only 3 major nuke accidents - and only 1 of them - Chernobyl one causing significant human loss of lives. I'd live with that percentage honestly. Further on the "unit cost" - Hmm I am not s convinced about it adding to India's GDP. Rather such pricing might spark inflation which would nullify any value additions won't it? 1. Damage cost will be borne by insurer if I understood correctly. The premium will be paid by Govt every year ( through Indian tax payers money obviously ). This is money that tax payers will not get back. It will stay with insurer. Even if the suppliers ( non-Indian companies) are asked to contribute to the premium, they will add the cost and pass on again to Indian consumers is what I understand. In pure Insurance terms, Indian taxpayers are underwriting unproven and untested US technologies. 2. You need to multiply low probability with enormous impact to get an idea of the risk. Cost of recovery will be 200 billion$ + and human life is invaluable in any case. 3. I am unable to articulate well as I am not an economist but we should not just evaluate per unit price to consumer. I don't think unit electricity charges to consumers will differ based on mode of generation so Govt might choose to subsidize ( i.e ofer to consumers at less than Rs. 15 - we don't know).Also,we need to look at overall economic impact too. Something like Indian companies/workforce will also benefit, Govt will get tax, money from shareholder profits,etc will flow back into GDP -- stuff like that. Maybe any finance MBA,etc here can explain better.
bulbul Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 Sorry to sound like a dummy (which I pretty am much on this topic) - but we already have nuke plants set up and working don't we? What is that Americans /NSG etc would bring to the plate in addition? I also acknowledge RandomGuy's post talking about trade imbalance etc, but what guarantee do we have which helps us achieve that? NSG is a body of 48 nations that regulates global trade in civil nuclear materials and technologies. It ensures the materials and technologies transferred to any nation aren’t diverted to developing nuclear weapons. It is said to have been created about 40 years ago as a sequel to India’s first nuclear test conducted in 1974. It isolated India from nuclear trade with the rest of the world. However, in 2008 when the Indo-US Bilateral Civil Nuclear Agreement was signed, the US facilitated lifting of the NSG trade restrictions against India. The NSG waiver to India was granted in September 2008 after an intense debate US facilitating India's entry to NSG http://www.newindianexpress.com/columns/India-Deserves-NSG-Membership/2014/07/28/article2351569.ece More details from Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Suppliers_Group NY times article opposing India entry to NSG..read their argument, I guess this paper or some reporters have serious problem with India http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/06/opinion/sunday/indias-role-in-the-nuclear-race.html?_r=0
bulbul Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 More details on India US nuclear deal http://www.cfr.org/india/us-india-nuclear-deal/p9663
surajmal Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 India's current power gen capacity is 250 GW. It needs to get to atleast 1000 GW for India to be a middle income economy. Thorium reactors are supposed to play a key role in that. To not make it sound technical, thorium fuel cycle needs additional fissile material since naturally occuring Thorium can't sustain fission on its own .(Th 231 can but that is found in a very minute quantity) That is where traditional reactors utilizing uranium isotopes and plutonium come in. Since India doesn't have any substantive uranium reserves, it needs to either import uranium from foreign shores or use reprocessing cycle from its existing (and forthcoming )reactors. But 500 + GW worth of thorium reactors will require a large amount of fissile uranium/Pu239. This is where the imported reactors come in. While one may say that, DAE can ramp up production of its indigenously developed 700 MW PHWR to meet the need. Please understand, DAE isn't a commercial entity that has experience in mass production. After all they have only made couple dozen reactors (and mostly of small sizes) in its history. Secondly, much of their road map is geared towards operationalizing thorium reactors/3 tier nuclear cycle. One could look to outsource mass production of 700 MW PHWRs to private sector but presently, they have next to zero experience with nuclear energy. So India is left with little else but importing reactors considering the massive energy demands staring it in its face in the coming decades. In 30 years, investment in a few dozen foreign reactors will seem like chump change when you have a few hundred thorium reactors humming around the country.
cowboysfan Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 My big fear is security, can we adequately protect these facilities because I doubt we can handle the fallout.
G_B_ Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 I am not sold on thorium. The fast breeder reactor has been branded about some sort of saviour for India but for me it remains a pipedream. @prem What india needs to aim for is a diverse basket of energy supplies. Cost per unit is one metric of measurement. But security of supply for India's planner is number 1 on the list. Solar panel for India can be a game changer. But that involves personal use rather than government investment. I hope a day comes whereby the government gives incentives to each household/colony/society to get solar power to meet x% of their net demand. Already in mumbai some societies in the rich parts of the city are investing in solar panels and rain harvesting facilities to be 100% independent of the government grid. The technology for solar power is getting cheaper by the day and maybe one day the government can give an incentive for example dont pay any tax for the year but get a solar panel. In the UK which is sun starved more and more people are getting solar panels put in. Thats when nuclear power in conjunction with say an established solar grid comes handy. It is dangerous for India to invest only in nuclear power (expensive) but having nuclear power is also a handy option to have. By 2050 i feel india needs to aim for 50% fossil fuels (of which natural gas and coal form the core) 30% renewable (hydro electric wind solar) and 20% nuclear. That is a diverse basket. Yes the gestation period is high. But todays nuclear power plants can be in operation for close to 40-50 years.
surajmal Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 I am not sold on thorium. The fast breeder reactor has been branded about some sort of saviour for India but for me it remains a pipedream. Tell that to the DAE guys who have been hard at work for half a century to close the fuel cycle.
diga Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 I am not sold on thorium. The fast breeder reactor has been branded about some sort of saviour for India but for me it remains a pipedream. Do we have a non-import option other than Thorium for Nuclear fuel? We need to find some means to generate energy out of it.. Solar panel for India can be a game changer. But that involves personal use rather than government investment. I hope a day comes whereby the government gives incentives to each household/colony/society to get solar power to meet x% of their net demand. Already in mumbai some societies in the rich parts of the city are investing in solar panels and rain harvesting facilities to be 100% independent of the government grid. The technology for solar power is getting cheaper by the day and maybe one day the government can give an incentive for example dont pay any tax for the year but get a solar panel. In the UK which is sun starved more and more people are getting solar panels put in. Most states in India do I think.. you get a small rebate in your electricity bills if you show renewable energy used at your household. And people generating excess energy can suppy it to the grid
Recommended Posts