india denied NSG membership and tranfer of enriched uranium technology

India denied  enrichment nuclear technology and nuclear fuel

Claiming that the Nuclear Suppliers Group ( NSG)  had “reneged ‘on its  waiver on nuclear fuel uranium supply to India opposition party BJP on Tuesday charged Prime Minister Manmohn Singh  with betraying the nation on  Indo- U.S. nuke deal and asked to clarify how Indo - US deal beneficial  to India. This important issue which had historic back ground .  NSG back tracked historic waiver given  to India for supply of fuel and enrichment nuclear technology from NSG Group.

Prime Minister Manmohn Singh assured at the time of signing Indo-U.S.  nuclear deal that  NSG will waive of for supply of enrichment nuclear technology and nuclear fuel from nuclear supplier group after concluding nuclear deal

As disquiet over fresh guidelines on transfer  of ENR technology to NPT non signatories further Indian foreign secretary Nirupama Rao emphasized  India’ s   impeccable  non-proliferation record reiterating India s interest in becoming a member of multilateral export control regimes including NSG.

Speaking at international institute for strategic studies in London Rao said India had  a place strict and effective controls over the export of sensitive items in line with “ best international standards

“over the recent years our civil nuclear initiative resulted  in conclusion  international civil nuclear energy co-operation  with various international partners including  U.S., France ,Russia , U.K. and Canada etc
This has reflected recognizance of India’s impeccable non-proliferation record on its contributions to global non- proliferation objectives “ Rao said.

“India has expressed interest in full membership of four multilateral export control regimes ,which  we believe will be mutually beneficial. We are engaged with regimes members and hope to make progress in that direction with support of our partners including U.K.

The new NSG guidelines on transfer of sensitive enrichment and reprocessing technology is being seen by many diluting the clean waiver given to India in 2008 for carrying civil nuclear program .

NSG  has reneged on its promise made after indo-U.S. civil nuclear deal was now insisting that any for enrichment and nuclear  reprocessing ( ENR) beneficiary has to be signatory to  nuclear proliferation treaty(NPT).

“In 2008 when the historic nuclear deal was signed between U.S. President George Bush and Manmohn Singh the government that deal was very much important for meeting power requirements of nation’  BJP spokes person Raj-iv Pratap Rudy said. Rudy pointed out that government said “we would produce 15000 MW of energy by 2015 and 30000 MW of nuclear energy and also cater power  to two lakhs villages which  don’t have power”

The opposition maintained that the agreement was signed with U.S. after U.P.A government got it passed and ratified by parliament, though left parties with drew support and NDA opposed it strongly.

We had said the government has compromised on the strategic autonomy of country and country has been betrayed” Rudy said.

Let our hope  nuclear power corporation of India , Atomic Energy Commission to discuss with nuclear supplier group for its membership in NSG and see that NSG Group should  agree transfer of  enrichment technology without mentioning any conditions  and supply of  nuclear fuel to India civil nuclear program for continuous running our nuclear reactors without facing shortage of enrichment fuel.

fusion power

Fusion power

Fusion power, a primary area of research in plasma physics, is power generated by fusion processes. In fusion reactions two light atomic nuclei fuse together to form heavier nucleus, in doing so they release a comparatively  large amount of energy arising from the building energy due to  the strong nuclear force which is manifested as an increase in temperature of reactants.

The term is commonly used to refer to potential commercial production of net usable power from fusion source, similar to the use of term “ steam power “ . The  leading designs for controlled fusion research use magnetic (tokomak design) or inertial (laser) confinement of a plasma, with heat from fusion reactors used to operate a steam turbine which in turn drives electrical generators similar to the process used in   fossil  fuel and nuclear fusion power stations.

Fusion power is  believed to have significant safety advantages over current power stations based on nuclear fusion. Fusion only takes place under very limited and controlled circumstances( by comparison fission, including catastrophic failure, only requires that there is sufficient fuel within small enough (space) for this reason, a failure of precise centre or cessation of fueling quickly shut down fusion power reactors. There is no possibly of run way heat build up or large scale release of radioactivity, little or no atmospheric pollution, the power comprises light elements in small quantities which are easily obtained and largely harmless to life, the waste products are short lived in terms of radioactivity , and there is little overlap with nuclear weapon technology.

Fusion powered electricity  generation was initially believed to be ready achievable, as fusion power had been. However the extreme requirements for continuous reactions and plasma requirement lead to projections being extended by several decades, and more than 60 years after first attempts, commercial power production still believed to be unlikely before 2050.

As of July 2010, the largest  experiment by  means of magnetic confinement has been the joint European Torus ( JET). In megawatts ( 21,600 hp ) of fusion power ( 65 %  of input power) with fusion power of over 10 MW (13,000 hp) sustained for over  0.5 sec. In June 2005, its Successor ITER was announced by seven parties involved in the project - U.S., China, the European (EU), India , Japan, the Russia federation and South Korea.

ITER is designed to produce ten times more fusion power than power put into plasma over many minutes , for example 50 MW of input power to produce 500 MW of out put power. ITER  is currently under construction Cadarache  France. DEMO is intended as next generation of research from ITER , and  to be first reactor demonstrating sustained net energy producing fusion  on a commercial scale. It has been proposed to begin construction of DEMO in 2024.

Inertial ( laser)  confinement, which was for a time seen as more difficult or unfeasible has generally seen less development effort than magnetic approaches. However  this approach made  a come back following further innovation, and is being developed at both the United States National Ignition facility as well as the planned European Union High Power Laser Energy Research ( HIPER) faculty. As 2010 heating 3.3 million Kelvin was achieved  and in October 2010 the first integrated ignition test was announced to have completed successfully with 192 beam laser system firing over  million Joules of ultraviolet laser energy into capsule filled hydrogen fuel. Fusion ignition tests are to follow.

As technology develops fusion power believed to be  available after 2050 , hope let research on fusion power go on.

nuclear power and EPR ( European pressurized reactor )

Nuclear power and European pressurized reactor( EPR) 

 The total out lay power sector (nuclear ) for 2011-2012 is 5581 crore. The plant out lay consists of Rs 1609. Crore  by way of budgetary support and 3972 crore  by way of IEBR ( Internal and extra budgetary resources) . The budgetary support includes for investment in equity for Bharatiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Limited ( BHAVINI) and Rs 24  crore for externally aided  projects at Kundankulam being executed by Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited(NPCIL ) with assistance of Russian federation. Projects of Bhabha Atomic  Research Center and that  of Indira Gandhi Center for Atomic Research to provide R&D support for power program is also included .

India’s NPCIL signed an agreement for construction of 2 EPR’ s with Areva France each 1650 Mwe each for setting up in Jaithapur in Maharashtra. Let us evolute the principal benefits of this reactor.

EPR reactor

Safety and operational performance are key strengths of the EPR ( European pressurized Reactor ) . This pressurized water model is also the first  generation 111+ reactor to be deployed on international scale, being built in three different countries .

The EPR reactor has an electrical production capacity of more than 1650 Mwe  which places it among the most powerful reactor in the world. A direct descendant of previous models manufactured by AREVA, EPR  Pressurized water reactor is based on tried and tested technologies and principles. It is classified as generation 111+ reactor  due to the level of safety obtained and economic savings that it achieves in  relation to the  earlier models.

From a safety point of view the EPR reactor ensures an unequaled safety level thanks drastic reduction of probability of severe accidents as well as their consequences on the environment. In addition it is particularly resistant to external accidents( airplane crash). Economically , it achieves an unrivaled level of competitiveness because electricity production cost are reduced by 10 % compared with current plants. It also produces less waste.

It currently under construction in Finland( Olkiluoto) in France ( Flamanville)  and in  China ( 2 units Taishan) and is currently under going certification in U.S. and U.K.

Safety , competitiveness, flexibility

Unrivaled level of safety : resistance to plan crashes and seismic vibrations, quadruple safety devise redundancy, core melt down risk further reduced and minimization of consequences from such an accident thanks to proven of special compartment isolating molten core.

Active and passive safety systems

Designed as an extension of KONVOI (Siemens) and N4 ( AREVA) reactors , the EPR reactor combines active and passive safety systems to increase  safety and provide better process control over plant operation.

Competitiveness

High power :  the power out put of “EPR”  reactor originates from the size of its larger core, which is capable of holding more fuel, and its advanced nuclear steam supply system comprising 4 primary loops.

Reduced operating costs






Reduction in fuel consumption and easier system maintenance.


Maximized electrical production through reliable components, proven technologies and maintenance during operation, permitting shorter unit outages.
.
Environmental protection

. Reduction in fuel consumption per Kwh  and  production of long life waste  products (-15%) through improved thermal efficiency and uranium utilization.

 An unrivaled experience on large projects

Areva is only manufacture to benefit from  40 years of continuous experience in the design and construction of nuclear power projects,  there are  three programs for construction of “ EPR”  plants under way, enabling Areva gather unrivaled experience almost all primary circuit components are designed and manufactured by Areva.

Innovation for performance

Two innovations contribute to the “ EPR “  reactors high thermal efficiency .

. Steam generators with an axial economizer provide increased steam pressure and notably increase the reactor thermal efficiency . These components were developed and tested in the  N4 type reactors.

. A neutron reflector surrounding the core reduces fuel consumption by limiting the neutron leakage. It increases the life span of reactor pressure vessel by limiting its irradiation and its embitterment.

Flexibility

Load follows ;  Between 60 and 100% nominal out put, the EPR  reactor can adjust its power out put at a rate of 5% nominal power per minute at constant temperature preserving the service life of components and plants.

. A varied choice of fuels : An EPR power plant can operate with uranium enriched 5% , reprocessed uranium or MOX fuel( in variable proportions according to customer needs and up to 100 % .

. Irradiation cycle  : fuel cycle length possibly between 12 to 24 months for better management of power plant.

With above technical design advantages of EPR reactor selected by NPCIL ( nuclear power corporation of  India)  has taken wise  decision for building it  in Jaithapur in Maharashtra for  nuclear power development
in India. Anti nuclear organizers in Maharashtra should stop agitations and support the project to go ahead without  any obstructions for quick implementation of this plant for surrounding areas overall development..

economics of nuclear projects

The economics of nuclear power plant

The economics of new nuclear power plants is controversial issue, since diverging views on this topic, a multi- billion dollar investments ride on the choice of an energy source. Nuclear power plants typically have high capital costs for building power plants, but low direct fuel cost ( with much of cost fuel extraction, processing, use and long term storage externalized ) cost estimates also need to take into account plant decommissioning and nuclear waste storage costs. On the other hand measures to mitigate global warming, such as a carbon tax or carbon emission trading may favor economics of nuclear power.

In recent years there has been slow down of electricity demand growth and financing has become more difficult, which has  an impact on large projects such as nuclear reactors with large upfront costs and long project lead time which carry variety of risks. In eastern Europe, Bulgaria and Romania, where gas is available cheap and future supply relatively secure this relatively secure this also poses a major problem for nuclear projects. Other problem who bears the  risk of future uncertainties while taking  into account of economics nuclear  projects. 

Normally all operating nuclear power plants were developed by government utility monopolies.  In India nuclear power corporation of India is responsible for building nuclear power plants. There are several risks associated with construction costs operating performance, fuel price and other factors were borne by consumers rather than suppliers. Many countries have liberalized the electricity market when these risks and risk of cheaper competitiveness emerging before capital costs are recovered are borne by plant suppliers and operates rather than consumers which leads to a significantly different evolution of the economics of nuclear power plants.

Because of large capital costs for nuclear power and relatively long construction period before revenue is retuned, servicing , the capital costs of nuclear power plant is most important factor determining the economic competitiveness of nuclear energy. The investment can contribute about 70% to 80 % of costs of electricity. The discount rate chosen to cost nuclear power plants capital over its life time is arguably the most sensitive parameter to over all costs.

The recent liberalization of electricity market in many countries has made the economics of nuclear power generation less attractive. Previously monopolistic provider could guarantee out put requirements decades into future. Private generating companies now have to accept shorter out put contracts and risks of future lower -cost competition so they desire shorter return on investment period-this favors generation plant types with lower capital costs even if associated fuel cost are higher.  A further difficulty is that due to large sunk costs but unpredictable future income from liberalized electricity market, private capital is unlikely to be available on favorable terms which is particularly significant for nuclear as it is capital intensive.

Another consideration is that even  though consumer demand is not guaranteed , nuclear place among the lowest operating cost options. Once plant is built , it has distinct advantage over, coal ,gas  other fuel based generation supply in winning the monitory supply auctions, thereby resulting in operations at full reactor capacity. In this regard upper (P.V.) calculations for risk adjusted discount could be applied carefully, possibly approaching the guaranteed captive market levels.


Recent construction costs

In 2007 estimates have considerable  uncertainty in over night cost, and vary widely from $ 2950/ Kwe  ( over night cost) to  a Moody;s investor service conservative estimate of between $ 5000 and $ 6000/ Kwe  ( final or all in cost .

The reported prices at six new pressurized water reactor are indicative of costs for that  type of plant.

February 2008 -for two new AP 1000 reactors at turnkey point site Florida power & light calculated overnight capital cost from $ 2444 to $ 3528 per KW,which were grossed up to include cooling towers, site works , land costs , transmission costs and risk management for total $ 3108 to $ 4540 per Kilo watt. Adding financing charges increased to overall figures to$ 5780 to $ 8071 per KW.

November 2008 for two new AP 1000 reactors at Beltifonte  site TVA updated its estimates for overnight capital costs ranged to $ 2516 to $ 4649 KW for combined construction cost $ 5.6 to 10.4 billion ( total cost $ 9.9 to 17.5 billion )

In comparison with the AP 1000 units already under construction in China have been reported with substantially lower costs due to significantly lower labor costs.

In 2010, Chinese nuclear commission expect construction cost would fall significantly once full scale mass production is under way. In addition a domestic CAP 1400 design based as AP1000 is due to start construction in April 2013 with schedule short of 2017. Once CAP 1400 design has been proven work is scheduled for CAP 1700 design with largest  construction cost $ 1000/ KW.

COST OVERRUN

Construction delays can add significantly to cost of plant.  Because  a power plant does not earn income  during construction, longer construction times translate directly into higher finance charges.  Modern nuclear power plants are planned for construction in four years or less ( 42 months for CANDU ACR -1000, 60 months from order to operation for AP1000,48 months from first concrete to operation for EPR and 45 months for ESBWR)as of forced to over decade for some previous plants. However  Japanese success ABWR two of the four EPR under construction ( in Finland and France) are significantly behind schedule. In some countries notably U.S. in past unexpected changes in licensing, inspection and certification of nuclear power plants added delays and increased construction costs. However regulating process for siting
Licensing and construction have been standardized.


OPERATING COST

In general coal and nuclear plants have same type of operating costs ( operations and maintenance plus fuel costs) . However nuclear projects have lower fuel costs but higher operating and maintenance costs.

Security  costs

Unlike other plants nuclear plants must be carefully guarded against both attempted sabotage ( general with goal considered to be causing radiological accident, rather than just preventing the plant operating ) and possible theft nuclear material. Some nuclear energy plant require higher security, like natural gas storage facilities and oil refineries.

Uranium

While  amounts of uranium  used are a fraction of amounts while comparing coal or oil used conventional power plants, fuel cost account for about 28%  of  nuclear power plant operating expenses. Other recent sources cite lower fuel costs such as 16% . Doubling the price of uranium would add only 7% to the cost electricity produced. Mining activity is growing but developing a uranium mines takes long time some times 10 years. This means that uncertain uranium prices can have a grave impact on plant operating costs.

Waste disposal

All nuclear  plant produce radio active waste. To pay for cost storing, transport ting and disposal these waste in permanent location in U.S. a surcharge of  a tenth of cent per Kilo Watt hour is added to electricity bills.

Advantages  of nuclear energy when compared to other energy sources.
. Nuclear energy produces zero green house gases, which will reduce global warming on earth, while  this is the important point while considering use of nuclear energy.

. The life of nuclear power plant is more than 60 years and hence the cost of construction nuclear power plants and overrun cost will be recovered  due to long life of nuclear project.

. Cost of fuel is cheaper when compared to coal or natural gas.

. New technologies are being developed to reduce cost on construction and operating costs of nuclear projects and improving construction delays.

nuclear energy and future

Nuclear energy and future

Before the divesting earthquake and tsunami at Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan on March 11, nuclear power returning  to its prominence after dull period of slow down , but not decline.

As per the latest reports of nuclear power industry in top 10 nuclear countries as per economic report shows these countries are going ahead and expand the use of nuclear power capacity except in Japan and Germany.

As far as prices  uranium concerned the biggest drop in prices of uranium in two years may be ending as china and India reaffirmed  their plans to carry on  nuclear power production plans as per original schedule while these developments that will  double global uranium production even after Japans nuclear disaster.

The radio active metal has slumped 8.9 percent this year most since 2009 after tumbling  as much as 27 % as governments reviewed nuclear power plant safety systems following Japan crisis, according prices from MF global holdings inc. China and India will lead a 46 % increase in consumption by world’s biggest nuclear power developers by 2020 according to data compiled by Bloom berg.

Soaring energy demand from world fastest growing economies is buoying uranium prospectus of miners from Cameco corp  to Palladium Energy in c. , even after radiation leaks from Japan 40 years old Fukushima Daaichi plant sparked the world nuclear disaster since Chernobyl in1986. China nuclear energy associate said May 12 it will boost nuclear energy capacity as much as eight times by 2020. A day after India Atomic Energy commission said it will increase its nuclear energy production 13 fold by 2030.

A review of our forecasts for 10 largest nuclear power producing country s  -  85 %  of global capacity- shows that despite Nuclear crisis in Japan, the overriding global trend over the next decade will be growth” the future of nuclear energy report says.

Today the top 10 countries have around 320 Giga Watt (GW) of nuclear infrastructure between them by 2020 this capacity will swell to 405 GW. Even countries like Eastern Europe to Africa are showing interest producing nuclear energy and developing infrastructure required for..

The  report looks at the situation in top  ten nuclear power producing countries while actually there will be slight to moderate increases in nuclear power capacity in the current number one producer, the U.S. as well as  France, the Ukraine, Canada and U.K.

The increase will be more significant in South Korea currently number six nuclear energy producer in world while  Poland plans  50% expansion by 2020. Meanwhile Russia currently number four has planned to increase 80 percent. While by planning the bigger expansion of nuclear energy program  by China currently the worlds 10th biggest nuclear energy producer, which is  an expected increase in  nuclear energy capacity by more than 500 percent   capacity by 2020. 

“In  the case of fast growing china nuclear energy is a response to long term trends, and hence  not easily abandoned or replaced “ an Economist says.

“ The need for new sources of electricity to power economic growth persists and promise of nuclear bolstering energy security and reducing carbon emissions makes it appealing option.

As Fukushima crises started as a result global reach group has slightly modified down china’s nuclear fore cast from 70GW to 63 GW by 2020.

Only two of the top 10 nuclear energy producing countries plant to cut back on their capacities, Japan still reeling from its nuclear disaster it said it will not build any new nuclear reactors, whereas before disaster it envisaged a new fleet of reactors. Mean while Germany where burgeoning support for abandonment of nuclear capacity recently severing elections now plan to phase out nuclear power altogether.

The report says countries to watch are Brazil, India and Pakistan . It says the India governments has huge plans to increase nuclear energy capacity in order to over come severe power shortages. However   there have been violent protests  on nuclear sites and coastal areas where India want to put its reactors are prone to earthquakes and tsunamis. India plans to take enough safety measures  to construct nuclear reactors in coastal areas with clear environmental protection plans as per Nuclear Power Corporation of India.

However recently India prime minister Manmohn Singh made statement that India committed to nuclear power generation to reduce dependency on oil and save country for reducing  global green house gases.