What are the real facts behind India-American Nu-deal?-Sudan?

Question

For energy!Not at all,If we start now to get electricity we will get up to 2020 and how much ?5%-7% of total electricity!

Very strange all our ruling leaders including Rahul Gandhi are making us to understand that we will get all electricity by this deal and our dream comes true,what is the facts behind this deal nobody saying to Nation.

See the fact of Atomic-Power-Electricity and other resources :-

1.America have not build any Plant of Atomic-Electricity for last 30 years!Why?the no need of energy or they are develop other resources or using other resources?

2.The most Biggest supplier of Uranium in word is Australia, till now have not build a single Atomic-Power-Electricity plant!

3.Pawan-Urza(Air-energy) giving us 5000 Mega Wt,which develop in last 10 years,where Atomic producing only 3000 mega Wt for more than 44 years!

4.Electricity by Gas plant are more-more economic and in future 75% will plants are build on gas.

Why we are not pursuing fast for India-Pakistan-Iran Gas-Line

-Su

Answer 1

They don’t build atomic reactors simply because of big risk involved incase of natural or other calamities which can result in loss of lives on a big scale (not same accident but like Bhopal disaster). They are aware but our leaders are not or may be they got packets form companies of usa which builds chimney and other material related to reactor plants. Well they have to cover an amount spent in horse trading and also elections are coming boss. A fact is that those companies are in a big loss.

Answer 2

Firstly i want to comment on the point why india is not pursuing for india-pakistan-iran gas-line, this is because india can not trust pakistan, india can depend on that gas pipe as pakistan can at any point of time just turnits back to india and can stop the gas in pakistan, if that will hapen then india will be facing great problem and will not be able to any thing, so india does not want to totally depend on that gas-line.

now the second point australia is not having any nuclear power plant since it is supplying alot of uranium but in comparison to countries like india and china it is not having such huge population whose demand to satisfy is difficult. like australia india is also having the dumps of coal on which australia depends a lot as it  is it's main sorce of light and it is having a lot of coal for that but indian coal power stations are not running 100% to their capacity like the australian plants do as india is not able to produce such huge amount of coal, also india has lessen it's greenhouse gas emission so india will have to change its plan for power sector so they want more nuclear power plants to build which does not emmit greenhouse gases and for which they need uranium for which they will have to sign the deal with america. India is not having the technology of light water heater for nuclear power plants it's nuclear power plant's are running on heavy water heater which produces very less electricty as compared to those light water heaters, so it is not only about the nuclear power but also abut the technology which is keeping india behind many countries.

also america and australia are devloped countries but india is a devloping country it's infrastructure need's to be established, it's demand in every feild is going to increase at a very fast speed so to coup with that need india needs new technology that's what indian prime minister is doing

                                                          Thank's for reading my view

Answer 3

1. The Watts Bar Nuclear Plant: Unit 1, owned by Tennessee Valley Authority, located at Spring City, Tennessee and producing 1,177 MW of power was commissioned in 1996.

The Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station: Unit 2 owned by the Texas Utilities Co., located at Glen Rose, Texas and producing 1,111 MW of power was commissioned in 1993. The Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station: Unit 1, also owned by Texas Utilities Co., located at Glen Rose, Texas and producing 1,150 MW of Electricity was commissioned in 1990. The Limerick Generating Station: Unit 2 owned by Exelon Corporation, located at Pottstown, Pennsylvania and producing 1,143 MW of power was commissioned in 1990. The Seabrook Nuclear Station: Unit 1, owned by Public Service Co. of New Hampshire, located at Seabrook, New Hampshire and producing 1,200 MW of power was commissioned in 1990. Thus, your contention that no new nuclear power plants have come up in the last 30 years is not correct. In fact the USA has over 100 nuclear reactors providing almost 20% of its electricity. These have a high level of performance. Extension of reactor lifetimes from 40 to 60 years is enhancing the economic competitiveness of plants. The industry envisages substantial new nuclear capacity by 2020.

2. Australia is not the biggest supplier of Uranium in the world as claimed by you. In fact it is the world's second biggest supplier of Uranium behind Canada. Inspite of being one of the largest Uranium suppliers in the world, Australia doesn't have a single nuclear power plant as you have rightly stated. In June, 2006, the federal governments of Western Australia (WA), South Australia (SA), Victoria, New South Wales (NSW) and Queensland, all opposed a proposed nuclear energy inquiry by the erstwhile Australian Prime Minister, John Howard. The reasons ranged from opposition to turning WA into a nuclear waste dump, commercial non-viability in SA on account of a small population, high cost and waste disposal problems in Victoria and opposition to jeopardising the coal industry in Queensland.

3. In India, currently 17 nuclear power plants produce 4120 MW of power (and not 3000 MW as stated by you), while projects for production of another 3160 MW are under construction. The main reason for low energy production is that India, not being a signatory to Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty has failed to obtain advanced nuclear technology and Uranium supplies for expansion of its nuclear power capacity. Comparatively, the wind power has seen a more spectacular growth in India with an installed capacity of 7,660.2 MW, although it has started developing in the 1990s.

4. India is extremely keen to have the gas pipeline from Iran via Pakistan. Strategic reasons like Pakistan's hostility, terrorist threats and lack of assurance of security from Pakistan have hindered implementation till now. There were active considerations for bringing the pipeline under the sea, which again has been shelved for strategic reasons.

Now, the possible facts behind the deal.

1. Opening up Indian reactors to IAEA inspections which India has opposed till date.

2. Making India dependent on international supplies of Uranium in order to run the power plants. The hazards of total dependence are well known.

3. Pre-empting the possibilities of nuclear weapons production by India.

4. Forcing India to shift from its independent nuclear policy to one that makes it fully dependent. That will ensure total control over a strategic sector in India in terms of defence and power production. India will be gradually forced to comply with other conditions that are unrelated to nuclear issues.

5. Entry of foreign nuclear technology suppliers to India to sell largely obsolete technology.

6. India might be slowly forced to accept the status of being the West's nuclear waste dumping ground.

These are all high stakes.

Answer 4

You already answered the question and didn't left any thing for others.