NEWS

N-Deal: Looking Ahead Boldly

February 21, 2006
Cynical Nerd

Much has been said about the Indo-US nuclear deal including our own cacophonic takes here, here and here. At this point, a deal will most likely be signed during President Bush's visit in March. A compromise was apparently reached on the contentious breeder reactor issue - it is now likely to be declared 'civil' in the near future. Meanwhile, the DAE will continue with the construction of additional fast reactors as planned.

Once the agreement goes through the U.S. Congress and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), India along with Russia, France, Japan and others will be roped in under President Bush's GNEP initiative. India can somewhat benefit from this deal by getting limited Pu supplies to its already well-developed fast reactors. But experts such as Steven Kraft has said that the Pu reprocessing plan is clearly a long term idea with the required technologies expected to mature only 50 to 60 years after. Of course, to satisfy the immediate energy needs for the next two decades, India will import fuel and dozens of traditional Uranium-based reactors from the usual 'heavy-weights' like France, Russia or USA.

Let's be clear on one thing: all this bonhomie heavily depends on the current mood of the Big Boyz at that time. The P-5 (especially the P-1), can at any time threaten to cut-off supplies or inflict intrusive IAEA inspections ( the P-1 funds more than 50% of its budget ) if and when India's foreign policy decisions or military hardware purchase doesn't pleases them. Hence it is important for India to pursue alternative strategies, not only as a Plan-B against possible sanctions but also as an additional energy source to feed its economy.

In this post, we ponder new, far-reaching avenues to secure India's energy supplies and in the process forge new strategic partnerships for the 21st century. With its excellent non-proliferation record, India has no reason to fear from developing a peaceful nuclear energy coalition with friendly developing nations.

Amidst all the world attention towards Iran, Brazil quietly started Uranium enrichment in a brand new plant in Resende near Rio de Janeiro sending out alarm bells among American strategic thinkers. Note that despite being an NPT signatory and having the 6th largest Uranium reserves in the world, Brazil had to lobby hard with the IAEA to do this (yet another instance of the discriminatory NPT regime). India and Brazil have already worked closely in several areas alongside the G-20 nations. They successfully lobbied against rich nations to eliminate their agricultural subsidies during WTO summits in Cancun and Hong Kong. India should go ahead and further this close relationship by signing a bilateral energy partnership, by providing technical assistance to Brazil it its civilian program in exchange for Uranium mining rights.

South Africa is another potential partner with huge Uranium reserves and one of the most advanced pebble-bed reactors. Brazil, India and China have already shown interest in this technology. India can commit itself to purchase a few of these reactors in return for sanction-free Uranium supplies. Further trade agreements can be signed to give preferential treatment to South African goods and services in the huge Indian market. (This blogger prefers a South African Steenberg Shiraz than an over-rated French Bordeaux). Note that till the early 90s under the whites-only government, it had an active weapons program with heavy Israeli assistance (who in return 'clandestinely' (duh!) got the fuel). Surprisingly, just when the apartheid was beginning to be abolished, the whites-only government shut down its weapons program and signed the NPT!

A more daring approach is to target an African country like Niger ( currently the #3 supplier in the world ) aiming for exclusive mining rights of yellow cake. A pro-active measure is to lure this poor country (GDP $3.5 bn) with few other natural resources with massive Indian investments, economic assistance or even military aid. As an ex-French colony, Niger's mining activities are probably under proxy French control. New Delhi can try lobbying with Paris but nevertheless it shouldn't be afraid of dealing directly. After all these years, what good it did to African nations by remaining loyal to their former colonial masters. This idea has its own risk since Niger was also the major embarrassment to President Bush's pre-invasion intelligence 'slam-dunk'. Similar policies should be cooked-up to approach other major Uranium suppliers like Nigeria or Kazakhstan ( similar to what the Chinese are doing).

All these ideas require creative thinking and bold realpolitik on the part of Indian strategic thinkers (not the 'cheerleader' variety). Make no mistake - no one is going to get India's energy supplies on a platter. The NSG cartel will try its best to maintain its stranglehold on global Uranium supplies. It is only with dynamism and a forward-leaning approach that India can break this monopoly and ensure supplies not only for herself but also for friendly neighbors and allies among the developing countries.

Originally posted in our blog.

The author writes at National Interest
eXTReMe Tracker
Keep reading for comments on this article and add some feedback of your own!

N-Deal: Looking Ahead Boldly

Article

  • » Published on February 21, 2006
  • » Type: News
  • » Filed under: .

Author: Cynical Nerd

 

Comments! Feedback! Speak and be heard!

Comment on this article or leave feedback for the author

#1
Aaman
URL
February 21, 2006
08:46 PM

Good report, some interesting aspects worth thinking about

#2
temporal
URL
February 21, 2006
10:19 PM

cn:

Of course, to satisfy the immediate energy needs for the next two decades......All these ideas require creative thinking and bold realpolitik on the part of Indian strategic thinkers...

why next two decades only?

and creative thinking should also venture towards other alternative energy resources...wind, water, sun!....combined with efficient consumption and recycling

this reliance on black gold and yellow cake should be minimized

rgds

t

#3
Mr X
February 21, 2006
11:38 PM

Excellent article, well researched.
Won't designating the fast breeder program as civil adversely affect our strategic program?
What are your thoughts on India's long term plan of using the Thorium cycle ?Do we have the technology to make this a reality in 20-30 years time?

#4
cynical nerd
URL
February 22, 2006
12:22 AM

Thanks guys:

temporal:

why next two decades only?

We never meant it to be restriced to two decades only. But India should be ok over the next two decades with the the addition of 10 GW of already nuclear under construction + 20 GW of thermal + the imported reactors we talked about. This post spefically addresses nuclear options beyond 2025.

this reliance on black gold and yellow cake should be minimized

No doubt, they are not sustainable. We had addressed other options in a different post. But our opinion is that nuclear energy cannot be wished way since renewable sources can go only so far.

best,

#5
cynical nerd
URL
February 22, 2006
12:28 AM

Mr. X:


Won't designating the fast breeder program as civil adversely affect our strategic program?

Yes, we suppose there is a compromise being worked out as we write. Details are still sketchy at this point.
What are your thoughts on India's long term plan of using the Thorium cycle ?

We believe it will begin to be commercialized only after 2025-30. It is said that by 2050, it can generate 500 GW out of the total requirement of 1300 GW. The rest has to come from fossil fuel (clean coal?), renewable (wind, solar, etc.), bio fuels, etc.

best,

#6
mayank
URL
February 22, 2006
12:30 AM

Another question: What will be the long time repurcussions of seperating our military and civil nuclear institutions? Aren't these institutions safer under military control?

#7
cynical nerd
URL
February 22, 2006
12:43 AM

mayank:


What will be the long time repurcussions of seperating our military and civil nuclear institutions?

This is a generic question. The devil lies on the detail. India already has 25% of its facilites under IAEA safeguards. Now it is willing to offer 50%. But the US wants 75% of Indian facilities to be declared civil while it only 2% of its own faciities are under IAEA safeguards! This will clearly affect the weapons program. We have put some numbers here. Dr. MMS is supposed to give a statement, but it never came. Sadly, American negotiators know more that what tax-paying Indian public or parliamentatians know. If they have decided to sell-out the nation's strategic assets, they should have the courage to tell the citizens about it.

best,

#8
Kush Tandon
URL
February 22, 2006
12:54 AM

"It is said that by 2050, it can generate 500 GW out of the total requirement of 1300 GW. The rest has to come from fossil fuel (clean coal?), renewable (wind, solar, etc.), bio fuels, etc."

Cynical Nerd,

I like your ideas. Most importantly, you have thought through Nuclear Policy and its finer points. You have done your homework.

However, your ideas on grander Energy Policy are little naive. The age of Fossil Fuel is far from over.........The age of Hostile Oil (as Paul Roberts puts it) is on, or maybe The age of Natural Gas is on.

You gotta remember USGS told President of USA in 1919-1920 that the world oil supply in less than a decade.

The most realistic transition is hydrogen economy piggy-backing on natural gas economy.

A few weeks ago Science discussed about Indian reactors in detail from a technology viewpoint. Do you have access to their subscription?

#9
cynical nerd
URL
February 22, 2006
01:16 AM

KT: Thanks.

However, your ideas on grander Energy Policy are little naive. The age of Fossil Fuel is far from over.........The age of Hostile Oil (as Paul Roberts puts it) is on, or maybe The age of Natural Gas is on.

Just to clarify, the specific response you quoted was about electricity generaion and not over all energy requirements, which obviously needs every form of source. In our other post, we never discounted fossil fuels. we did cover new sources like shale oil and tar-pit.

Yes, natural gas may be the a good option. The closest regions for India are Iran/CAR/Myanmar. In these trouble part of the world, we have no idea of how to go after them!

We have a feeling you work in the Industry. If so, we'd surely be interested in your thoughts if you can spare some time. Specifically, the cost analysis constructing a piple line from Iran vis-a-vis shipping it via large ship vessels. Give it a try.

best,

#10
Kush Tandon
URL
February 22, 2006
01:23 AM

"We have a feeling you work in the Industry. If so, we'd surely be interested in your thoughts if you can spare some time."

I used to. I am in academics right now but still very closely related. I would love to talk to you and contribute - in bits and pieces I can do before June but in comprehensive manner later. Let's keep in touch.

The reason I am supporting India-US nuclear deal is India needs to mordernize and diversify their energy mix big time. India shinning is not possible if it is energy starved.

I would support Iran deal using LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) tankers, so with Australia. India needs to be as agressive as Japan and China in its energy needs.

Thanks for your efforts. We'll talk later.

Add your comment



Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.






Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!