08-28-2006, 04:15 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->DECCAN CHRONICLE
<b>Scientists still have doubts, ask PM to spell out strategy</b>
New Delhi, Aug. 27: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was urged by the countrys top nuclear scientists at their recent meeting with him to formulate an adequate Indian response as they had serious doubts that the US Congress would accept the concerns of the nation on this sensitive issue.
Dr A. Gopalakrishnan, a former chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, told this newspaper when contacted that I had mentioned to the PM that he has comprehensively covered in his recent speeches in Parliament most of the concerns pointed out earlier by the scientists, the Opposition parties and the strategic analysts.
However, I also expressed my serious doubt whether the US Congress would take into account every one of the Indian requirements as spelt out by the PM. Therefore, it was my suggestion that the government must anticipate this and plan the type of response India should give the US . The government has started a strong campaign through its missions across the world to project the Indo-US nuclear deal.
Heads of Indian missions have been instructed to engage not just governments but civil society in discussions on this issue to gather support for the nuclear deal and allay suspicions about the strategic component of the India-US nuclear understanding, particularly in the developing world. Foreign secretary Shyam Sarans visit to the Scandinavian countries is just one part of the larger exercise directed at winning over maximum support for the deal as it stands at the moment.
Dr Gopalakrishnan was particularly worried about the views expressed by a senior official of the Planning Commission to US businessmen in Washington earlier this year. He refused to identify the member, but his reference was clearly to Planning Commission deputy chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia, who has been actively lobbying for the nuclear deal. Dr Gopalakrishnan, on his communicating concerns to Dr Manmohan Singh, told this newspaper: <b>The Prime Minister assured the scientists that establishing energy security in the country would be primarily on the basis of indigenous technology development and nationally-available primary energy resources. I pointed out that there is a contradiction between this assurance of the PM and the briefings that a senior official of the Planning Commission gave to an American business group in Washington on April 19, 2006, the transcript of which is still available at the website of the Indian embassy in Washington .</b>
Dr Ahluwalia had claimed that on nuclear energy, without access to foreign uranium supplies, the Indian nuclear power programme will peak at 10,000 MW and flatten out at that level for about 30 years, until the thorium breeder reactor is developed. <b>Dr Gopalakrishnan pointed out that the official concerned seems to be totally misinformed of our three-stage nuclear power programme, which will require the building of several Pu-depleted uranium first-generation breeder reactors to produce electricity and also the U-233 needed to fuel the subsequent thorium breeders. </b>
Dr Gopalakrishnan made it clear that what was referred to as plain nuclear reactors are the PHWRs, developed entirely by Indian scientists and engineers against all the obstacles and sanctions imposed by US since 1974. Dr Ahluwalia also claimed that India was not doing enough work on the utilisation of high ash coals and he hoped to persuade the US to devote some intellectual energy to solving this problem for us.
<b>Dr Gopalakrishnan pointed out that this assertion contradicts the findings of four Indo-US joint technical evaluations on the applicability of US clean-coal technologies to our type of coals. All these evaluations established that Indian coals cannot be utilised through US clean-coal technologies. </b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Scientists still have doubts, ask PM to spell out strategy</b>
New Delhi, Aug. 27: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was urged by the countrys top nuclear scientists at their recent meeting with him to formulate an adequate Indian response as they had serious doubts that the US Congress would accept the concerns of the nation on this sensitive issue.
Dr A. Gopalakrishnan, a former chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, told this newspaper when contacted that I had mentioned to the PM that he has comprehensively covered in his recent speeches in Parliament most of the concerns pointed out earlier by the scientists, the Opposition parties and the strategic analysts.
However, I also expressed my serious doubt whether the US Congress would take into account every one of the Indian requirements as spelt out by the PM. Therefore, it was my suggestion that the government must anticipate this and plan the type of response India should give the US . The government has started a strong campaign through its missions across the world to project the Indo-US nuclear deal.
Heads of Indian missions have been instructed to engage not just governments but civil society in discussions on this issue to gather support for the nuclear deal and allay suspicions about the strategic component of the India-US nuclear understanding, particularly in the developing world. Foreign secretary Shyam Sarans visit to the Scandinavian countries is just one part of the larger exercise directed at winning over maximum support for the deal as it stands at the moment.
Dr Gopalakrishnan was particularly worried about the views expressed by a senior official of the Planning Commission to US businessmen in Washington earlier this year. He refused to identify the member, but his reference was clearly to Planning Commission deputy chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia, who has been actively lobbying for the nuclear deal. Dr Gopalakrishnan, on his communicating concerns to Dr Manmohan Singh, told this newspaper: <b>The Prime Minister assured the scientists that establishing energy security in the country would be primarily on the basis of indigenous technology development and nationally-available primary energy resources. I pointed out that there is a contradiction between this assurance of the PM and the briefings that a senior official of the Planning Commission gave to an American business group in Washington on April 19, 2006, the transcript of which is still available at the website of the Indian embassy in Washington .</b>
Dr Ahluwalia had claimed that on nuclear energy, without access to foreign uranium supplies, the Indian nuclear power programme will peak at 10,000 MW and flatten out at that level for about 30 years, until the thorium breeder reactor is developed. <b>Dr Gopalakrishnan pointed out that the official concerned seems to be totally misinformed of our three-stage nuclear power programme, which will require the building of several Pu-depleted uranium first-generation breeder reactors to produce electricity and also the U-233 needed to fuel the subsequent thorium breeders. </b>
Dr Gopalakrishnan made it clear that what was referred to as plain nuclear reactors are the PHWRs, developed entirely by Indian scientists and engineers against all the obstacles and sanctions imposed by US since 1974. Dr Ahluwalia also claimed that India was not doing enough work on the utilisation of high ash coals and he hoped to persuade the US to devote some intellectual energy to solving this problem for us.
<b>Dr Gopalakrishnan pointed out that this assertion contradicts the findings of four Indo-US joint technical evaluations on the applicability of US clean-coal technologies to our type of coals. All these evaluations established that Indian coals cannot be utilised through US clean-coal technologies. </b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->