For a sector that contributes less than three per cent to India’s current energy needs, the promise of nuclear cooperation from Australia and China has come as a beacon of hope for reviving its prospects.
Within months of assuming office, Prime Minister Narendra Modi ratified the additional protocol of the International Atomic Energy Agency, inked a civilian nuclear deal with his Australian counterpart Tony Abbott and convinced Japanese PM Shinzo Abe to speed up Tokyo’s nuclear cooperation process with New Delhi.
Even China, which has stayed away from ‘talking nuke’ with India for the longest time, agreed to bilateral civil nuclear cooperation with New Delhi during President Xi Jinping’s recently concluded visit. This has bolstered Mr. Modi’s prospects for Chinese backing of India’s Nuclear Suppliers Group membership.
India’s nuclear vision, which envisages about 63000 MW of installed nuclear power capacity by 2032, essentially has two goals — access to uranium and access to technology.
Former chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and noted nuclear scientist Anil Kakodkar said that import of high grade uranium from Australia is required for the growth of nuclear power sector in India.
According to the AEC, of the 20 commercially operating Indian nuclear power reactors, 10 are currently under IAEA safeguards and two more will come under safeguards by December 2014. The IAEA-safeguarded reactors are eligible to be fuelled by imported uranium.
With agreements to buy uranium from countries like Russia, Canada, Namibia, Mongolia, and Kazakhstan among others, India has successfully diversified its energy sources.
With reactor deals with Russia (1000 MW at Kudankulam), France (Areva/1600 MW at Jaitapur) and the U.S. (about 1000 MW in Gujarat/Andhra Pradesh), India has managed to get access to three different streams of technology with different capacities. While this is undoubtedly beneficial to Indian interests, it also means a longer time period for technology absorption.
“The main problem now is with liability laws and that too largely with U.S. companies,” according to government sources.
“Russian companies are largely state-owned…if there’s a fear the state could assuage those concerns…but U.S. companies are not state-owned…so we’re finding it a little bit more difficult…the problem with the French is the cost,” the sources said.
While global nuclear legislative practices channel the liability exclusively towards the operator, Indian Nuclear Liability Law 2010 brought in supplier liability too.
Arguments, thence, have been made for quantifying the suppliers’ liability instead of keeping it open-ended. “U.S. companies feel if there is an accident, liability could have a bearing on corporates in the nuclear power sector. But there is a slim chance of India diluting its position (on supplier liability),” said the sources.
A troubled project
Though promise of fuel imports for the nuclear industry has boosted hopes, the example of the Rs. 17,000-crore Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project reveals the limitations of nuclear diplomacy for energy security. Conceived way back in late eighties, the project that symbolised Indo-Russian cooperation in civilian nuclear energy, had a bumpy ride. Though the Rajiv-Mikhail Gorbachev agreement was signed in 1988, for constructing two pressurised light water nuclear reactors, each with the capacity of 1,000 MWe at Kudankulam, the ‘first pouring of concrete’ for this project happened only in 2002. And, the gestation period for the construction of this nuclear reactor, which is otherwise just five years, extended beyond 12 years. A range of reasons contributed to this — delayed supply of the components, installation, incorporation of additional third generation safety features and anti-nuke agitation, escalating the expenditure from Rs. 13,171 crore to over Rs. 17,000 crore.
The reactor is set for commercial generation in a couple of weeks.
Meanwhile, the People’s Movement against Nuclear Energy, an anti-nuclear power movement based in Idinthakarai, has vowed to stall the move to construct four more reactors while demanding comprehensive investigation about the first two reactors.
“Besides scrapping the KKNPP completely in the best interest of the people living in Southern Tamil Nadu and neighbouring Kerala, the public opinion on the country’s nuclear policy should be elicited through a nationwide debate,” says S.P. Udayakumar of PMANE.
Undeterred The challenges faced by the nuclear industry, however, will not deter Modi’s pursuit of nuclear diplomacy.
In a closed-door interaction with scientists at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre in July, the PM asked them to keep up to the target of tripling nuclear power generation by 2023.
Power Minister Piyush Goyal, however, intends to tread cautiously on the nuclear energy path. “Everything depends on the costs and assurances that dependence on nuclear energy would not come at the cost of India’s sovereign interests,” he said.
(Additional reporting by Antony Sudhakar in Tirunelveli)
