Indian Nuclear Development and Technology

[RPK]

The Department of Nuclear and Atomic Physics is a leading centre in the country with a major thrust on molecular sciences. In the early 1990s, a heavy-ion accelerator, a 14 MV Pelletron, was built on the Mumbai campus. The tall structure, which is visible in photographs of the institute, has led to studies of nuclear matter at high excitation energies and angular momenta. An entirely indigenously built superconducting linear accelerator (sLINAC) helps boost the energies of particles from the Pelletron further, and the accelerator was declared a national facility in November 2007. The development of the sLINAC is a milestone in accelerator technology in India.

Another important development relates to the use of ultra-short (femtosecond) lasers, with very high peak powers to investigate ionised matter at extreme conditions. An offshoot of the early studies of magnetic properties of molecules, atoms and nuclei that began in the early 1950s is the Department of Chemical Sciences where life-sciences related studies on structures of nucleic acids and proteins, dynamics of protein folding and unfolding, chemical basis of neuronal communication, biological pathways in living cells, molecular self-assembly, and so on are carried out. A national facility for high field NMR, set up in 1983 with support from the Union Ministry’s Department of Science and Technology, is extensively used by the drug industry and other laboratories. A number of sophisticated optical instruments, such as the time-correlated single photon counting instrument, a multiphoton microscope and a fluorescence correlation spectrometer, have also been built in the department.

The Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics carries out experimental studies over a wide range of wavelengths in the electromagnetic spectrum – optical, infrared, radio, X-rays and gamma rays. A major experimental activity relates to the designing and building of instruments for the first Indian multi-wavelength astronomy satellite, ASTROSAT. The fabrication of the specially designed X-ray mirror for the satellite marks a major development.

Theoretical work includes studies on black holes, neutron stars, pulsars, gravitational collapse, gravitational lensing, supernovae and the sun as well as the mathematical structure of Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity. At the NCRA, on the other hand, millisecond pulsars and the epoch of structure formation in the universe are studied using data from the GMRT.

Early work at the Department of Biological Sciences in the 1960s and 1970s focussed on molecular aspects of processes fundamental to the life sciences – recombination, gene regulation and protein structure. In the 1980s and 1990s, research diversified to study the genetic basis of more complex cellular processes such as brain function and development. Study of parasitic infections, particularly malaria, has been an area of research in the department. At the NCBS, which was established in 1991 as a result of the rapid growth in the range of activities in Mumbai, researchers are engaged in the study of nanoscale interactions in cells and systems biology. Recently, the NCBS joined hands with the IISc to establish a centre for neurological sciences at the IISc campus.

COMPUTER SCIENCE

Early work in computer science was largely related to various technology- and application-oriented activities of computer design and fabrication, software development and computer education and training, especially under the United Nations Development Programme-sponsored National Centre for Software Development and Computer Technology (NCSDCT). This later became the National Centre for Software Technology (NCST) under the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology.

The rest of the activities were consolidated as a new School of Technology and Computer Sciences in the late 1990s. Research here includes applied probability, computational geometry, computational mathematics, computer security, signal processing, formal methods and stochastic modelling and learning.

In science education, the HBCSE conducts research in cognition in scientific learning and is involved in curriculum development, aspects of science and mathematics education and popularisation of science, including textbook writing. In recent years, the centre has become the training ground for youngsters selected to participate in international olympiads in various subjects, and this has produced very encouraging results. The centre has also a special programme focussing on the problems of the underprivileged.

Besides pioneering computer technology development, the TIFR has developed technologies for applications in accelerators, microwave communications, software and semiconductor technology. Some of these activities nucleated to create specialised centres such as the NCST and the Society for Applied Microwave Electronics Engineering and Research (SAMEER) under the Ministry.

Computer scientists from the TIFR have played significant roles in defence projects such as the Air Defence Ground Environment System (ADGES) and the Army Radio Engineering Network (AREN) and in setting up technology organisations such as CMC Ltd and the Centre for the Development of Telematics (C-DoT).

SCIENCE EDUCATION

The institute has about 240 members on the academic faculty; 160 of them are based in Mumbai. Key to the continuing excellence at the institute is the graduate school, which was established in the late 1960s. Students are selected from a nationwide “open-to-all” written examination. Nearly 10,000 students took the test last year. At present, there are about 300 students in the programme. These students become part of the research activities at the institute and work towards their doctoral degree after their course work, which is a licence to a challenging research career. Until 2002, students received their doctorates from the University of Bombay. Now the institute is a “deemed university” and grants degrees on its own.

The acquisition of a 200-acre plot at the periphery of the Central University campus in Hyderabad points to greater expansion and a wider range of activities at the TIFR. The new campus is expected to facilitate collaborative research with the university and other research and educational institutions in the region. The institute’s authorities envisage that the number of students and postdoctoral fellows at the new campus will be about 1,200 and 300 respectively.

New initiatives at the Mumbai and Hyderabad centres are expected to include research laboratories for high field magnetic resonance, extremely high laser fields, novel imaging technologies, ultra-high resolution electron spectroscopy, matter under extreme conditions, soft matter, study of human biology and model organisms, quantum phenomena and mesoscopic science and optics and a broader range of theoretical research to complement these.

 

[sob]

Through the NSA the Govt. has made it known to the international community that the future Fast Breeder Reactors will not be for military purpose. The pilot plant will not come under the civilian ambit.

NSA spells it out: Fast breeder reactors not to be used for military purpose

In the clearest enunciation of the government’s position on what it intends to do with the fast breeder reactor programme, National Security Advisor M K Narayanan told a conference of security experts in Bahrain last Saturday that India’s fast breeder reactors are not for “military purposes” and the government had “no intention” to place it in the “military realm”.

This is the first time that New Delhi has spelt out its plans with the FBR programme, still in the research stage, and currently not on the list of civilian reactors as per the Separation Plan notified to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Responding to a question at the Manama Dialogue, a regional security summit held annually by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, on how India planned to build on its FBR programme when it had not been placed under IAEA safeguards in the Separation Plan, Narayanan said: “The 2006 separation plan between India and the US, which has since been embedded in the IAEA safeguards agreement, refers to those items that are to be kept in the safeguarded category and a few in the non-safeguarded category. We had a long debate about our position on the fast-breeder reactor, and the Indian and US negotiators reached the point that the fast-breeder reactor was still in a very experimental stage. Therefore, it was not yet time to decide whether it should or should not go under safeguards. I want to underline the point that the fast-breeder reactor is not meant for military purposes. I think there was a reference to that. We have no intention for the fast-breeder reactor to be put into the military realm.”

It may be recalled that the FBR programme was the subject of intense negotiations between India and US during the n-deal talks. The Department of Atomic Energy had insisted that the programme be not brought under safeguards. This was among the biggest sticking points before US President George W Bush’s arrival in India in March 2006.

Washington, finally, did agree to keep the FBR programme out of the civilian list.

However, the Separation Plan does state that in case of future reactors, civilian fast breeder reactors will be placed under safeguards. At the same time, the document emphasizes that India “retains the sole right to determine such reactors as civilian”.

This ambiguity was intentionally put into the document given that India did not want the research facilities — Fast Breeder Test Reactor and Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor — located at Kalpakkam to come under safeguards. But it was believed that the decision for future FBRs should be left open until the reactors start rolling out, which is still a considerable time away.

Speaking at a session on Nuclear Power, Energy and Security, Narayanan brought up the FBRs in the context of addressing India’s power needs. He claimed that Indian nuclear scientists have calculated that the energy deficit of more than 400,000 MW by 2050 could be narrowed significantly.

“We have already passed many milestones on the way to this target. We have identified many of them and achieved several benchmarks. Our 500 MW prototype fast breeder reactor is today in an advanced stage of construction...India’s experiment with fast breeder reactors and the use of the thorium cycle could prove extremely useful to ensure energy security in the future,” said Narayanan.

The NSA went on to elaborate on India’s plans in the Q&A session, making it clear that FBRs will not be used for making nuclear weapons. “We see the three-stage, close-fuel cycle of the pressurised heavy water reactor, the fast breeder and the thorium fuel as the hope of the future. Anybody who has some understanding of nuclear weapons would realise that you do not require the fast breeder to produce nuclear weapons.”

With US President Barack Obama looking to achieve an understanding on the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty, India’s statement does provide confidence to the US ahead of the nuclear security summit at Washington in April. More so, India is still to conclude the reprocessing agreement with the US, which is vital for the Indian programme in the long term.

 

[nitesh]

Advanced systems key to self-reliance in nuke power: AEC chief - Pune - City - The Times of India

PUNE: India has a huge potential for becoming totally self-sufficient in nuclear power generation by way of utilising the vast reserves of Thorium at her disposal, said Srikumar Banerjee, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), here on Saturday.

However, to achieve such self-reliance, all efforts ought to be directed at developing advanced nuclear power systems meant for conversion of fertile materials like Thorium into fissile materials, Uranium-233, and utilise the latter for producing energy, he said. "We are moving in that direction," he said.

Banerjee, also secretary to the department of atomic energy (DAE), was speaking on Realising Homi Bhabha's dreams' at the inaugural session of the College of Engineering Pune's (CoEP) Alumni Fest 2009 and the 2nd Global Reunion, which commenced on Saturday. Thomas Kailath, professor emeritus at Stanford University, US, was the guest of honour.

The country has meagre reserves of Uranium, which is the only naturally occurring fissile element that can be directly used in a nuclear reactor to produce energy through nuclear fission. On the other hand, India has five to six times larger reserves of Thorium, than that of Uranium.

Advanced nuclear power systems using Thorium forms part of the country's three-stage nuclear power programme. "We have mastered the skill of setting up the Uranium-fuelled pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWR) and, to an extent, the fast breeder reactors (FBRs)," he pointed out.

Both PHWR and FBR were the first two stages of the programme. The focus has since shifted to raising advanced heavy water reactors (AHWR) and the accelerator driven system (ADS) using Thorium, he said.

According to Banerjee, India's per capita energy consumption is 600 kilo watt per hour (kwph) as against that of the US at 13,000 kwph. Nuclear power contributes 10,000 mega watt (MW) in the country's total installed capacity of 1.50 lakh MW. "Almost 40 per cent of our people still do not have access to electricity," he said. Exploiting the potential for nuclear power remains the best environment-friendly option although, thermal power is bound to remain the mainstay, he added.

Banerjee traced the growth of India's nuclear power programme from the days following Homi Bhabha's demise in 1966. "The country had then embarked on a joint mission with Canada for setting up a PHWR project but the latter withdrew mid-way through following the 1974 Pokhran tests and we were left to develop the technology on our own," he said.

The programme has since come a long way with the country acquiring a huge expertise in the setting up of the PHWRs that are cost effective and competitive compared to the available alternatives in US, he said. "The decade of 1970s was a phase of technology demonstration, 1980s was for indigenisation and post-2000 we have really come into commercialising nuclear technology," he said.

Earlier, professor Kailath called for apt emphasis by engineering colleges on promoting research at different levels going beyond mere publication of journals. "Research can be of many characters," he said, pointing out that institutions like the CoEP, which were once the leading colleges, had gone into a stage of hibernation after the emergence of the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs).

Kailath, an alumnus of CoEP's 1956 batch, said, "The IITs are great institutions but they have limitations of their own and I see no reason why CoEP can't catch up with them considering the calibre of its students. Research is what is lacking at our institution." He called for socially-relevant research projects by students as a stepping stone for bigger careers.

Earlier, chairman of CoEP governing council F C Kohli made the introductory remarks while CoEP director Anil Sahasrabudhe gave an overview of the progress made by the college. This was followed by presentations by the Alumni Associations.

Distinguished CoEP alumni Keshav Joglekar, Madhav Bhide, Prakash Jagtap, Anil Datar, Vikash Khanvelkar and Nickhil Jakatdar were felictated on the occasion. Prof Kailath was also accorded a grand felicitation. President of CoEP Alumni Association R Vasudevan, vice president S B Mirashi, secretary D J Doke and others were present.

 

[nitesh]

sorry if already posted:

Many a milestone

ANIL KAKODKAR, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission, and Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy, retired on November 30 after a marathon 45-year career in the DAE. His tenure included nine years as Chairman of the AEC and Secretary of the DAE. He was earlier the Director of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) at Trombay near Mumbai.

During his professional career, Kakodkar was primarily involved in the research and development of nuclear reactors. He made pioneering contributions to the development of many critical systems for the indigenous Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRs), both the 220 megawatt electrical capacity and 540 MWe capacity reactors. These systems helped India establish its self-reliance capability in nuclear power reactors. He was among the chosen few involved in India’s first nuclear test in May 1974 at Pokhran, Rajasthan. He played an important role in the five nuclear tests conducted in May 1998, again at Pokhran.

He is one of the architects of the Dhruva reactor at Trombay. This reactor is based on a completely original concept and is one of the most powerful reactor systems of its type. Kakodkar’s engineering capability came to the fore again when he helped in the rehabilitation of both the power reactors at the Madras Atomic Power Station at Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu, when they were on the verge of being written off. He made significant contributions to the designing of the futuristic 300 MWe Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR), which will use thorium as fuel. He drove a hard bargain with the United States before India signed the 123 Agreement, and he was able to convince the Nuclear Suppliers Group to relax its guidelines, which enabled India to enter the nuclear mainstream. Frontline met him at his office in Mumbai on November 23. Excerpts from the interview:

Tomorrow, the fifth reactor at Rawatbhatta in Rajasthan is reaching first criticality. You are going there.

This reactor was ready for some time and waiting for fuel. It forms part of the Separation Plan, and accordingly, we have fuelled this reactor with imported fuel. So it is ready to start. Capacity addition is always a good thing. This fuel is from Russia.

You have had a distinguished 45-year career in the DAE, capping it with your retirement as Chairman of the AEC and Secretary of the DAE. What was its most satisfying part? Was it getting India out of nuclear isolation by convincing the Nuclear Suppliers Group to waive its guidelines, or India signing the 123 Agreement with the U.S., or India building its own 540 MWe PHWRs at Tarapur, or BARC building the Pressurised Water Reactor (PWR) for the nuclear-powered submarine Arihant?

There are many important milestones that I was fortunate enough to see. But the important thing for me is that we are a homogeneous lot today, the entire DAE. There is a high degree of coherence in our strategy to implement our programmes, and it looks to me that a thousand minds working in coherence will be formidable. That is the biggest satisfaction for me.

But what was the most challenging assignment of your career?

Luckily for me, I have been able to engage myself in new things, every time something different from what I had done earlier. So everything was a new challenge. Everything new has more excitement compared to something which has gone by.

Can you give some examples?

For example, the Dhruva reactor is unique even conceptually. It is completely Indian. Even today, Dhruva is the only reactor of its kind. We began it as a concept and engineered it all the way through. In PHWRs, I had a lot of opportunity to develop different components and various systems. But decidedly, the 540 MWe reactors at Tarapur going critical was a very important moment. The beginning of the construction of the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor [PFBR] at Kalpakkam was also important – it is not an event completed yet – but one had to go through an assessment of where we were and the capability to do things.

Of course, building the submarine reactor was an excitement in itself. The nuclear tests – I was involved in both the 1974 and 1998 nuclear tests – were challenging. The PHWRs, the opening of civil nuclear cooperation… they are all unique in themselves, each one is different, each one full of excitement. As I said, it is always the new challenge which has more excitement than the old one. So for me, what is important is that I got the opportunity to do new things every time.

Do you feel sad that the thorium-fuelled AHWR project did not take off during your tenure? You told me in 2004 that the ground-breaking ceremony for the AHWR would take place by the end of 2004. It is yet to take place. Has the AHWR become a non-starter?

It is not a non-starter. I would have liked to see the AHWR construction start before I laid down office. Nevertheless, the AHWR will continue to remain an important development both from the Indian and the global perspective. [The construction of] the AHWR will be an important development whenever it takes place, and it will take place. There is no doubt about it at all. It is just that for a new development, you have to ensure that everything that should be taken care of has been taken care of and in the process, you lose time. I have no great excitement about when it takes place – during my time or others’ time. But that it will happen one day is an important thing.

Can you give me an assessment of what you have been able to achieve both as the Director of BARC and as the Chairman of the AEC?

I listed them just now. The important thing for me is that we have been able to take bold decisions, which are right for making rapid technological progress. There is the satisfaction, when you look back, that these bold decisions were timely. It is these things that allow you to move faster and even leapfrog.

What were those bold decisions?

To begin with, we decided to adopt electron beam welding for the Dhruva reactor. An electron beam welding machine for such a large construction was unthinkable in those days. Even now, not many have adopted it for such large constructions. We did it, and that was how we were able to make that unique design.

There were several bold decisions we took in the context of the submarine reactor, the Pressurised Water Reactor. I cannot give you the details. We took technologically bold decisions in the repair of the two units at the Madras Atomic Power Station. Conventional wisdom would have led to writing these reactors off. There are many examples like these. But the important thing is that we could pick up enough courage and confidence to take these bold decisions and I am very happy about it.

You had your doubts about the 123 Agreement with the U.S. You opposed the U.S. demand that India put its breeder reactors under safeguards. Later, you became a supporter of the agreement. Why did you change tack?

The fact is that the energy requirements of our country are very large. As I had mentioned several times at BARC, even with the contributions you can get from different kinds of energy sources in the most liberal fashion, you will find that there will be an energy deficit in terms of availability. The only way now to meet this deficit is to import energy.

It is clear that when you import energy in the form of fossil fuels, you will have to keep importing that energy for all time to come. On the other hand, if you import that energy in the form of uranium, you can recycle the uranium used in the reactor because it contains a lot of energy value. In fact, you get more and more energy out of the same fuel. So it becomes an extremely valuable additionality to our indigenous programme because we have a significant multiplier of energy production on the basis of our three-stage programme. We have only a limited quantity of uranium and we can set up only 10,000 MWe of PHWRs using this uranium. But when you recycle this uranium and adopt the three-stage strategy, you can go up to 200,000 MWe. Likewise, whatever uranium we import, we can bring in a similar multiplier on that uranium also if we have gone through the development of the three-stage strategy.

So the opening of the civil nuclear cooperation not only brings in that additionality but because of the domestic development of the three-stage programme, we will be able to bring in a multiplier on the imported uranium and bridge the shortage for the future. This is what I call the move towards energy independence. For us to be able to do that, the domestic programme must continue, the way it was planned earlier. There should be no constraints on its implementation.

If there were to be constraints on that, I would have opposed the whole thing. But we have been able to negotiate well, and people are also convinced [about it]. So we are in a position to go ahead with the civil nuclear cooperation without hindrance to our domestic programme and bring in both additionality and energy independence in the long term. So it was not either my being opposed to or supportive of.… It is a pragmatic move forward which benefits the country.

The Prime Minister was in the U.S. on November 23. What exactly is the sticking point with the U.S. on our reprocessing the spent fuel from the reactors to be imported from that country? You told a delegation of the U. S.-India Business Council in January 2009 that there would be no reactor purchases from the U.S. without reprocessing rights. Has the U.S. gone back on allowing India the right to reprocess the spent fuel from the reactors that will be imported from that country?

No. The 123 Agreement gives us the upfront reprocessing consent rights. It is a done thing. What the 123 also says is that we have to negotiate and agree on “arrangements and procedures” [to do that]. What we are discussing now are the details of the “arrangements and procedures”. This work is in progress. We have had a number of rounds of discussions and we are making progress on that with the U.S. As far as other countries are concerned, there is no issue on that.

You have told me that “If I want, I can reprocess the spent fuel from [the existing American reactors at] Tarapur tomorrow”. Will you do that?

We will do the reprocessing in accordance with our priorities. Reprocessing the spent fuel from Tarapur is not the most important priority at this moment. But what I stated was the legal position.

The Union Cabinet has approved the Nuclear Liability Bill, which, it is said, will protect American companies from demands for compensation if there are any accidents involving the American reactors to be built in India. Why should we do that?

No. It is not a question of protecting the American companies or any such thing. Our effort to develop the domestic nuclear liability legislation, in fact, predates the start of the discussion on the India-U.S. nuclear deal. We have gone through a lot of studies. We had appointed external groups to look at the necessity or otherwise of developing civil nuclear liability legislation and what form it should take.

Now the issue is the following. In case of an unfortunate accident – which is very unlikely but supposing it takes place – then we will have to be able to compensate for the damage caused. Currently, all the reactors belong to either the government or the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited, which is a government company. So it is a 100 per cent government activity. If the scale of compensation that becomes necessary is very large, then we should be able to mobilise the required funding. It is a kind of insurance. For that, there are four different international instruments for mobilising the compensation. So this group looked at the merits and demerits of joining one of them and came to the conclusion that India’s best choice would be to be part of the Convention on Supplementary Compensation [CSC] because this allows, beyond the threshold, tapping international funding for compensation.

Now the CSC requires domestic legislation which is consistent with the provisions of the CSC. That is where our action to develop the domestic legislation began. As India expands its nuclear programme, with several business partners being a part of such a programme, it is important that we have a proper nuclear liability regime, and this is at the core of the development of such legislation.

India has to give an “Assurance 810 letter” to the U.S. that commits it (India) to the non-transfer of U.S. nuclear technologies to third countries. Without this letter, the U.S. Department of Energy may not give licences to American companies to sell reactors to India. Why should we give such a letter?

Whatever we do, we will do within the framework of the bilateral agreement, which provides for assurances on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy or non-diversion [of nuclear material]. It is consistent with whatever we have agreed. After all, we are talking of civil nuclear cooperation, is it not?

Now that locating the DAE’s India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) at Singara in the Nilgiris district in Tamil Nadu has been ruled out, where will it go from here?

This is a setback, I must admit. We will propose this problem to the INO group to think about what to do. One important thing is the urgency. It was planned to be a very important experiment. But it will not remain important if time is lost because the world of science would have moved on. So the INO group is looking at what to do.

How will you ensure the strategic component of India’s nuclear programme 15 years down the line? You had stressed earlier that you would not allow the 123 Agreement to compromise India’s strategic programme.

First of all, in our agreements with different countries, we have built in enough protection. There is a legal part of it. In technical terms, we are looking at it as a multiplier of the three-stage programme, even on the imported part. This, in turn, will mean that you cannot build the multiplier if you have not mastered the fast breeder reactor technology or the thorium technology. That thrust has to be continuous. Our ambition is not just to expand our nuclear power generation capacity through imports, which is a short-term requirement. The long-term requirement is to make India energy independent. That can happen only through the full development of our three-stage programme. That action remains undiluted because it is necessary for multiplying both the domestic and the imported programme. So our strategic independence is guaranteed.

During your tenure as AEC Chairman, there were landmarks such as the 50th year of the DAE, the 50th year of BARC and Homi Bhabha’s birth centenary. Which was closest to your heart? Did you use them adequately to project the DAE’s achievements?

They are all important. I used them more for introspection, to send out messages internally in terms of understanding our own legacy, for recommitting ourselves to the goals of the DAE, to look at strategies where we can do better than what we have been doing in the past. All these events have helped us to consolidate our position and develop greater clarity in our strategy. That is how I look at these things.

What was the most frustrating part of your career? Was it when you could not exploit the natural uranium in Meghalaya because of opposition?

I am still optimistic that we will exploit all the uranium deposits in the country, including in Meghalaya, for nuclear energy production. But obviously, it is a difficult exercise – taking people along, which we will do because after all everything is in the country’s interest. As long as everybody understands that, I am sure they will cooperate. I have no doubt about that. There are delays, of course. I would have been happier if it [mining of natural uranium in Meghalaya] had happened earlier. But I remain optimistic.

Would you like to say something about the recent controversy over the yield of the thermonuclear device that was tested in 1998?

That controversy was unnecessary. We said earlier and we are saying now, after this controversy erupted, and we have given a lot of information in the public domain [that we got the yield we wanted from the thermonuclear device]. Since you have asked me this question, let me again state that the yield of the tests done at Pokhran in 1998 have been verified by independent methods. These independent methods have been used by diverse groups, and we get the same answer, confirming that the desired yield [of the thermonuclear device] was achieved. So, there is no issue whatsoever.

What lies ahead for the DAE?

We have to concentrate on our continuous search for technological advancement. That should remain the key to our progress. Now I look forward to such technological achievements on the basis of Indian basic research. Through strong linkages between Indian basic research and Indian technology, we will be able to make India much stronger.

You are a workaholic. You work 18 hours a day. So what is your next assignment?

No problem. I can also sleep 18 hours a day!

You have survived on two to four hours of sleep a day.

I can survive on two hours of work! (Laughter)

You said in Kolkata recently that if the people of Haripur in West Bengal were opposed to setting up a nuclear power project there, then “we will not go there....”

No. The question [that was posed to me] was that the people were opposed to the project. What I said was: “As a first step, we have to take the people into confidence. We have to tell the people that nuclear reactors will bring benefits and not create any harm. I hope I will be successful in doing so. But we do not want to do anything against the wishes of the people.”

 

[bengalraider]

Fire in N-hub: 2 researchers burnt alive in BARC lab​

Vijay Singh & Srinivas Laxman | TNN

Mumbai: A fire broke out in a chemistry laboratory in India’s top nuclear zone, the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, on Tuesday afternoon, killing two PhD students who were at work. Experts have ruled out any danger of radioactive radiation following the accident.
The researchers who died were Umang Singh of Mumbai and Partha Bag of Kolkata, both around 25. They were the only researchers in the lab when the incident occurred; usually there are seven. The bodies were badly charred by the time BARC firemen managed to enter the laboratory on the third floor after extinguishing the fire in about 45 minutes.
Police and BARC teams are investigating the cause of the fire. Department of Atomic Energy spokesperson S K Malhotra stressed there was no ‘‘reactor, radioactivity or radiation’’ involved in the accident.
Despite the assurances that the fire was only an accident, the recent Intelligence Bureau alert that India’s nuclear facilities could be under a terror threat triggered considerable speculation among staffers. Barc fire third mishap in a nuclear installation in ’09
Mumbai: The fire mishap at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (Barc), at Trombay is the third time in the recent past that a nuclear establishment in India has hit the headlines for the wrong reason. The first incident occurred at the Kaiga Atomic Power Station in Karnataka where a staffer allegedly tried to contaminate drinking water with heavy water. Investigations have been in progress for the last two months but not much headway has been made.
The second incident occurred at the Tarapur Atomic Power Station where CISF personnel nabbed several people attempting to smuggle out some computer-related parts. Atomic energy officials refused to call it a security breach.
Former nuclear chief P K Iyengar told TOI that he could not recall any such serious accident at BARC in recent times. ‘‘I do remember that several years ago, an employee died as a result of a crane accident at the central workshop of BARC. But I do not remember any serious accident in the laboratories that proved fatal like today. Yes, there were incidents now and then, but they were of a minor nature,’’ he added.
Another official of the nuclear establishment said the laboratory room, in which a number of analytical instruments such as spectro-photometers were kept, was badly damaged.

Welcome - Times Of India ePaper

 

[nitesh]

hmmm what u guys think:

BARC fire was not accidental, says director

Mumbai, Dec 30 (PTI) The fire at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre was not a mere accident and could be "some one's" way of checking the preparedness of the nuclear centre in the backdrop of intelligence reports of a possible terror attack, said former Director of the centre A N Prasad.

"It could be that someone is testing us (BARC) to know our preparedness and response to such incidents. We have been told by intelligence that BARC is one of targets for terror attacks," Prasad told PTI from Bangalore today.

Two persons were killed in the fire yesterday at the high-security premises.

From media reports one could conjuncture that someone is trying to ascertain how vulnerable the centre is, he said adding, the security system of the centre should not be disclosed.

 

[notinlove]

Trying to Ascertain by killing two people .. that's outrageous and downright stupid :|

 

[venkat]

Few months ago ,a scientist died in the adjoining forest of kaiga, then later in the same plant drinking water was contaminated and now BARC incident!!!!! How can these things happen in high security areas? Do all these employ casual laborers who work on daily wages? some time back a bangladeshi casual employed by a contractor was nabbed by police at ISRO, sriharikota!!! Really somebody is checking!!!!

 

[nitesh]

this is good news:

The Hindu Business Line : Uranium mining in Meghalaya in 6 months: CM

An estimated 16 per cent of the country's uranium reserves are located in the West Khasi Hills district of Meghalaya.

The deposits in the two uranium rich areas of Domiasiat and Wakhyn are estimated to be nearly 9,500 tonnes and 4,000 tonnes respectively.

 

[nitesh]

Thorium reactors more secure, says Kakodkar

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The former Atomic Energy Commission Chairman, Anil Kakodkar, on Thursday said he planned to associate himself with the Mumbai-based Bhabha Atomic Research Centre and focus on issues of use of thorium for generating nuclear power.

He would create awareness among the global community of the fact that reactors based on thorium are inherently more secure than others. Thus it would be of importance to not only India but the world at large.

Dr. Kakodkar was speaking to journalists after a plenary discussion on the energy sector at the 97th session of the Indian Science Congress here.

Currently, much of the research on thorium was being conducted in India, which is rich in it, though the country did not have enough reserves of uranium, conventional fuel for nuclear reactors.

A major thrust of the Indian nuclear programme since the beginning was to develop reactors that used thorium. After years of research, scientists recently developed the prototype of such a reactor. Efforts were under way to identify a site for setting up a 300- MW technology demonstrator reactor called the Advanced Heavy Water Reactor.

Dr. Kakodkar parried questions on talks to be held later this year on the reprocessing agreement with the United States. “I have relinquished my government position. There are others who will participate in the negotiation and they are no less capable.”

At the plenary discussion, he emphasised the need for a nation-wide comprehensive programme to address the technological challenges that faced research and development in the energy sector, including solar, hydrogen, and coal-based power plants, apart from nuclear energy.

 

[NSG_Blackcats]

India to vigorously pursue non-nuke heavy water prog​

Mumbai: With new research opening fresh vistas for its non-nuclear applications, India will continue to sincerely pursue its heavy water programme with cost-effective and energy-efficient techniques, Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Srikumar Banerjee on Thursday said. "India being an established international supplier, we are exploring many more areas of non-nuclear applications of heavy water for societal benefits," he said inaugurating the first national conference on "Non-nuclear applications of Heavy water and Deuterium."


Speaking about the non-nuclear applications of heavy water, Banerjee said it could be used to replace cold chain for polio vaccine and animal vaccines in far-flung areas. Deuterium and heavy water have vast scope for applications in communication through optic fiber, polymers and pharmaceutical industry, he said.

Heavy water export is going to be a big business even in the fusion energy sector as Tritium from heavy water has a crucial role. India exports heavy water to the US and South Korea, he said. The Bhabha Atomic Research Centre recently conducted a study in Uttarakhand to successfully recharge the mountain springs using isotope hydrology, Banerjee said.

Chairman and Chief Executive of Heavy Water Board (HWB) A L N Rao shared Banerjee's optimism for large-scale non-nuclear applications of heavy water. "In collaboration with Mumbai-based Entero Virus Research Centre (EVRC) we have successfully demonstrated improved thermal stability of deuterated polio vaccine. After being clinically tested by various institutions it is ready for commercial production and should be in the market within a year," Rao said.

He said HWB had recently signed an MoU with the Board of Radiation and Isotope Technology (BRIT) and a number of Deuterium-labelled compounds including solvents had been taken up for synthesis. K V Raghavan, Emeritus Professor at Hyderabad-based Indian Institute of Chemical Technology (IITC) said heavy water with a wide-range of applications could be a useful component in cosmetics industry, particularly in anti-ageing products.

HWB is collaborating with a large number of R&D institutions like IIT, CSIR, International Vaccine Research Institute and Indian Institute of Chemical Technology to explore fresh areas for hard water application.

Source

 

[NSG_Blackcats]

Obama certifies India-IAEA accord is in force​

Washington: US President Barack Obama has certified that the Safeguards Agreement between India and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on its civilian nuclear facilities has come into force, in yet another step towards full implementation of the Indo-US atomic deal.

A memorandum in this regard was issued on Wednesday to the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as mandated by the United States-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Non-proliferation Enhancement Act regarding the safeguards agreement between India and the Vienna-based global nuclear watachdog IAEA.

Obama also certified that India has filed a declaration of facilities ?- as mandated by the agreement -- that is "not materially inconsistent" with the facilities and schedule described in the Separation Plan presented in the Parliament on May 11, 2006, taking into account the later initiation of safeguards that was anticipated in the Separation Plan. The Presidential action came amid questions being raised in some quarters about the Obama Administration's commitment to implement the landmark bilateral nuke deal.

Source

 

[ajtr]

Go for thorium-based reactors: Kalam

CHENNAI: India has to go for nuclear power generation in a big way using thoriumbased reactors, former President Dr A P J Abdul Kalam said.
After inaugurating the Commonwealth Science and Technology Academy for Research here on Friday, he said thorium, a non-fissile material, was available in abundanne in the country and suggested that intensive research is essential for maximising its utilisation and generation of electricity through reactors.
Dr Kalam suggested that the national programme in proteomics (the study of all the proteins expressed by the genome of a cell) should be given more thrust with the cooperation of the international scientific community.
“Proteomics helps to understand the basic biological processes critical to normal cellular functions as well as the development of diseases. It identifies the essential components of these processes and exploits these components as targets in the development of new methods to prevent or treat diseases.
The type of work involved is huge and challenging, and much bigger than the human genome programme.” He said it would be a challenge to scientists to have an integrated vaccine development leading to the production of a vaccine against HIV/AIDS in three years’ time.
Kalam suggested that the research institutions in the country should strive for commercial production of Carbon Nano Tube (CNT) that would make an important impact on energy independence for the country.
Stressing that technologies were needed for sustainable development, Kalam said there was a need for global monsoon research for determining intensity and quantum of rain with a particular cloud condition through a validated prediction system with detailed research.
He said C-STAR would facilitate quality research through engineering institutions.
Thirty-two institutions, including nine higher learning institutions, would support the endeavours of the academy. The representatives of the institutions signed MoUs with C-STAR.

 

[ajtr]

‘US still denying us technology’

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is looking at providing technology for low-intensity conflicts such as terrorism and cyber warfare, as well as towards ensuring the security of Indian space assets, the DRDO chief and science adviser to the defence minister, Dr V.K. Saraswat, tells S. Raghotham in his first interview to the media since he assumed office in September 2009.
Q. The obvious first question — where are we on the missile roadmap?
A. We have two streams of missile programmes — strategic and tactical. There is a momentum, a certain push to achieve our requirements for strategic defence. Agni 3 is set for production in numbers. We have no doubt about the missile after three consecutive successful tests.
The 5,000-plus km range Agni 5 has moved out of the drawing board, developmental activities are on, subsystems work is in progress. We plan to do the first test flight by the end of the year.
After the successful test of Shourya, a canisterised missile with a range similar to Agni 1 — around 700 km— more and more of our missiles will go the canisterised way because then they can go on multiple platforms on land, air and sea. Next is a canisterised version of the 2,000-plus km range Agni 2.
Q. What about tactical missiles?
A. Nag, the anti-tank missile, will go in for repeat summer trials this year after we incorporated user (Indian Army) suggestions. It’s a third-generation anti-tank guided missile with infrared seeker. India will be only the third or fourth country to make such a missile.
We have led Akash, the air defence missile, to production. The Indian Air Force (IAF) has ordered eight squadrons of Akash missiles, the Army has ordered two batteries.
In new missiles, the Astra air-to-air beyond visual range missile has undergone four to five ground launch trials. We are now qualifying its infra-red seeker. Once ready, it will go on multiple platforms, including Tejas and Sukhoi fighters.
For the Navy, we are developing a canisterised anti-anti-ship missile, with a range of 70 km, and able to intercept manoeuvring targets. It is an advancement over the 15-km range Israeli Barak missile. We are developing the Long Range Surface-to-Air Missile (LRSAM) in collaboration with Israel Aircraft Industries. The first flight test will happen in mid-2010. We started developing a similar missile for the IAF in late 2009.
Q. What about Cruise missiles? Sub-launched missiles? K-15?
A. We are setting up a cruise missile development programme under Nirbhay. I won’t say more than that.
Q. What does the future look like for DRDO?
A. We have made a technology development plan for the next 25 years. It is dovetailed to projections made by the armed forces in their long-range plans, what they call the LTIPP (long-term integrated perspective plan), taking into account the changing nature of warfare and the threats that India is likely to face. It calls for directed basic research in technologies that are still in their infancy, customising technologies for different users and “productionising” the most mature technologies into platforms and systems. The focus is on improving the velocity of research. All research is now in mission mode.
Q. There has been criticism of the DRDO-military relationship.
A. Look, as I said, DRDO’s technology development plan is now dovetailed to the military’s LTIPP. Two, there is now increasing coordination between the services and DRDO. The military is now involved at every stage in our projects. Also, what we do now is, if a development project is estimated to take five years but the military wants the capability sooner, we say, go ahead and buy it from outside. So, the potential for conflict between DRDO and military does not arise.
Q. What is the status of the Rama Rao Committee report and DRDO reforms?
A. A panel headed by the defence secretary is looking into the issue of implementing the recommendations.
Q. What are the focus areas in the 25-year technology development plan?
A. There are three. The closest to our heart is low-intensity conflict (LIC). Many technologies that we have developed for the military have relevance for LICs. You will appreciate that many agencies in the country are today involved in LICs — the paramilitary forces, police forces, counter-insurgency and counter-terror organisations and so on. We have started a programme to customise DRDO technology for each of them. LIC is one of our key result areas now.
Another area is space security because future wars are going to be controlled from space as network-centric warfare becomes the new way of war-fighting. So, technologies that are relevant for space security such as ballistic missile defence, anti-satellite systems, are going to be part of our development process. Secondly, to be able to quickly launch satellites to regain space-based capabilities when existing assets are attacked or denied to our military during war. These are low-cost, quick reaction satellite launch systems and low-endurance satellites — they last just long enough to do their job. What will emerge through our programme are micro-satellites, mini-satellites etc. On the launch side, some of our missiles can be modified, a satellite put on top of them and launched.
Q. Can our current missiles be used for anti-satellite hits?
A. With modifications, yes. But that’s not our priority.
Q. What’s the third focus area?
A. Cyber security. As we move towards network-centric warfare, the security of the networks becomes a major requirement. DRDO already has a strong technological base in encryption and things like that. We want to enlarge that base to hardware and software to make our stand-alone systems impossible to penetrate, and harden for military usage those systems that have to work with commercial networks, such as the Internet. Cyber security will be most applicable in low-intensity conflicts. What we want is to be able to detect attacks on our systems and deny the attackers the pleasure.
Q. But much of the core electronics used in our defence equipment is imported.
A. So what we plan to do is to set up a facility to detect Trojans — viruses, hidden locks, killer switches — in the chips that we buy from outside before clearing them for usage in sensitive equipment.
Q. What are you doing to give a fillip to the private sector defence manufacturing base?
A. The DRDO has been partnering with industry for the last 25 years and has a network of 800 small and medium enterprises and large public and private enterprises working with us on various projects.
Now, we are starting a commercial arm of DRDO to transfer technology to industry. We already have a programme called ATAC (Technology Assessment and Commercialisation), with industry body Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Ficci) as our partner which identifies potential technology buyers.
There are also technologies that have a larger relevance for the civilian market. For instance, what we do in our life sciences labs — high-altitude agriculture, biomedical engineering research, nuclear-biological-chemical technologies, etc. The ministry of home affairs requires them for disaster management. For DRDO, 2010 is the year of R&D collaboration with industry, universities and the military.
Q. Are we going to see the Hyperplane test flight happen any time soon?
A. We faced a problem in high-temperature materials for the scramjet engine. We needed to run the engine for 20 seconds, but could do it only up to three seconds. We were denied imports of the material required. So, we launched a separate programme and developed three materials. We have now been able to reach 20 seconds twice. We want to do five to six more ground tests. We expect to be able to do the first test flight by the end of the year.
Q. But hasn’t it become easier since the Indo-US nuclear deal to obtain technology?
A. No. We are still victims of US denial regimes. Our labs are still on the “Entity List”. Technology denial continues. There is a big gap between American talk and action towards us.

 

[ajtr]

Where Indian nuclear scientists cut their teeth….

ndia, among other countries, to help set up new reactor there
SACLAY (FRANCE): As one leaves the closed but chic confines of Paris and drives down the motorway, a squat clump of buildings set between fields recovering from the unusually severe winter comes into view.

It was here, at this modest-looking, lightly guarded site that Indian nuclear scientists cut their teeth on the beneficial uses of atomic energy a full 55 years ago.

The laboratories at Saclay also contributed heavily to the first phase of India's nuclear programme. With the experience gained here and helped subsequently by the French, one of India's first three and lesser known reactors — Zerlina — was set up at what is now known as the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre.

As was the case with the better known Apsara and CIRUS reactors, Zerlina, which became critical in 1961, was to provide the experience to set up the next generation of reactors. In this case, the Dhruva.

The decision to opt for the technological experience offered by Zerlina was part of several strategies and approaches that have marked the Indian nuclear programme ever since.

Saclay became one of the early foreign atomic energy establishments where the first generation of Indian scientists learnt their lessons in practicality. The others were Harwell (the U.K.), Chalk River (Canada) and Argonne, Oak Ridge (the U.S.).

Training ground

Saclay also proved to be an important training ground. One of the scientists recruited by Homi Bhabha was the tall and fair V.K. Iya, with a doctoral degree from Paris. Dr. Bhabha advised him to learn the production of radio isotopes at the laboratories. On his return, the experience was to prove invaluable in the extraction of samples irradiated in the Apsara reactor.

The second stage of the French connection began in 1967, when Vikram Sarabhai visited Cadarache — down the railway track from Saclay to Flamanville — the site of the upcoming latest generation nuclear reactor.

After the initial experience gained at Saclay, the next generation of Indian nuclear scientists was to make Cadarache their base to imbibe the nuances of setting up a fast breeder reactor.

Criticality was reached 18 years later in the presence of the then chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, Raja Ramanna, the long period taken because Indian scientists opted for major design modifications following an accident.

Today, Saclay continues to offer the world the same sunnier side of nuclear technology that was provided to India more than half a century ago.

Its Osiris reactor, named after an Egyptian god, supplies a bulk of radio isotopes required for medical diagnosis after 70 per cent of the world's supplies disappeared due to the shut down of two reactors in Canada and the Netherlands.

With the Osiris getting tired, the Indian connection at Saclay is due to be revived. Along with Finland and other countries, Indian scientists will join hands to set up a new reactor, the JHR, which will start after the Osiris is put to sleep.

 

[ajtr]

IGCARs major atomic energy achievement new

Chennai: Indias three-phased atomic energy programme is entering a decisive phase with the Fast Breeder Test Reactor (FBTR) nearing the 1,00,000-MWd/t burn-up stage without any fuel-pin failure.
(When nuclear fission occurs there is a simultaneous release of a large amount of energy and many fission products. The amount of the thermal energy released by a tonne of initially-present fissile elements [or a tonne of whole fuel] is termed as burn-up. Alternatively, burn-up can also be termed as the number of fission that have occurred per one hundred atoms of initially-present fissile elements.)

Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research (IGCAR) director S B Bhoje says: FBTR has reached the milestone on 2 September 2002. This is a major milestone not only for IGCAR but also for India as a whole. This achievement gives the necessary fillip for going ahead with the setting up of the 500 MW Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) at Kalpakkam, involving an outlay of Rs 2,800 crore.

Fast Breeder Reactors form the countrys second stage of its three-stage nuclear power programme. The first stage being Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWR) and the third and final stage being the thorium-based reactors.


As a result, FBTR was initiated in 1972 at Kalpakkam and it attained criticality in 1985. This is the only reactor of its kind in the world to use plutonium-uranium mixed carbide fuel. The fuel was designed at IGCAR and developed and fabricated at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre.

 

[ajtr]

Why three-stage nuclear power programme news

Chennai: India drew its three-stage nuclear power programme because of insufficient uranium reserves estimated in the region of 73,000 tonnes for the overall power generation plan. Curiously, all the three are in operation, though in different stages.
To understand better the linkage between the three stages, one should know about the fuels. The materials that one comes across as fuels for atomic power plants are U235, U238, U233, plutonium and thorium.

Says Dr S M Lee, director, Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research (IGCAR): Natural uranium has two isotopes: U238 (99.27 per cent) and U235 (0.72 per cent). Only U235 can sustain a fission chain reaction and is called fissile material. Two other fissile materials that can fuel nuclear reactors are plutonium and U233, which are manmade and not available in the nature.

Plutonium is created when U238 is irradiated in a nuclear reactor where it absorbs neutrons and part of it is transmuted into plutonium. Similarly, U233 is created when thorium is irradiated in a nuclear reactor, where it absorbs neutrons, which transmutes a part of the thorium into U233.

Thus U238 and thorium are also valuable nuclear resources, called fertile materials, as they can be converted into fissile material for fuelling nuclear reactors and generate power.

With the available uranium reserves around 20,000 mw can be generated for 30 years. In order to utilise the abundance availability of thorium (3.6-lakh-tonne reserves) and to be able to generate nuclear power beyond 30 years, India drew up a three-stage atomic power programme.

The first stage is the setting up of Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWR). India has 12 such reactors and several more are being planned. The readily-available natural uranium in India will be entirely committed to these reactors over their lifetime, says Lee. Besides generating power, PHWRs will convert a part of U238 in natural uranium into plutonium, which is separated from the spent fuel in plutonium reprocessing plants.

The second stage of fast breeder reactors (FBR), which will come into operation largely from 2020, will be fuelled by plutonium (obtained from the first stage PHWRs) and U238. The fast breeder reactors will fission plutonium for power production and at the same time breed more plutonium from the U238.

The surplus plutonium from each FBR can be used to set up additional FBRs and grow the nuclear capacity in tune with Indias needs. The uranium resource position is such that with FBRs a nuclear electric base of as much as 350 GW appears technically feasible.

Consolidation and further growth of the nuclear electric base is planned to by means of thorium breeders, which will form the third stage of the programme, which is several decades away. But this will set the stage for adequate power for the next couple of centuries. As mentioned earlier, thorium when irradiated in a nuclear reactor gets converted into U233, a fissile material.

The third stage use of thorium for power generation has already begun. A prototype 30 kv reactor at IGCAR called Kamini for thorium separation, irradiation in reactor, reprocessing for separation of U233, neutron radiography and activation analysis have been commissioned successfully.

Following the success Bhabha Atomic Research Centre is developing an advance heavy water reactor that will use both thorium U 233 and thorium plutonium-mixed oxide as fuel. It also incorporates several advanced safety features, such as heat removal by natural circulation. Thorium fuel bundles have also been successfully used in the PHWR for flux flattening. Construction is expected to start during the 10th Plan period.

 

[NSG_Blackcats]

US, India reach nuclear reprocessing deal​

WASHINGTON: India and the United States have concluded a nuclear fuel reprocessing agreement to advance their bilateral civilian nuclear deal, the Obama administration announced on Monday.

The agreement, a key step in the full realization of the US-India nuclear deal reached some 18 months ago, will enable Indian reprocessing of US-supplied nuclear material under safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Nuclear reprocessing typically involves separating and managing components of spent nuclear fuel, potentially including producing weapons-grade fuel for nuclear bombs; Washington's insistence on an internationally overseen reprocessing arrangement arose from the condition in the nuclear deal that India not divert US supplied nuclear fuel to its military program.

Full Story

 

[anoop_mig25]

US, India reach nuclear reprocessing deal​

WASHINGTON: India and the United States have concluded a nuclear fuel reprocessing agreement to advance their bilateral civilian nuclear deal, the Obama administration announced on Monday.

The agreement, a key step in the full realization of the US-India nuclear deal reached some 18 months ago, will enable Indian reprocessing of US-supplied nuclear material under safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Nuclear reprocessing typically involves separating and managing components of spent nuclear fuel, potentially including producing weapons-grade fuel for nuclear bombs; Washington's insistence on an internationally overseen reprocessing arrangement arose from the condition in the nuclear deal that India not divert US supplied nuclear fuel to its military program.

Full Story

when cau u specify the date i am hearing this news since last 2 week`s and if it is true then is usa playing with india & pakistan satisfying both giving them F-16 and us the right to reprocess spent nuclear fuel and its related technology

 

[ajtr]

India's nuclear deterrence strategy

In May this year, it will be 11 years since India crossed the nuclear Rubicon and became a de facto nuclear weapons power. The strategy of ambivalence, namely keeping the option open, was finally ended, shifting in a definitive manner towards weaponisation, the global opprobrium notwithstanding. Given India's distinctive nuclear profile marked by restraint and rectitude in husbanding this apocalyptic capability, an accommodation with the global community was reached in late 2008 when the NSG (nuclear suppliers group) accorded India an exceptional status, despite its being a non-signatory to the NPT.

What is the underlying strategy to harmonise India's complex and seemingly contradictory nuclear profile that encompasses credible nuclear deterrence, safe nuclear power, and an abiding commitment to disarmament? This book addressees these issues with a rare and commendable lucidity in a manner that is comprehensive and comprehensible, an elusive element in matters nuclear.

Elements

Sethi dwells, first, on the trends in prevailing nuclear thinking and discourse and, then, on the core elements of nuclear deterrence including doctrine, command and control, survivability, ballistic missile defence (BMD) and the challenges of fissile material control. In the third and last section, he takes the reader through India's post-2008 nuclear energy imperatives and concludes by making out a persuasive case for global nuclear disarmament.

Locating the Indian dilemma against the backdrop of the nuclear strategies of the major powers and their impact on India, Sethi examines the doctrinal underpinning and strategic orientation of China and Pakistan in some detail before elucidating the Indian posture. The core of the Indian nuclear strategy is the commitment to no-first-use (NFU) predicated upon assured retaliation leading to unacceptable damage. While this formulation is unexceptionable in terms of its conceptual validity, the devil is in the opaque detail of the nuclear domain.

As Sethi notes, “nuclear strategy must strike a balance between maintaining secrecy for enhancing deterrence while simultaneously allowing transparency, also for enhancing deterrence.” Deterrence itself is visualised as a ‘ three-legged stool' — the legs being: “capability, resolve to use that capability, and the communication of both – the capability and the resolve – to the adversary.”

Operational challenges

Acquiring a profile of sustainable and effective deterrence that is deemed to be credible by the external interlocutor is fraught with many operational challenges, and this is where the secrecy/transparency correlation becomes critical. India's national security apex will have to manage this dynamic in a regional context that stands no comparison with any other part of the world. China and its shrouded WMD cooperation with Pakistan and the latter's penchant for supporting terrorism constitutethe abiding politico-strategic nettle for India — and this aspect warrants greater attention. Sethi is right in saying that China's NFU “can provide little assurance to India.” He also argues that Beijing will seek to showcase itself as a responsible player — even while seeking “to influence the security environment to safeguard its national interests.” How responsible Beijing has been in its proliferation commitments and conduct is an area that calls for a more nuanced elucidation and assessment — for it will have a strong bearing on India's evolving nuclear strategy.

The section on ballistic missile defence is a useful introduction to a very complex technology, and Sethi highlights the operational challenges ahead of India and the armed forces in particular. The claim by the Defence Research and Development Organisation(DRDO) that Akash is superior to the United States' Patriot is meticulously recorded, with a citation, but the author refrains from delving further into the validity of this assertion.

Given the vast canvas that the book covers, it is a valuable addition to the existing literature on India's nuclear strategy. The publisher needs to be commended for the page layout and the use of a font that is easy on the eye, with the footnotes (provided at the bottom of each page, instead of the end-notes after each chapter) coming as a bonus.