Indian Economy: News and Discussion

[nongaddarliberal]

maybe the next quarter or the one after that we may surpass UK in nominal GDP ,militarily we may catch them next decade only ,they are ahead us technologically but there are many profound changes happening in UK. Brexit , it also projected that white brits may become minority in coming decades ,so yeah winston churchill would be turning in his grave.

Someone please address this comment. I'm afraid I won't quite be able to reply to this in a calm manner.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

Short period of time only if consumption or innovation stops.

I'm talking about rapid transportation, if it stops, everything will slowdown.
This dense transportation network that US & European economies function or why China & India were able to catch up in business.

Abusing world economy and technology as artificial will be luditic.

Don't use big words like luditic. If it is true, it is true even if you don't like it. Innovations have limits. As of now, nothing was based on innovation but just about using the existing stores of energy and minerals. The method of using was made, not method of creating. Don't get too overwhelmed by these. Unless you know to make things from commonly available material rather than special materials, you are not doing any innovations. Just happening to discover materials and using them aggressively is not something to be glorified

They have chemical energy in them which we convert into thermal & kinetic for our use. Understanding & handling them is easier & the "blast" gives more power for same energy easily is only reason why its popular.

Bad things are emissions and they are exhaustible.

Emissions are minimal and is simply being exaggerated. The carbon in these fuels were once part of atmosphere and there is no harm releasing them back. CO2 levels of 0.03% increased to 0.04% is nothing. The real problem is depletion. There is nothing you can do about that if you consume more than what you can produce. Living within means is the only solution, not hoping and dreaming of special solution

So, that's running away from handling.
No pains no gains. What will you do if you don't have petrol in future? Countries will have to use battery.

That is reality. Jut because you want to handle something does not mean you can. You must know your position in this world and your capability

You know, by "infrastructure" I meant creating network for mainting electricity based transportation like petrol pumps where we could avail batteries like gas cylinders.
Obviously, infrastructure and arrangements can be made to make any project viable. Just because you need oil, don't hope that oil will never exhaust, stick to a better "sustainable" source.

Everything relies on natural resource. The maintenance is based n our usage of natural resource. What natural resource will you use to make infrastructure for electricity and how will you sustain it without depletion? Do you know of any endless energy resource other than sunlight?

Also, how will you make EV without petrol? EV once made don't last for 100 years. They have to be maintained regularly. How will you make new batteries regularly? How will you make the vehicles every 15-20 years when they get old and rusted? The making of these equipment also needs raw materials and energy for transportation. You can't use EV to dig the raw materials, process etc as the energy required for that is much more than what can be harnessed by solar panels.

The only solution is to reduce the population of the earth to 2-3 billion by wiping off the "evil and undesirable" people and rely on the natural cycle based on sunlight. Living in unlimited limitless consumption is not a solution. The character of Thanos in Avengers movie actually gives practical insight about life. See the movie and understand the concept

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

Guys, I have a very naive question.

When will our economy surpass that of UK?

Militarily we are already leaps and bounds ahead of the UK. They only beat us in the no of SSN, SSBN and total no of nuke warheads.
In the years to come even the SSBN gap will be bridged.
Their armed forces have an expeditionary capability which is almost absent in our case but that is because our perceived adversaries share land borders with us.
We don't need to fight on foreign shores.


Excuse me fellas for posting it here but when I look at India vis a vis UK, it gives me immense pleasure to note that we have surpassed out colonial masters in most parameters.by which a great nation is judged .

Winston Churchill would have a heart attack followed by multiple organ failures had he been alive today. That two bit fucker.

Indian economy has already surpassed UK. UK relies on returns from external investment to fund its economy. UK is just 5-6 crore country whereas India is 130-140 crore country. UK as of now has very little manufacturing and most of its economy rely on "service" and returns from its earlier investments in foreign areas like oil fields, minerals et

maybe the next quarter or the one after that we may surpass UK in nominal GDP ,militarily we may catch them next decade only ,they are ahead us technologically but there are many profound changes happening in UK. Brexit , it also projected that white brits may become minority in coming decades ,so yeah winston churchill would be turning in his grave.

What techology is ahead in UK? India has technology like SAM, BMD, satellites etc which UK does not have. Also, warheads is higher in India as India has more Uranium than UK. UK may have one thing more than India - jet engine but India got that from Russia for Su30 and hence that issue is also resolved to a good extent.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

What techology is ahead in UK?

militarily we may catch them next decade only ,they are ahead us technologically

Actually, certain aspects of technology, they are far ahead of us in small arms and naval technology, in strategic weapons & rest of things, we got overwhelming advantage.

Someone please address this comment. I'm afraid I won't quite be able to reply to this in a calm manner.

Come on don't act like teens. We got the quantity, they got the quality. Although we may win, damage you'll get after a war with them is unacceptable. At least for few decades.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Don't use big words like luditic. If it is true, it is true even if you don't like it. Innovations have limits. As of now, nothing was based on innovation but just about using the existing stores of energy and minerals.

When you got no point to defend anything & just are reluctant to even think about change, you'll be called luditic.
As of now, even the handling & management system for application of this material in industry has been a series of itself.

Innovations have limits.

Utter wrong.

The method of using was made, not method of creating. Don't get too overwhelmed by these. Unless you know to make things from commonly available material rather than special materials, you are not doing any innovations.

Even if you could find me a new & better productive way to hold my spoon, it'll be an innovation.

Just happening to discover materials and using them aggressively is not something to be glorified.

The whole point is that I'm discussing about bringing an alternative to oil but you are busy counting me its shortcomings despite the fact that it has got no infrastructure to make it viable for commercial transportation.
Every problem has a solution.

Emissions are minimal and is simply being exaggerated. The carbon in these fuels were once part of atmosphere and there is no harm releasing them back. CO2 levels of 0.03% increased to 0.04% is nothing. The real problem is depletion. There is nothing you can do about that if you consume more than what you can produce. Living within means is the only solution, not hoping and dreaming of special solution

I used to think like that but realized the quality of air in Delhi. Fossil fuels suck indeed.
Although, biggest problem actually is that this overwhelming dependence on oil has handed over way too much power & money to the hands of gulf countries who apparently did nothing to be strong & rich.

That is reality. Jut because you want to handle something does not mean you can. You must know your position in this world and your capability

I can handle electricity in form of chemical energy in batteries, case closed.

Everything relies on natural resource. The maintenance is based n our usage of natural resource. What natural resource will you use to make infrastructure for electricity and how will you sustain it without depletion? Do you know of any endless energy resource other than sunlight?

Also, how will you make EV without petrol? EV once made don't last for 100 years. They have to be maintained regularly. How will you make new batteries regularly? How will you make the vehicles every 15-20 years when they get old and rusted? The making of these equipment also needs raw materials and energy for transportation. You can't use EV to dig the raw materials, process etc as the energy required for that is much more than what can be harnessed by solar panels.

Just like I'm making petroleum based equipments right now. With other batteries or sources of electricity. Point here is to phase out petrol.

The only solution is to reduce the population of the earth to 2-3 billion by wiping off the "evil and undesirable" people and rely on the natural cycle based on sunlight. Living in unlimited limitless consumption is not a solution. The character of Thanos in Avengers movie actually gives practical insight about life. See the movie and understand the concept

Talk about something practical.
If US, EU, China, Russia & Japan etc. undergo WW3 and destroy each other stone ages, India will be left only big power & consumer of resources.
But practically, it isn't going to happen. Better find a way to save forex and manage to surpass their current economies & military.

 

[Haldiram]

The problem with this argument is that Gold is an actual natural resource and is valuable because of its rarity and its chemical properties. Currencies are simply printed and hence don't have the legitimacy of being undoctored and natural.

The so called productive business is not really productive as people can still live without it. The real production comes by over exploiting natural resource which is actually a bad and short sighted activity. I would not say that buying gold is a bad thing to do in such situation

The price of gold is not pegged against anything so its value is purely speculative and that makes it a bad saving instrument, because there is no way to keep its value tied up to any metric. The prices of real life commodities can diverge from gold prices independently of each other. Today if a person saves a gold coin, assuming its present value to be equivalent of a year's food and rent for him, and tomorrow if real estate prices boom, one wouldn't be able to afford even a month's livelihood expenses with the same gold. All real world commodities are pegged against the currency.

When the rents, loan rates, EMIs, salaries are increased or decreased, they are done in consultation with the domestic currency's value. They don't consult gold prices anywhere. There is no mechanism to say that "well..5 years ago 10gm gold is was 15k, and today the rupee has lost half of its value so I *demand* that my gold be valued at 30k, to adjust for the inflation". There is no central body setting the prices. It's based purely on speculation, exactly like equities. That's what makes gold just as risky for savings as the stock market. Your assumption of "safety" is based on the fact that, years later, some other person will be willing to pay 60k for gold that you bought for 30k today. In the future, when the gold mania subsides, such a buyer might not be available, causing a crash in the gold bubble, just like it happens in real estate and stocks. There's no safety in these instruments, they are all volatile, speculative assets. One can only hope that the volatility pushes the prices up but they may very well go down, so we are not "safe" in the sense that there is no guarantee of inflation beating capital preservation.

 

[indiatester]

DIgboi is almost depleted and had very little oil. It comes under the plains area, not under Himalayas. Also, NGOs are interested in sabotaging anything and everything, not just oil. But NE definitely does not have lot of oil. It has Uranium and some minerals but not oil

I was talking about NE India. Never made mention of Himalayas or plains or plateaus.

How are you asserting that "NE definitely does not have lot of oil" ?

Lot of reports suggest that there is enough interest.
https://www.telegraphindia.com/business/oil-india-shale-drill-in-northeast/cid/1448961

A former Oil India chairman C. Ratnam has for long advocated that India exploit its shale reserves in Arunachal, which some experts estimate to be up to 14 billion tonnes.

Lot of exploration going on too. I would tend to thing those people putting money into exploring believe there is a possiblity

“It is not certain whether all the 19 blocks being offered from the Assam-Arakan basin will have oil and gas reserves. However, data analysed shows that there is potential and the maximum investor interest is in NE basins. Nevertheless, the region will witness a spur in exploration and drilling activities due to auctions,” an oil and gas analyst said.

According to information provided by the country’s upstream oil and gas regulator Directorate General of Hydrocarbons (DGH), the Assam-Arakan basin comes under Category-1 sedimentary basin with established commercial production. The basin is estimated to have around 1,454.8 Million Tonne of Oil Equivalent (MMTOE) of undiscovered hydrocarbon reserves.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

Actually, certain aspects of technology, they are far ahead of us in small arms and naval technology, in strategic weapons & rest of things, we got overwhelming advantage.

Saying that someone is ahead of India in small arms is just a joke. All, even Pakistan is similar in small arms. These are simple technology that has matured since 1970s and has not improved any further.

When you got no point to defend anything & just are reluctant to even think about change, you'll be called luditic.
As of now, even the handling & management system for application of this material in industry has been a series of itself.

No one is reluctant to think of change. But I am definitely reluctant to hope for change. I live on real terms, not hopes and dreams. First tell me how will you change and only then you will get my attention.

Changing minor things is not the question here. We are speaking of substituting fossil fuels entirely. That means there has to be substitute that does the same work as fossil fuel. The chemical nature of fossil fuel ensures that any substitute is hard to find. We know the chemical properties of all elements and most of the available compounds and know for sure that they can't match fossil fuel.

The whole point is that I'm discussing about bringing an alternative to oil but you are busy counting me its shortcomings despite the fact that it has got no infrastructure to make it viable for commercial transportation.
Every problem has a solution.

There is no point having infrastructure if the battery technology is unfit to replace fossil fuels. Tell me the plan to get the following:
1) Fertiliser
2) Allopathy medicine (which is made from petrochemical)
3) Paints
4) Electric cable insulation, switches (made from PVC, bakelite etc)
5) Ready available energy that is non fluctuating and easily storable (batteries and hydrogen leak over time)
6) Chemicals like plastics, synthetics
7) Large stores of energy at low weight (batteries weigh a lot)

The very fact that the batteries need plastics and PVC from fossil fuels to work is a matter of concern. Also, the extraction of raw materials and their processing is extremely energy intensive that it is difficult to make using battery.

I used to think like that but realized the quality of air in Delhi. Fossil fuels suck indeed.
Although, biggest problem actually is that this overwhelming dependence on oil has handed over way too much power & money to the hands of gulf countries who apparently did nothing to be strong & rich.

I can handle electricity in form of chemical energy in batteries, case closed.

The quality of air is low because of overcrowding and particulate matters rather than fossil fuel usage. Stop the fossil fuel usage for 6 months and the air quality will come back to normal. This is a temporary damage, not a permanent one and hence does not need much brouhaha

Just like I'm making petroleum based equipments right now. With other batteries or sources of electricity. Point here is to phase out petrol.

Petrol is a small part of petroleum. 25% of petroleum is used in making petrochemicals and plastics. Another 40% is used to make diesel, ship oil, kerosene (jet fuel), LPG etc. Petrol is used in limited quantity - may be about 30% of oil production.

The price of gold is not pegged against anything so its value is purely speculative and that makes it a bad saving instrument, because there is no way to keep its value tied up to any metric. The prices of real life commodities can diverge from gold prices independently of each other.

The price of dollar is also variable and so is price of any other currency. Even worse, dollar is pegged to petroleum producer currency in petrodollar deal which makes it extremely dangerous ponzi scheme instrument. Petroleum is exhaustible commodity and hence the value of dollar and global economy pegged to that makes it a sure shot recipe for disaster.

Gold may not be tied to any metric but even in the worst scenario, gold will still be usable as currency, may be at a diminished value but nevertheless usable. The fiat currency will be complete garbage and usable only as waste paper. A $100 bill will be worth less than $0.01 as the only value will be of the weight of the paper

 

[Mikesingh]

Modi's big challenge may turn into his biggest ally for 2019

Fall in global crude price may ease India’s import bill and inflation

Global oil prices fell by about a quarter in 40 days to $65 a barrel on Wednesday, promising to reduce India’s import bill and inflation. It is also likely to cool local fuel prices that crested several peaks and rob the Opposition of a key political plank against the Narendra Modi government ahead of a series of crucial state polls.

• What: Among Modi government's challenges on the economic front today are: fuel prices, rupee, state-run banks, Reserve Bank India, current account deficit, fiscal deficit. All of them may cease to be such big problem areas because of just one factor slowly turning into government's favour.

• Good news: Oil prices have tumbled more than 26% from a four-year high (of $86 a barrel) in October. It has been a dramatic shift of sentiment in just about a month with traders switching from predicting $100 per barrel oil to fearing another supply glut amid dimming demand prospects. US decision to allow Iranian oil shipments to some countries to continue even after the imposition of sanctions, as well as rising American inventories and record output of oil have hit oil prices.

• Master key: Falling oil prices will bring down India's import bill (of which oil is a significant chunk) and that's good news for current account deficit (the difference between the value of our imports and exports). If current price trends were to continue, India's oil import bill in 2018-19 would be much lower than Rs 8.8 lakh crore projected by the oil ministry based on an assumed crude price of $77.88 per barrel and an exchange rate of 72.22 per dollar. Lower oil price also means lower pressure on the rupee as we will need fewer dollars to buy oil. Centre will spend less on subsidising fuel and LPG prices and oil companies can cut petrol and diesel prices that had till last month been creating daily records. Local prices of petrol and diesel, factor in both international fuel rates as well as currency movements. An unlikely side effect could be easing of the government's dispute with Reserve Bank of India, which is about bringing in more money into the system. Since lower fuel prices also lower the risk of inflation, it means increased room for RBI to cut interest rate in future.

• Mission 2019: Having to allocate less money to oil means higher public resources for other welfare projects and schemes. Government can always choose not to lower fuel taxes further, which means its revenue tap from oil keeps flowing. That's good news for politics. At least one report says that government may be planning to roll out goodies in the next year's budget and not present a boring one as most election-year interim budgets are. The February 1 date of the interim Union Budget may keep the announcements out of the election model code of conduct too.

Full story here

 

[Haldiram]

Modi's big challenge may turn into his biggest ally for 2019

Fall in global crude price may ease India’s import bill and inflation

Global oil prices fell by about a quarter in 40 days to $65 a barrel on Wednesday, promising to reduce India’s import bill and inflation. It is also likely to cool local fuel prices that crested several peaks and rob the Opposition of a key political plank against the Narendra Modi government ahead of a series of crucial state polls.

• What: Among Modi government's challenges on the economic front today are: fuel prices, rupee, state-run banks, Reserve Bank India, current account deficit, fiscal deficit. All of them may cease to be such big problem areas because of just one factor slowly turning into government's favour.

• Good news: Oil prices have tumbled more than 26% from a four-year high (of $86 a barrel) in October. It has been a dramatic shift of sentiment in just about a month with traders switching from predicting $100 per barrel oil to fearing another supply glut amid dimming demand prospects. US decision to allow Iranian oil shipments to some countries to continue even after the imposition of sanctions, as well as rising American inventories and record output of oil have hit oil prices.

• Master key: Falling oil prices will bring down India's import bill (of which oil is a significant chunk) and that's good news for current account deficit (the difference between the value of our imports and exports). If current price trends were to continue, India's oil import bill in 2018-19 would be much lower than Rs 8.8 lakh crore projected by the oil ministry based on an assumed crude price of $77.88 per barrel and an exchange rate of 72.22 per dollar. Lower oil price also means lower pressure on the rupee as we will need fewer dollars to buy oil. Centre will spend less on subsidising fuel and LPG prices and oil companies can cut petrol and diesel prices that had till last month been creating daily records. Local prices of petrol and diesel, factor in both international fuel rates as well as currency movements. An unlikely side effect could be easing of the government's dispute with Reserve Bank of India, which is about bringing in more money into the system. Since lower fuel prices also lower the risk of inflation, it means increased room for RBI to cut interest rate in future.

• Mission 2019: Having to allocate less money to oil means higher public resources for other welfare projects and schemes. Government can always choose not to lower fuel taxes further, which means its revenue tap from oil keeps flowing. That's good news for politics. At least one report says that government may be planning to roll out goodies in the next year's budget and not present a boring one as most election-year interim budgets are. The February 1 date of the interim Union Budget may keep the announcements out of the election model code of conduct too.

Full story here

Saudi would love to increase their oil price but they are scared that people might switch to Shale. They have to keep their oil prices significantly below the proposed cost of Shale to delay the entry of their competitor. Regardless of whether we buy from them or not, their productivity and prices affect us directly. If Saudi supplies oil to Iran's buyers, then Iran will have less suitors, which gives India a dominating position in our negotiation with Iran.

Putin has said that oil prices at 60$ suits Russia and China has signed a (400 billion $) 30 year oil deal with Russia, so the major oil buyers have diversified and reduced their dependence on jihadi oil.

Shale is likely to cost between 60 to 70$ (give or take 25% for initial logistics setup). India is getting cheap oil from Iran and has already committed to buy American Shale whenever it becomes available.

Oil remained around 85 to 90$ in the period between 2007 to 2015 when people were predicting that it would go to 150$. Instead, it sharply came down to 45$. There's no way oil can go and remain beyond 70$. It will settle somewhere around 55-60 max.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

Saudi would love to increase their oil price but they are scared that people might switch to Shale. They have to keep their oil prices significantly below the proposed cost of Shale to delay the entry of their competitor. Regardless of whether we buy from them or not, their productivity and prices affect us directly. If Saudi supplies oil to Iran's buyers, then Iran will have less suitors, which gives India a dominating position in our negotiation with Iran.

Putin has said that oil prices at 60$ suits Russia and China has signed a (400 billion $) 30 year oil deal with Russia, so the major oil buyers have diversified and reduced their dependence on jihadi oil.

Shale is likely to cost between 60 to 70$ (give or take 25% for initial logistics setup). India is getting cheap oil from Iran and has already committed to buy American Shale whenever it becomes available.

Oil remained around 85 to 90$ in the period between 2007 to 2015 when people were predicting that it would go to 150$. Instead, it sharply came down to 45$. There's no way oil can go and remain beyond 70$. It will settle somewhere around 55-60 max.

USA is the only shale oil producer and USA is still dependent on oil imports. USA consumes 20.7 million barrels of oil a day while it produces 11.5 million barrels of oil a day, 1 mbd of ethanol, 1mbd refinery gains, 5mbd of LNG. USA imports about 2.4mbd from Canada and Venezuela to make up for the remaining. How will a net imported like USA export oil without substituting with some other import? USA only exports oil because of logistical reason where it imports oil in one coast and exports it in another as shipping from east coast to west coast is difficult.

The net oil exports of KSA and allies like UAE, Kuwait, Iraq, Oman, Qatar, Libya, Algeria, Malaysia, Tunisia, Brunei export 22 mbd of oil. They are cohesive jihadist group and act collectiveley. Other jihadist countries like Iran, Azerbaijan, Yemen, Syria, Sudan etc export a net of 2.5mbd oil. So, total jihadi oil exports is about 25mbd. The overall net exports of oil comes to about 43mbd (excluding Canada oil as I have considered Canada-USA to be acting a one single group and hence consider net oil imports/exports of USA-Canada as 0). So, we have about 60% oil under Jihadi control and of that over 50% is in the hands of KSA allies. Remaining net oil exports mainly rely on Russian (8mbd), Kazakhstan (1.5mbd), Norway (1.5mbd), Angola (1.5mbd), Nigeria(2mbd), Venezuela(0.8mbd), Ecuador (0.6mbd), Colombia(0.6mbd), Brazil, Vietnam, Congo, Guinea, Gabon, Chad etc

So, if KSA wants, it can definitely bring a squeeze on oil supply by 3-4MBD which will be difficult to supply. Countries like Angola, Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador are seeing big time reserve depletion and other countries are pressing hard to produce the current levels of oil. There is very little room for oil supply increase of 3-4 MBD.

Oil price has more to do with political undertones rather than any other reason of supply or demand. As long as right pressure is exerted politically as in case of threats by USA-Turkey to crown prince's involvement on Kashoggi killing or threats by India to retaliate by vicious electoral campaign and attacks on Islam if oil price is not lowered for 2019 elections etc are the only things that will help lower oil prices

 

[Mikesingh]

Putin has said that oil prices at 60$ suits Russia and China has signed a (400 billion $) 30 year oil deal with Russia, so the major oil buyers have diversified and reduced their dependence on jihadi oil.

I think we need to do the same and sign a deal for at least 20 years for $55-$60 a barrel. This will have the advantage of stability and ease of future planning. Of course the problem may crop up if oil plunges to the $40-$45 range, but then we can buy additional oil at these rates and stock it up as strategic reserves.

 

[Haldiram]

I think we need to do the same and sign a deal for at least 20 years for $55-$60 a barrel. This will have the advantage of stability and ease of future planning. Of course the problem may crop up if oil plunges to the $40-$45 range, but then we can buy additional oil at these rates and stock it up as strategic reserves.

Once you build the logistics to buy from multiple people, the price comes down automatically. Paying a locked-in price of 50$ for the next 30 years in assured oil supply is much better than the speculation of 40$ while actually paying 80$ in reality, due to lack of diversification. For a country like India which has paid 96$ in the 2005 to 2015's, 50$ should be an immediate grab. If Saudis then decide to lower it to 45, sure, we buy some % from them to average out our prices, but the paradox of bargaining is such that they will not come down to 45 unless we start building the India-Russia pipe.

I remember there being some murmurs about the possibility of Russia-India pipe. I don't know what happened of it. I hope we find a middle path and Russia ends up brokering a deal between India and China for India to join the Russia-China pipeline. Buying from Russia means our money doesn't end up in Wahabbi pockets and a degree of immunity from oil blackmail.

This news is from 2016.

India, Russia to study building $25-bn pipeline

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Saying that someone is ahead of India in small arms is just a joke. All, even Pakistan is similar in small arms. These are simple technology that has matured since 1970s and has not improved any further.

Go through the kind of small arms, MBTs & metallurgical capabilities. Decades of experience can't be trumped in few decades. UK might be militarily weaker than India now but the percentage of obsolete stuff makes them a bit more efficient at least.
India holds advantage due to overwhelming size of its military forces and strategic weapons. Its massive size provides it even a better favour in case of a nuclear war and can't be defeated convincingly by any country but three great powers US, Russia & PRC. But India being not at par with em, UK's able to nulify India on many fronts.

No one is reluctant to think of change. But I am definitely reluctant to hope for change. I live on real terms, not hopes and dreams. First tell me how will you change and only then you will get my attention.

If you don't want to be replace consumables with something which creates inventory isn't possible most likely.

By electricity, again I told you that batteries could be used from stations & returned like gas cylinders. Electricity gained from sources other than direct thermal energy.
Even better ways may be there but the thing need to assessed.
I won't declare anything not feasible when I don't know when petroleum reserves may not be available.

Changing minor things is not the question here. We are speaking of substituting fossil fuels entirely. That means there has to be substitute that does the same work as fossil fuel. The chemical nature of fossil fuel ensures that any substitute is hard to find. We know the chemical properties of all elements and most of the available compounds and know for sure that they can't match fossil fuel.

Other artifical chemicals?

There is no point having infrastructure if the battery technology is unfit to replace fossil fuels. Tell me the plan to get the following:
1) Fertiliser
2) Allopathy medicine (which is made from petrochemical)
3) Paints
4) Electric cable insulation, switches (made from PVC, bakelite etc)
5) Ready available energy that is non fluctuating and easily storable (batteries and hydrogen leak over time)
6) Chemicals like plastics, synthetics
7) Large stores of energy at low weight (batteries weigh a lot)

The very fact that the batteries need plastics and PVC from fossil fuels to work is a matter of concern. Also, the extraction of raw materials and their processing is extremely energy intensive that it is difficult to make using battery.

Look my essential focus is on non polluting & most important indigenous energy. That doesn't mean to necessarily used acid batteries or dry cells. Even if government is able to halt the increasing number of cars and able to impose mass transport in lives of people like Singapore did.
For what you wrote above, nearly nothing is there which can't be substituted. Although, main focus is on fuel which is biggest import & needed to be curbed.

The quality of air is low because of overcrowding and particulate matters rather than fossil fuel usage. Stop the fossil fuel usage for 6 months and the air quality will come back to normal. This is a temporary damage, not a permanent one and hence does not need much brouhaha

Unburnt fuel gives a nice amount of SPM too. If not largest, pollution from exhaust of vehicles isn't insignificant at all. And hence, side effects can't be ignored just like population growth & mining.

 

[Arihant Roy]

Actually, certain aspects of technology, they are far ahead of us in small arms and naval technology, in strategic weapons & rest of things, we got overwhelming advantage.

Come on don't act like teens. We got the quantity, they got the quality. Although we may win, damage you'll get after a war with them is unacceptable. At least for few decades.

We have got both quantity and quality.
Around 1600 T-90S which can hold their own and even get the better of Chally 2 with the Refleks from 5000 meters out.
Then we are ypgrading another 1000 T-72 with uprated power packs and the new K5 type ERA .

Then we have 220 Arjun Mk1 and Mk1A in service/on order.

Around 1700 BMP2. Yes they are inferior to what the British have but they gets the job done. This is the only kit in the Army arsenal which is qualitatively inferior.

Come to artillery we have similar if not superior stuff. With induction of Dhanush and the Atags we will have superior artillery assets. This is not to mention the huge no of units we have.

Then there are Pinaka mk1/ mk2 and Smerch.
Brahmos. 4 regiments of them with 100 missiles in each.
Prithvi-1 and 2 missile groups which can be used in c nventional role.

When it comes to Army Aviation, ALH isn't in any inferior to the Lynx. Then we have Cheetah, Chetak and Cheetal which fill in niche roles.
Chinook and Apache will give us tremendous capabilities as far as organic heavy lift and heavy close air support is concerned.

Coming to IAF vs RAF, the Su-30MKI isn't no slouch either. It's superior to the EF Typhoon tranche 3 as far as air to ground is concerned. Then the N011M Bars is being continually upgraded. It's superior to the Captor M in most respects.

Then we have MiG-29UPG Mirage 2000I/TI and Jaguar DARIN-3. MiG-29 has the IAF's first Aesa based RF jammer whereas DARIN - 3 will get the ELM-2052 aesa.
Rafales are coming. And Tejas mk1a will have excellent air to air and air to ground capabilities.

Now look at RAF. 160 Typhoons. To Kas are being phased out. And just 35 F-35B. Talking about firm orders. Look at their IADS and Sam network. Non existent.
We have everything from the vintage Kvadrat to modern Akash-1 in the ESHORAD and short range categories, Mrsam and then the ultra long range S-400 has been ordered.

Then there are SpyDer, OSA-AKM.

We have a robust BMD system too. Either operational or soon to enter service.


The RAF won't last a week against the IAF in a full spectrum war. Now if we consider our multi tiered Sam network, then it's more bad news for the RAF.

The UK Army won't last more than 3-4 days against the Indian Army in a 71 war type conflict.

Now coming to our Navy, the Kolkata class and the upcoming Visakhapatnam class are superior to the Daring class in anti surface warfare. It has similar anti air capabilities. We have the P-17A coming. The P17 and Talwar and it's sub classes are superior to the Type 23 frigates.

Their only Trump card is the two QE class carriers with their complement of F-35B.but these two look great on paper. Against Brahmos and its sisters they won't last long.
And their fleet of SSN. That's one descent piece of capability they have.


In an all out conventional war where nukes are out of the picture, we will be annihilating them in under a week. Besides they don't have reserves to offset attrition. They don't have the nos.

UK would be hard pressed if she is to herself face against a country like Iran or even Vietnam.

India is far far off.

 

[Arihant Roy]

Actually, certain aspects of technology, they are far ahead of us in small arms and naval technology, in strategic weapons & rest of things, we got overwhelming advantage.

Come on don't act like teens. We got the quantity, they got the quality. Although we may win, damage you'll get after a war with them is unacceptable. At least for few decades.

We have got both quantity and quality.
Around 1600 T-90S which can hold their own and even get the better of Chally 2 with the Refleks from 5000 meters out.
Then we are ypgrading another 1000 T-72 with uprated power packs and the new K5 type ERA .

Then we have 220 Arjun Mk1 and Mk1A in service/on order.

Around 1700 BMP2. Yes they are inferior to what the British have but they gets the job done. This is the only kit in the Army arsenal which is qualitatively inferior.

Come to artillery we have similar if not superior stuff. With induction of Dhanush and the Atags we will have superior artillery assets. This is not to mention the huge no of units we have.

Then there are Pinaka mk1/ mk2 and Smerch.
Brahmos. 4 regiments of them with 100 missiles in each.
Prithvi-1 and 2 missile groups which can be used in c nventional role.

When it comes to Army Aviation, ALH isn't in any inferior to the Lynx. Then we have Cheetah, Chetak and Cheetal which fill in niche roles.
Chinook and Apache will give us tremendous capabilities as far as organic heavy lift and heavy close air support is concerned.

Coming to IAF vs RAF, the Su-30MKI isn't no slouch either. It's superior to the EF Typhoon tranche 3 as far as air to ground is concerned. Then the N011M Bars is being continually upgraded. It's superior to the Captor M in most respects.

Then we have MiG-29UPG Mirage 2000I/TI and Jaguar DARIN-3. MiG-29 has the IAF's first Aesa based RF jammer whereas DARIN - 3 will get the ELM-2052 aesa.
Rafales are coming. And Tejas mk1a will have excellent air to air and air to ground capabilities.

Now look at RAF. 160 Typhoons. To Kas are being phased out. And just 35 F-35B. Talking about firm orders. Look at their IADS and Sam network. Non existent.
We have everything from the vintage Kvadrat to modern Akash-1 in the ESHORAD and short range categories, Mrsam and then the ultra long range S-400 has been ordered.

Then there are SpyDer, OSA-AKM.

We have a robust BMD system too. Either operational or soon to enter service.


The RAF won't last a week against the IAF in a full spectrum war. Now if we consider our multi tiered Sam network, then it's more bad news for the RAF.

The UK Army won't last more than 3-4 days against the Indian Army in a 71 war type conflict.

Now coming to our Navy, the Kolkata class and the upcoming Visakhapatnam class are superior to the Daring class in anti surface warfare. It has similar anti air capabilities. We have the P-17A coming. The P17 and Talwar and it's sub classes are superior to the Type 23 frigates.

Their only Trump card is the two QE class carriers with their complement of F-35B.but these two look great on paper. Against Brahmos and its sisters they won't last long.
And their fleet of SSN. That's one descent piece of capability they have.


In an all out conventional war where nukes are out of the picture, we will be annihilating them in under a week. Besides they don't have reserves to offset attrition. They don't have the nos.

UK would be hard pressed if she is to herself face against a country like Iran or even Vietnam.

India is far far off.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

Go through the kind of small arms, MBTs & metallurgical capabilities. Decades of experience can't be trumped in few decades. UK might be militarily weaker than India now but the percentage of obsolete stuff makes them a bit more efficient at least.
India holds advantage due to overwhelming size of its military forces and strategic weapons. Its massive size provides it even a better favour in case of a nuclear war and can't be defeated convincingly by any country but three great powers US, Russia & PRC. But India being not at par with em, UK's able to nulify India on many fronts.

You are forgetting that people die and new people keep getting born. So, the idea of indefinite experience is fallacy. Experience also has limits and every generation has to learn from scratch.

Indian technology is not any inferior. Su30 matches well with EFT, Indian SAM and BMD have no match in UK. India makes T90 tanks (though they are Russian design, India makes them) and works well in all terrains - desert, mountain and swamps. UK does not have any missile or satellites on its own either. About USA, Russia and PRC, India can defeat Russia due to its extremely small population concentrated together making it easy to target them quickly. USA is too far off with the distance of 16000km travel by sea. This itself means that to come to India, USA will need 2 weeks of time in 1 way trip. This makes any chances of USA victory almost 0. Also, USA has way less population than India which adds to Indian strength. China is the only country that can take on India and even win

By electricity, again I told you that batteries could be used from stations & returned like gas cylinders. Electricity gained from sources other than direct thermal energy.
Even better ways may be there but the thing need to assessed.
I won't declare anything not feasible when I don't know when petroleum reserves may not be available.

There is about 650-680 billion barrels of oil left and the consumption is about 31-32 billion barrels a year. So, petroleum will not last over 2040-45.

Your dream of finding a substitute is like dreaming about finding a medicine which will stop your aging and make you live for 1000+ years!

Around 1700 BMP2. Yes they are inferior to what the British have but they gets the job done. This is the only kit in the Army arsenal which is qualitatively inferior.

BMP2 is not inferior to Warrior tracked vehicle of UK or Bradley of USA> BMP is a lightweight vehicle to resist infantry fire and to some extent small IEDs. Bradly or Warrior on the other hand, have huge weight, about 2 times that of BMP, consume more fuel and is difficult to produce. It is better to use tanks instead of 30ton vehicles

 

[Haldiram]

How to lie using half truths :

This is a paragraph from ET :

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ee-finds-its-footing/articleshow/66653029.cms

In the past four days to the week, FIIs have poured in Rs 1,141 crore into Indian equities. The figure stood at a net Rs 1,322 crore so far this month. This compares with outflows of Rs 28,921 crore in October and Rs 10,824 crore in September.

What actually happened :

 

[Haldiram]

@ezsasa

I ran some numbers on gold returns, just out of curiosity; Here are the findings.

CAGR from 1998 - 2008 : 12.10%
CAGR from 2008 - 2018 : 11.61%

The recently launched government sovereign bonds offer 2.5% interest in addition to market gains. So if one assumes that gold will offer 12% returns for the coming 10 years, we'll get a CAGR of 14.5% (12 + 2.5). The market returns are exempt from LTCG. If our assumption of 12% holds good, then it's not bad at all. Even if it gives 8% returns, that's 10.5% with no LTCG, still better than an FD. Let's not write off gold, as of yet.

@indiatester

 

[Indx TechStyle]

@Arihant Roy

Your dream of finding a substitute is like dreaming about finding a medicine which will stop your aging and make you live for 1000+ years!

Either of them isn't wrong, former one is feasible and later one is far fetched.
For vs UK part, I think I should quote you in another thread instead of derailing economics thread. Will do after coming home.
Regards