Troubled Galaxy Destroyed Dreams, Chapter 429
Palash Biswas
http://indianholocaustmyfatherslifeandtime.blogspot.com/
Nuclear Disasters
In this text we will discuss these two disasters, along with correcting a few common misconceptions about nuclear accidents. ...
library.thinkquest.org/.../nuclear_disasters/nuclear_disasters.html - Cached - Similar -Chernobyl disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to Chornobyl nuclear power plant: The Chornobyl disaster was a nuclear reactor accident that occurred on 26 ... It is considered to be the worst nuclear power plant disaster in history and ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster - Cached - Similar -Nuclear and radiation accidents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The worst nuclear accident in history is the Chernobyl disaster. Other serious nuclear and radiation accidents include the Mayak disaster, Soviet submarine ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents - Cached - Similar -Image results for nuclear disasters
- Report imagesThank you for the feedback. Report another imagePlease report the offensive image. CancelDoneDisasters: Nuclear Accidents - The Chernobyl Disaster, Three Mile ...
Of all the environmental disaster events that humans are capable of causing, nuclear disasters have the greatest damage potential. ...
www.pollutionissues.com › Co-Ea - Cached - Similar -Nuclear and Chemical Accidents — Infoplease.com
How Would Military Hospitals Cope with a Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical Disaster? (Military Medicine). IAEA conventions on nuclear safety provide for ...
www.infoplease.com › World › Disasters - Cached - Similar -Nuclear Power Plant Disasters: A Three Part History of Tragic ...
Nuclear power plant disasters in the past are of great concern. Here we examine the history of nuclear power plant disasters in the hope that it will teach ...
www.brighthub.com/environment/science.../13602.aspx - Cached - Similar -Nuclear Disasters in the Yahoo! Directory
Yahoo! reviewed these sites and found them related to Nuclear Disasters.
dir.yahoo.com › ... › Environment and Nature › Disasters - Cached - Similar -nuclear_accidents
This map displays informations about the most important nuclear accidents and disasters relying on a well-documented Wikipedia source. ...
www.lastingnews.com/maps/nuclear_accidents.php - Cached - Similar -Chernobyl Accident - Chernobyl
Chernobyl: information on the Chernobyl accident. The Chernobyl RBMK reactor design faults and how they have been addressed, the Chernobyl shelter.
www.world-nuclear.org/info/chernobyl/inf07.html - Cached -CHELYABINSK "The Most Contaminated Spot on the Planet" - a ...
The people of the Chelyabinsk Region have suffered no less than three nuclear disasters: For over six years, the Mayak complex systematically dumped ...
www.logtv.com/films/chelyabinsk/nuclear.htm - Cached - Similar -
You have removed results from this search. Hide them
Loading...
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next |
Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement was met with stiff opposition by some ..... Highlighting the importance of Sino-Indian relations, Yang remarked, ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-US_civilian_nuclear_agreement - Cached - Similar -Foreign relations of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to Indo-USA Strategic Partnership: U.S. President Barack Obama with Indian PM Manmohan Singh ... Indo-USA relations got strategic content way back in early sixties. ... the two countries on the issue of nuclear proliferation. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_India - Cached - Similar -The U.S.-India Nuclear Deal - Council on Foreign Relations
A proposed groundbreaking nuclear deal between the United States and India is raising questions and concern in both countries.
www.cfr.org › by publication type › backgrounders - Cached - Similar -The truth behind the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal
29 Jul 2005 ... The truth behind the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal .... Mr. Tellis, whose report on India-U.S. relations formed a valuable input to the Bush ...
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=756 - Cached - Similar -Indo-US relations « The State Of the Oldest Nation
The Public spotlight that was on the Indo-US nuclear deal until it was passed by the US Congress and ... Filed under India and the World, Indo-US relations, ...
hawkeyeindia.wordpress.com/category/.../indo-us-relations/ - Cached - Similar -Indo-US Nuclear Deal- In Perspective
12 Jul 2008 ... INDO-US NUCLEAR DEAL: IN PERSPECTIVE. By B. Raman .... depend on the state of over-all Indo-US relations and his own perception of India as ...
www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers28%5Cpaper2767.html - Cached - Similar -Rediff.com: Indo-US Nuclear Tango
'McCain will take Indo-US relations in a positive direction' • 'The Left parties have lost ground' ..... Rice meets Pelosi to discuss Indo-US nuclear deal ...
in.rediff.com/news/nukedeal05.html - Cached - Similar -Indo-US nuclear accord approved by key US Congressional committees
6 Jul 2006 ... On June 27, the House of Representatives International Relations .... Within days of the Indo-US nuclear accord, Moscow was citing it in ...
www.wsws.org/articles/2006/jul2006/indi-j06.shtml - Cached - Similar -Highlights of Indo-US nuclear deal
2 Oct 2009 ... it makes new relation not only two country but relation for ... The Indo-US nuclear deal is going to help India in meeting with their ...
www.financialexpress.com/news/...indous-nuclear.../208405/ - Cached - Similar -Indo-US Nuclear Deal: A Case Study in Indo-US Relations
30 Apr 2009 ... Indo-US Nuclear Deal: A Case Study in Indo-US Relations - This book interrogates the Indo-US civil nuclear agreement from its inception in ...
www.routledgepolitics.com/.../Indo-US-Nuclear-Deal-isbn9780415544528 - Cached - Similar -News results for Indo US Nuclear Relations
Globe and MailIndian PM state visit to US significant step in Indo-US relations - 4 days ago
... state visit to America heralds a new beginning for the Indo-US relations ... operationalize the landmark Indo-US nuclear deal has been left unsigned. ...Xinhua - 3676 related articles »
Indo-US nuclear deal 'landmark' in bilateral ties, says PM - Daily News & Analysis - 2942 related articles »
| Searches related to: Indo US Nuclear Relations | |||
| indo us nuclear deal | indo us nuclear agreement | indo american nuclear deal | indo us nuclear deal wikipedia |
You have removed results from this search. Hide them
Loading...
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next |
Nuclear power in India
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nuclear power is the fourth-largest source of electricity in India after thermal, hydro and renewable sources of electricity.[1] As of 2008, India has 17 nuclear power plants in operation generating 4,120 MW while 6 other are under construction and are expected to generate an additional 3,160 MW.[2] India is also involved in the development of fusion reactors through its participation in the ITER project.
Since early 1990s, Russia has been a major source of nuclear fuel to India.[3] Due to dwindling domestic uranium reserves,[4] electricity generation from nuclear power in India declined by 12.83% from 2006 to 2008.[5] Following a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group in September 2008 which allowed it to commence international nuclear trade,[6] India has signed nuclear deals with several other countries including France,[7] United States,[8], and Kazakhstan[9] while the framework for similar deals with Canada and United Kingdom are also being prepared.[10][11] In February 2009, India also signed a $700 million deal with Russia for the supply of 2000 tons nuclear fuel.[12][13]
India now envisages to increase the contribution of nuclear power to overall electricity generation capacity from 4.2% to 9% within 25 years.[14] In 2010, India's installed nuclear power generation capacity will increase to 6,000 MW.[15] As of 2009, India stands 9th in the world in terms of number of operational nuclear power reactors and is constructing 9 more, including two EPRs being constructed by France's Areva.[16] Indigenous atomic reactors include TAPS-3, and -4, both of which are 540 MW reactors.[17] India's $717 million fast breeder reactor project is expected to be operational by 2010.[18]
Contents[hide] |
[edit] Nuclear Power Growth in INDIA
[edit] Growth
India, being a non-signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, has been subjected to a defacto nuclear embargo from members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) cartel. This has prevented India from obtaining commercial nuclear fuel, nuclear power plant components and services from the international market, thereby forcing India to develop its own fuel, components and services for nuclear power generation. The NSG embargo has had both negative and positive consequences for India's Nuclear Industry. On one hand, the NSG regime has constrained India from freely importing nuclear fuel at the volume and cost levels it would like to support the country's goals of expanding its nuclear power generation capacity to at least 20,000 MW by 2020. Also, by precluding India from taking advantage of the economies of scale and safety innovations of the global nuclear industry, the NSG regime has driven up the capital and operating costs and damaged the achievable safety potential of Indian nuclear power plants. On the other hand, the NSG embargo has forced the Indian government and bureaucracy to support and actively fund the development of Indian nuclear technologies and industrial capacities in all key areas required to create and maintain a domestic nuclear industry. This has resulted in the creation of a large pool of nuclear scientists, engineers and technicians that have developed new and unique innovations in the areas of Fast Breeder Reactors, Thermal Breeder Reactors, the Thorium fuel cycle, nuclear fuel reprocessing and Tritium extraction & production. Ironically, had the NSG sanctions not been in place, it would have been far more cost effective for India to import foreign nuclear power plants and nuclear fuels than to fund the development of Indian nuclear power generation technology, building of India's own nuclear reactors, and the development of domestic uranium mining, milling and refining capacity.
The Indian nuclear power industry is expected to undergo a significant expansion in the coming years thanks in part to the passing of The Indo-US nuclear deal. This agreement will allow India to carry out trade of nuclear fuel and technologies with other countries and significantly enhance its power generation capacity.[19] when the agreement goes through, India is expected to generate an additional 25,000 MW of nuclear power by 2020, bringing total estimated nuclear power generation to 45,000 MW.[20]
India has already been using imported enriched uranium and are currently under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, but it has developed various aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle to support its reactors. Development of select technologies has been strongly affected by limited imports. Use of heavy water reactors has been particularly attractive for the nation because it allows Uranium to be burnt with little to no enrichment capabilities. India has also done a great amount of work in the development of a Thorium centered fuel cycle. While Uranium deposits in the nation are limited (see next paragraph) there are much greater reserves of Thorium and it could provide hundreds of times the energy with the same mass of fuel. The fact that Thorium can theoretically be utilized in heavy water reactors has tied the development of the two. A prototype reactor that would burn Uranium-Plutonium fuel while irradiating a Thorium blanket is under construction at the Madras/Kalpakkam Atomic Power Station.
Uranium used for the weapons program has been separate from the power program, using Uranium from indigenous reserves. This domestic reserve of 80,000 to 112,000 tons of uranium (approx 1% of global uranium reserves) is large enough to supply all of India's commercial and military reactors as well as supply all the needs of India's nuclear weapons arsenal. Currently, India's nuclear power reactors consume, at most, 478 metric tonnes of uranium per year.[21] Even if India were quadruple its nuclear power output (and reactor base) to 20GW by 2020, nuclear power generation would only consume 2000 metric tonnes of uranium per annum. Based on India's known commercially viable reserves of 80,000 to 112,000 tons of uranium, this represents a 40 to 50 years uranium supply for India's nuclear power reactors (note with reprocessing and breeder reactor technology, this supply could be stretched out many times over). Furthermore, the uranium requirements of India's Nuclear Arsenal are only a fifteenth (1/15) of that required for power generation (approx. 32 tonnes), meaning that India's domestic fissile material supply is more than enough to meet all needs for it strategic nuclear arsenal. Therefore, India has sufficient uranium resources to meet its strategic and power requirements for the foreseeable future.[21]
[edit] Nuclear power plants
Currently, seventeen nuclear power reactors produce 4,120.00 MW (2.9% of total installed base).
| Power station | Operator | State | Type | Units | Total capacity (MW) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kaiga | NPCIL | Karnataka | PHWR | 220 x 3 | 660 |
| Kakrapar | NPCIL | Gujarat | PHWR | 220 x 2 | 440 |
| Kalpakkam | NPCIL | Tamil Nadu | PHWR | 220 x 2 | 440 |
| Narora | NPCIL | Uttar Pradesh | PHWR | 220 x 2 | 440 |
| Rawatbhata | NPCIL | Rajasthan | PHWR | 100 x 1, 200 x 1, 220 x 2 | 740 |
| Tarapur | NPCIL | Maharastra | BWR (PHWR) | 160 x 2, 540 x 2 | 1400 |
| Total | 17 | 4120 |
The projects under construction are:
| Power station | Operator | State | Type | Units | Total capacity (MW) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kaiga | NPCIL | Karnataka | PHWR | 220 x 1 | 220 |
| Rawatbhata | NPCIL | Rajasthan | PHWR | 220 x 2 | 440 |
| Kudankulam | NPCIL | Tamil Nadu | VVER-1000 | 1000 x 2 | 2000 |
| Kalpakkam | NPCIL | Tamil Nadu | PFBR | 500 x 1 | 500 |
| Total | 6 | 3160 |
The planned projects are:
| Power station | Operator | State | Type | Units | Total capacity (MW) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kakrapar | NPCIL | Gujarat | PHWR | 640 x 2 | 1280 |
| Rawatbhata | NPCIL | Rajasthan | PHWR | 640 x 2 | 1280 |
| Kudankulam | NPCIL | Tamil Nadu | VVER-1200 | 1200 x 2 | 2400 |
| Jaitapur | NPCIL | Maharastra | EPR | 1600 x 4 | 6400 |
| Kaiga | NPCIL | Karnataka | PWR | 1000 x 1, 1500 x 1 | 2500 |
| Bhavini | PFBR | 470 x 4 | 1880 | ||
| NPCIL | AHWR | 300 | 300 | ||
| NTPC | PWR | 1000 x 2 | 2000 | ||
| NPCIL | PHWR | 640 x 4 | 2560 | ||
| Total | 10 | 20600 |
The following projects are firmly proposed.
| Power station | Operator | State | Type | Units | Total capacity (MW) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kudankulam | NPCIL | Tamil Nadu | VVER-1200 | 1200 x 2 | 2400 |
| Jaitpur | NPCIL | Maharastra | EPR | 1600 x 2 | 3200 |
| Pati Sonapur | Orissa | PWR | 6000 | ||
| Kumaharia | Haryana | PWR | 2800 | ||
| Saurashtra | Gujarat | PWR | |||
| Pulivendula | NPCIL 51%, AP Genco 49% | Andhra Pradesh | PWR | 2000 x 1 | 2000 |
| Kovvada | Andhra Pradesh | PWR | |||
| Haripur | West Bengal | PWR | |||
| Total | 15 |
The following projects are proposed and to be confirmed soon.
| Power station | Operator | State | Type | Units | Total capacity (MW) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kudankulam | NPCIL | Tamil Nadu | VVER-1200 | 1200 x 2 | 2400 |
| Total | 2 | 2400 |
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- ^ http://cea.nic.in/power_sec_reports/Executive_Summary/2008_12/27-33.pdf
- ^ http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSDEL16711520080818
- ^ http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=65381
- ^ http://www.livemint.com/2008/06/30222448/Uranium-shortage-holding-back.html
- ^ http://powermin.gov.in/JSP_SERVLETS/internal.jsp#
- ^ http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?id=321896
- ^ http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/jan/25france.htm
- ^ http://www.livemint.com/2008/10/09005930/Bush-signs-IndiaUS-nuclear-de.html?d=1
- ^ http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Business/Kazakh_oil_deals_hang_in_balance/articleshow/4019306.cms
- ^ http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20090080481&ch=1/18/2009%203:57:00%20PM
- ^ http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite.nsf/0/3AA1B3B19AE0CD276525754500564CCB?OpenDocument
- ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7883223.stm
- ^ NTPC, Nuclear Power to Spend $3 Billion on India Atomic Plants
- ^ http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/slowdown-not-to-affect-indias-nuclear-plans/19/57/53400/on
- ^ Nuclear power generation to touch 6,000 Mw by next year
- ^ http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSL360076520090203
- ^ (http://www.npcil.nic.in/PlantsInOperation.asp
- ^ India's fast breeder reactor nears second milestone
- ^ http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite.nsf/0/E696AFE1CBD8BA4C652574A600103BE1?OpenDocument
- ^ http://www.livemint.com/2008/07/10012202/At-G8-Singh-Bush-reaffirm-c.html
- ^ a b http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/atomsforwarfinal4.pdf
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Indian nuclear workers 'deliberately poisoned'AFP - 1 hour ago BANGALORE, India — Workers at a nuclear power plant in southern India were treated for poisoning after drinking water was deliberately spiked with radiation ... Nuclear plant radiation leak leaves 55 employees sick Hindustan Times Radiation contamination of water cooler act of mischief: NPCIL Daily News & Analysis L&T ties up with NPCIL to make forgings for n-plantsMoneycontrol.com - 7 hours ago The present generation nuclear power plants require nearly 200 forgings of various sizes, tonnage and specifications. Reactor vessel components, turbine ... NPCIL, Nalco ink MoU to set up N-power plants in India Business Standard NPCIL, L&T nuke forgings JV to take off Economic Times Will Nuclear Power Blow Up Obama's Climate Goals for Copenhagen? truthout - - 1 hour ago Indeed, it seems that a nuclear power plant is the ultimate toxic asset. As Nuclear Power Daily reported: If Congress and the states do not follow the lead ... An 'old boys club' headed by an old lady Trinidad & Tobago Express Countdown to Copenhagen Special Broadcasting Service IOC signs agreement to set up a nuclear power plantTimes of India - Nov 24, 2009 NEW DELHI: IndianOil Corporation has signed an MoU with Nuclear Power Corporation of India for setting up a nuclear power plant of at least 1000 mw, ... Indian Oil signs pact with NPCIL for 1000 MW power plant Press Trust of India IOC edges higher on nuke plans India Infoline.com Tribe protests power plant's expansionPost-Bulletin - - Nov 28, 2009 WELCH -- After sitting in the shadow of the Prairie Island Nuclear Power Plant for more than 30 years, the Prairie Island Indian Community is ... Native Americans protest nuclear storage River Towns Native Americans to protest Prairie Island plan to expand waste storage Pierce County Herald A deal gone sourDaily News & Analysis - - Nov 26, 2009 Two nuclear-power plants currently under construction in Finland and France are billions of dollars over budget and years behind schedule. ... Video: PM-Obama: The next step  NDTV.com 'Pending issues in N-deal to be sorted out soon' Deccan Herald Between friends Indian Express Indian PM Visits US: Then and NowINDOlink - - Nov 27, 2009 Two potential sites for the building of nuclear power plants have already been demarcated for American companies. India plans on modernizing its military by ... Canada warming up to India United Press International, Asia Obama and India The Durango Herald Canada, India reach nuclear deal Globe and Mail India votes against Iran at IAEATimes of India - - Nov 27, 2009 NEW DELHI: India stuck to its opposition of Iran's nuclear weapons by voting for a resolution in the IAEA on Friday rapping Tehran for building a secret ... India votes against Iran's nuclear plan Deccan Herald India votes against Iran on IAEA resolution Chandigarh Tribune India puts nuclear plants on alert-reportReuters - - Nov 16, 2009 NEW DELHI, Nov 16 (Reuters) - India has put its nuclear power plants on alert and tightened security after intelligence about possible attacks, ... Nuclear installations absolutely safe: Minister Express Buzz Nuke sites put on high alert Deccan Herald Kakodkar confident of meeting 2020 target of nuclear power generationHindu - - Nov 16, 2009 On land acquisition for nuclear power plants, he said there were difficulties in some places, but they were solved. "The fact is that rehabilitation has to ... No nuclear power plant at Haripur as locals oppose Economic Times 'No nuclear plant at Haripur if locals oppose' Express Buzz AEC chief Kakodkar downplays terror threat Little About (blog) |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next |
Indian PM makes landmark US visit - 23 Nov 09
AlJazeeraEnglish
November 22, 2009
India's Prime Minister has asked the US to extend it's power in Pakistan to reduce the influence of the Taliban in the country. In unusually frank remarks, Manmohan Singh questioned whether Asif ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MModwMvzcUk
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MModwMvzcUk&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MModwMvzcUk&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>
"Increased collaboration with India's civilian nuclear energy market will allow Canadian companies to benefit from greater access to one of the world's largest and fastest expanding economies," Mr Harper said on Saturday at a meeting with India's Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, following the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Trinidad and Tobago.
more by Stephen Harper - 1 hour ago - Sydney Morning Herald
Nuclear installations safe: Manmohan
Sandeep Dikshit
We have no reservations in negotiating a civilian nuclear deal with India, says Harper
— Photo: Sandeep Saxena
TALK ON TERROR: Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at a joint press conference in New Delhi on Tuesday.
NEW DELHI: A day after nuclear installations were put on high alert following inputs that terrorists might target them, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh allayed fears about their safety.
"We will do everything in our power to ensure the safety and security of nuclear installations," Dr. Singh said on Tuesday in response to a question on the threat to nuclear plants and India's quest to step up the civil nuclear energy component in its energy mix.
At a joint press conference with Dr. Singh here, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper described India as a safe and reliable country and Canada had no reservations in negotiating a civilian nuclear deal with it.
Combating terror
Both leaders revealed that they had discussed the case of Canadian born Lashkar-e-Taiba operative Tahawwur Rana and resolved to step up exchange of information on terrorism. While declining comment on the case, as investigations were under way, Dr. Singh said he and Mr. Harper had useful discussion on expanding the area of cooperation in combating international terror.
"We work closely with the U.S. [which has Rana and his associates in custody] and have resolved to work closely with India on cooperation and exchange of information in this area," added Mr. Harper.
In a joint statement at the end of delegation-level talks, Mr. Harper reiterated Canada's commitment to be India's ally in tackling global terrorism. Both Prime Ministers also called for an early conclusion of the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism within the United Nations framework.
Although an agreement on civil nuclear energy could not be finalised despite three previous rounds of discussions, India and Canada signed pacts that would advance bilateral trade and sourcing of raw materials for conventional as well as non-conventional energy.
Energy research
With the second largest oil reserves after Saudi Arabia and proven expertise in advanced mining and oil extraction technologies, the memorandum of understanding on energy aims to enhance cooperation in energy research and development as well as in sustainable exploration and production, mining and drilling. Canada is one of the biggest suppliers of uranium and also has substantial reserves of iron ore, nickel, zinc and diamond.
With the U.S., Canada's main market, still facing recession, the formation of a Joint Study Group (JSG) to examine the feasibility of a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement would be the first step in improving the business climate in both countries as well as deepening trade and investment flows. The JSG would identify trade barriers and suggest streamlining of regulations, noted Mr. Harper.
He met top Indian corporate leaders in Mumbai on Monday to encourage them to step up investments in his country.
Mr. Harper leaves for Amritsar on Wednesday to pay obeisance at the Golden Temple.
Dr. Singh and Mr. Harper have met several times in the past, including at CHOGM in Kampala in 2007 and the G-8 summit in Hokkaido last year.
There are over 10 lakh people of Indian origin in Canada, and Punjabi is the fourth largest spoken language. The Indian community is politically active, with 12 MPs in the House of Commons and one in the Senate.
Canada, a member of the G-8, will host the next G-20 summit.
http://www.hindu.com/2009/11/18/stories/2009111859661000.htm
NUCLEAR EMERGENCIES – HOW TO RESPOND
Nuclear facilities in India adopt internationally accepted guidelines for ensuring their safe operations and safety to the public and the environment. An independent regulatory authority oversees their safe operations. While the limits for radiation release / exposure have been set at a fraction of what can cause any significant harm, emergency procedures get implemented even when these very low limits are exceeded. As a result, it is extremely unlikely that the public near a nuclear facility will be exposed to any radiation beyond the permissible limits. However, to reassure the public, contingency plans are put in place even to handle such unlikely scenarios.
Keeping these facts in mind, if you still feel concerned on hearing any news or rumour about an incident at a nearby nuclear facility, follow these simple guidelines. These guidelines could also be followed in the event of any other nuclear emergency in your area, which does not even involve any nuclear facility.
DO THE FOLLOWING
1. Go indoors. Stay inside.
2. Switch on Radio / TV and look out for public announcements from your local authority.
3. Close doors / windows.
4. Cover all food, water and consume only such covered items.
5. If in the open, cover your face and body with a wet handkerchief, towel, dhoti or saree. Return home, change / remove clothes. Have a complete wash and use fresh clothing.
6. Extend full cooperation to local authorities and obey their instructions completely – be it for taking medication, evacuation etc.
DO NOT DO THE FOLLOWING
1. Do not panic.
2. Do not believe in rumours passed on by word of mouth from one person to another.
3. Do not stay outside / or go outside.
4. As far as possible, AVOID –water from open wells / ponds, exposed crops and vegetables, food, water or milk from outside.
5. Do not disobey any instruction of the District or Civil Defence Authorities who would be doing their best to ensure the safety of yourself, your family and your property.
http://www.dae.gov.in/cmgweb.htm#Respond
Chernobyl disaster
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Chornobyl disaster was a nuclear reactor accident that occurred on 26 April 1986 at the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine (then part of the Soviet Union). It is considered to be the worst nuclear power plant disaster in history and the only level 7 event on the International Nuclear Event Scale. It resulted in a severe release of radioactivity following a massive power excursion that destroyed the reactor. Most deaths from the accident were caused by radiation poisoning.
On 26 April 1986 at 01:23 a.m. (UTC+3) reactor number four at the Chornobyl plant, near Prypiat in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, exploded. Further explosions and the resulting fire sent a plume of highly radioactive fallout into the atmosphere and over an extensive geographical area. Four hundred times more fallout was released than had been by the atomic bombing of Hiroshima.[2]
The plume drifted over large parts of the western Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, and Northern Europe, with some nuclear rain falling as far away as Ireland. Large areas in Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia were badly contaminated, resulting in the evacuation and resettlement of over 336,000 people. According to official post-Soviet data,[3] about 60% of the radioactive fallout landed in Belarus.
The accident raised concerns about the safety of the Soviet nuclear power industry as well as nuclear power in general, slowing its expansion for a number of years while forcing the Soviet government to become less secretive.[4]
The countries of Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus have been burdened with the continuing and substantial decontamination and health care costs of the Chernobyl accident. It is difficult to accurately quantify the number of deaths caused by the events at Chornobyl, as over time it becomes harder to determine whether a death has been caused by exposure to radiation.
The 2005 report prepared by the Chornobyl Forum, led by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and World Health Organization (WHO), attributed 56 direct deaths (47 accident workers, and nine children with thyroid cancer), and estimated that there may be 4,000 extra cancer deaths among the approximately 600,000 most highly exposed people.[1] Although the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone and certain limited areas remain off limits, the majority of affected areas are now considered safe for settlement and economic activity.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster
28/11/2009
India can't quiz Headley, Rana due to legal issues in US: Jones
Washington: The US, which foiled a major terror plot by LeT to target India, has said it would be forthcoming with details of the case but cited legal limitations in allowing Indian investigators to quiz the two arrested operatives David Coleman Headley and Tahawwur Rana.
US National Security Adviser James Jones said President Barack Obama has shown personal interest in the Headley-Rana case and the matter was discussed during his meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Tuesday last.
"It is something that the President and the Prime Minister discussed and both of them were very satisfied with the outcome of those discussions," Jones told in an interview in Washington when asked about the terror plot foiled by FBI last month by arresting Headley, a Pakistani-origin American national, and Rana, a Pakistan-born Canadian citizen.
He said Obama has given instructions to US authorities to share the information with India regarding Headley-Rana case, despite the limitation posed by the country's legal system.
"At the President's direction we have been very forthcoming with our Indian counterparts on sharing whatever information we have which might be of some assistance to (India)," Jones said, adding "as a result of the President's guidance, we are doing as much as we can legally, without jeopardising the process of the case."
He, however, said the US was unable to allow Indian investigators access to the arrested LeT operatives because certain aspects of the legal system here protect the rights of the accused.
Source: PTI
The Nuclear Power Corporation of India, which operates the country's civil nuclear facilities, said in a statement that preliminary enquiries revealed no radioactive leak or security breach.
"It is possibly an act of mischief," the statement said.
Hiroshima Proved it. Then Nagasaki. Followed by numerous Nuclear Disaster incidents worldwide including CHERNOBYL. But Nuclear Super Power hindu Sensex Rashtra, Controled by US zionist Corporate Economy, FIIs, MNCs and India Incs happen to be very casual as far as Industrial Disaster Management is Concerned and the Ruling Hegemony is quite habitual to bail Out Union Carbides and further invtes DOWS! With Strategic reallaiance in US Israel lead, Indo US Nuclear deal is auto Operationalised amidst much Hyped Parlaimentary Soap Opera and with Manipulated Mandate. Biliteral Nuclear deals with developed world is an infinite process so that Nuclear Armament may open galaxy Weapon Markets and Swiss bank accounts!The FBI's proactive stance on the Headley-Rana probe is an extension of the new counter-terrorism framework pact signed during Manmohan Singh's visit to Washington.
Now the security relationship between the two countries will be without reservations, official sources said here. If any side gets sensitive information having a bearing on the other, it will quickly pass on the information.
The Masses, the best NUCLEAR Fuel!About 55 employees of the Kaiga Nuclear Power Plant in Uttara Kannada district were exposed to minor nuclear radiation after drinking contaminated water in the plant.Routine urine tests of maintenance unit employees showed that the tritium level was higher than the normal level. The workers were immediately hospitalised and treated. They have now been discharged.Ironically, Chief of Army Staff General Deepak Kapoor on Sunday said that Pakistan should have total control over its nuclear weapons and is important to ensure that the weapons do not fall in wrong hands.Addressing the media on the sidelines of the 117th Passing Out parade of National Defence Academy (NDA) in Pune, General Kapoor said that the Pakistan Prime Minister Yusouf Raza Gilani, who has been reportedly handed over the nuclear button by the National Command Authority in Pakistan, should have total control over the weapons.
France has become the second country after Russia to fully opertionalise the inter-country nuclear agreement with India.The French National Assembly adopted a law authorising ratification of the Cooperation Agreement between India and France on the Development of Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy signed in Paris on September 30 last year. The Senate approved the same law on October 15 this year.
Workers at a nuclear plant in India took ill after radioactive heavy water contaminated their drinking water and the state-run Nuclear Power Corp. suspects "mischief" may have been the cause.This happened despite the fact that Nuclear power facilities in India have been put on high alert here after security forces determined that terrorists may target one of them.Intelligence agencies beefed up security after analysing new information, some of which may have come from Tahawwur Rana, a Pakistani-born Canadian citizen who is in FBI custody in Chicago. any Terror Break Through in any Nuclear Plan make convert the Masses literally Nuclear Fuel.
An unspecified number of workers at the Kaiga plant, in southern Karnataka state, were advised to visit doctors for "routine medical consultation" and are back on normal work schedules, the company said in a statement on its Web site late yesterday. At least 45 workers were hospitalized on Nov. 25 after they received higher levels of radiation than permissible, the Times of India newspaper reported, without citing anyone.
No worker has been hospitalized, according to an e-mailed statement today from Shreyans Kumar Jain, chairman of the company. An initial probe didn't reveal any violation of operating procedures or "radioactivity releases" or security breach, according to the statement.
The water cooler was "isolated and put out of use," according to the company's statement on its Web site. The incident didn't affect public safety, health or the environment and the cause of the contamination is being investigated, the compay said.
India and the US will conclude a crucial pact on reprocessing spent fuel in a week or so, with negotiators trying to sort out the right language to accommodate each other's concerns, India's National Security Adviser MK Narayanan said in Port of Spain.
Looking beyond differences in approach, India and the US on Tuesday agreed to partner each other in global non-proliferation efforts which will be in focus when Prime Minister Manhmohan Singh goes to Washington for a nuclear security summit next year.
After his wide-ranging talks with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, US President Barack Obama on Tuesday welcomed India's support for his non-proliferation and disarmament agenda and said he looked forward to New Delhi's participation in the nuclear security summit next year.
Meanwhile, Announcing that they had reaffirmed the global strategic partnership between India and the United States, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and U.S. President Barack Obama said that they were launching a new phase in this partnership. In their joint statement which reflected the scope of their discussions, the two leaders unveiled new initiatives to intensify cooperation on counter-terrorism, climate change, agriculture and education.Primeminister visted United states of America with a Sopping List for US Weapon Market and the Socialites as well as Nuclear Agents were seen in the White House banquet!
Meanwhile, Indian officials are attaching considerable significance to Mr. Obama's acknowledgment that India is a nuclear power, in his remarks at the arrival ceremony at the White House on Tuesday when he welcomed Dr. Singh. "As nuclear powers, we can be full partners in preventing the spread of the world's most deadly weapons…," he said.
This acknowledgment of India's nuclear status has made it easier for India to agree to participate in the April 2010 Nuclear Security Summit proposed by Mr. Obama and also cooperate with the United States in working towards a multilateral non-discriminatory and internationally verifiable Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty.
"I welcomed prime minister's support for the non-proliferation agenda that I laid out in Prague," Obama said while assuring India about his commitment for an early and full implementation of the path-breaking nuclear deal.
"I look forward to India's participation in our nuclear security summit next year, as well as India's participation as a full partner in our shared vision of a world without nuclear weapons," he said.
The nuclear security summit, planned for April in Washington, will focus on securing nuclear materials and combating atomic smuggling.
"India welcomes the renewed international interest in nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. We have been a consistent advocate of a world free of nuclear weapons," Manmohan Singh.
We will work with the US and other countries for the success of the Nuclear Security Summit which President Obama is hosting next year," Manmohan Singh said.
The Obama administration has an activist agenda on non-proliferation and has prioritised an early ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).
India sharply differs with the US on this issue and has made it clear that it will not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and CTBT as it sees them as discriminatory treaties that divide the world into the nuclear haves and have-nots.
A Memorandum of Understanding was signed on Tuesday between the two countries to "enhance cooperation on energy security, energy efficiency, clean energy and climate change." This MOU, signed by External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, is to "bring together joint ideas on energy efficiency, renewable energy and green technologies to stimulate the India-U.S. Energy Dialogue."
Another MOU was signed to intensify cooperation in agriculture and food security, calling for an expansion of the current partnership. Under the umbrella of a new framework called the "Obama-Singh 21st Century Knowledge Initiative," the two sides have promised to increase university linkages and junior faculty development exchanges between India and the U.S. The funding for this initiative is to be from both countries.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said on Wednesday that problems with the United States on the civil nuclear deal were "minor" and could be resolved in a couple of weeks.
"We have had a very good discussion at the highest levels. I have been assured by the U.S. leadership that the U.S. remains committed to the early implementation of the civil nuclear agreement.
"There are minor problems with regard to the reprocessing [of the spent] fuel under the 123 agreement. I think there are no insurmountable problems. I am confident that in the next couple of weeks we can sort out issues," Dr. Singh told a press conference, a day before he wraps up his visit.
Maintaining that there was no release of radioactivity in and outside the Kaiga Atomic Power Plant, the Nuclear Power Corporation of India today said it is only a drinking water cooler that was contaminated, which is behind its workers suffering minor radiation exposure.
"Preliminary inquiry does not reveal any violation of operating procedures or radioactivity releases or security breach. It is possibly an act of mischief. The related agencies are investigating," NPCIL Chairman and Managing Director S K Jain said in a statement here.
We have arrived at the final stage. It's all a matter of legalese now," Narayanan said Saturday when asked why the reprocessing pact could not be signed during the four-day visit of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Washington that ended on Thursday.
"It will take a week or a little more to wrap it up," Narayanan told Indian reporters at Port-of-Spain, where Manmohan Singh attended the Commonwealth summit after his Washington visit, while adding that the issue figured in discussions between Manmohan Singh and US President Barack Obama.
A day after the talks, Manmohan Singh said that the reprocessing deal will be wrapped up in two weeks.
Informed sources said that the gap between the two sides has narrowed down to just one issue of suspension of the right to reprocess in case India conducts a nuclear test or indulge in activities that may jeopardise the nuclear deal.
There were three issues that were holding up the reprocessing pact. Out of these, two issues have been resolved. The Americans have accepted India's proposal for multiple dedicated national facilities for reprocessing spent fuel, sources said.
The second issue related to security of reprocessing facilities. The issue was resolved after India agreed to security levels followed by nuclear powers like the US.
The only issue waiting to be resolved is that of the suspension of the supply of reprocessing technologies in the event of India conducting a nuclear test.
Indian officials have made it clear to their American interlocutors that India was not ready to move away from what is outlined in the 123 civil nuclear cooperation agreement.
After labyrinthine negotiations, the US had agreed to India's right to reprocess spent fuel. The conclusion of the reprocessing pact will effectively conclude the landmark nuclear deal that was inked by India and the US last year.
A team of senior nuclear officials led by RB Grover, head (technical) in the department of atomic energy, held a fourth round of talks with an American team headed by Richard Stratford, the US pointsperson for reprocessing negotiations, on the eve of Manmohan Singh's talks with Obama in Washington.
Under the 123 bilateral civil nuclear cooperation agreement inked by India and the US last year, the two sides had agreed to conclude an agreement for the finalisation of arrangements and procedures for India to reprocess spent fuel under a dedicated national facility under international safeguards.
The conclusion of the reprocessing pact, a key US commitment under the 123 agreement, will finally set anxieties in India at rest about the commitment of the Obama administration to the nuclear deal, which formed the showpiece of the India-US engagement during the Bush administration.
With the reprocessing deal out of the way, the only step left to operationalise the nuclear deal will be the approval of a civil liability legislation by India that seeks to limit damages to American nuclear companies operating in India from compensation claims in case of nuclear accidents.
The Cabinet has cleared the civil liability legislation. Manmohan Singh said on Wednesday that the Parliament will take up the legislation in its ongoing session.
About 50 employees working in Kaiga Atomic Power Plant in Karwar district in North Karnataka suffered minor nuclear radiation exposure after drinking contaminated water from the water cooler in the premises of the plant.
Jain said all units of the plant are functioning normally and none of its workers has been admitted to hospital.
however, Workers at a nuclear power plant in southern India were treated for poisoning after drinking water was deliberately spiked with radiation, senior government officials said Sunday.
Routine tests showed 55 employees from the plant in Kaiga in the state of Karnataka had increased levels of the radioactive element tritium, which is used in nuclear reactors.
B. Bhattacharjee, a member of the National Disaster Management Authority, said someone had inserted contaminated water into a water cooler, according to the Press Trust of India.
The employees had not suffered any ill effects and had returned to work, plant officials told AFP.
Atomic Energy Commission chairman Anil Kakodkar, speaking on the Headlines Today television network, blamed the sabotage on "an insider who has played mischief".
Anil Kakodkar, chairman of the Atomic Power Commission told television channels the incident and contents of the water in the water cooler are being investigated.
Tritium, also known as Hydrogen-3, is used in research, fusion reactors and neutron generators.
Scientists carried out immediate checks for radioactivity at the plant site but no leakage was detected, sources said.
KAPS-I has been shut down since October 20 for annual maintenance.
Exposure to such radiation increases the risk of cancer among other side effects.
FBI team coming to Delhi to reveal Headley links! We depend so much on CIA, FBI, M18, Mossad and even on ISI, the most despised one!A high-level FBI team will be coming to Delhi within a week with new information to unravel the terror plot hatched by David Coleman Headley and Tahawuur Rana and their links to the Mumbai carnage, National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan said far away in Port of spain under Queen`s Umbrella reminiscent of Colonial Rule in the Us Peripherry.On the eve of Manmohan Singh's visit to the US a week ago, the US had disclosed to India that their investigation had revealed the link of the terror plot hatched by Headly and Rana to elements in Pakistan's spy agency ISI. In a week's time, the US is likely to give India vital clues about a Pakistani connected to the Mumbai carnage, official sources
The CIA chief Leon Panetta disclosed the links of Headley-Rana to elements in the ISI when he met Narayanan in New Delhi Saturday.
The decision of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to come to India followed intensive discussions between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and US President Barack Obama in Washington Tuesday.
"We are seized of the matter. We are ready to do everything to unravel the conspiracy," Narayanan quoted Obama as telling Manmohan Singh during their talks in which issues relating to Pakistan and the Mumbai carnage figured prominently.
In the course of the discussions, the prime minister had expressed concerns about new hubs of terror coming up, specially in the neighbourhood, Narayanan said.
Radiation leak in Kaiga could be sabotage, probe ordered!Meanwhile,India, Canada agree on historic n-deal.
The radiation leakage in the state-run Kaiga atomic power plant in Karnataka could be an act of sabotage, a top official said Sunday. A probe has been ordered into the incident by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL).
Referring to the US' promise of providing vital clues about a prominent Pakistani linked with the Mumbai carnage, Narayanan said he and Home Minister P. Chidambaram will speak to the FBI director on the issue.
An estimated 166 people were killed and 244 injured when 10 Pakistani terrorists sneaked into Mumbai and unleashed mayhem in the city Nov 26-28 last year.
"Preliminary enquiry does not reveal any violation of operating procedures or radioactivity releases or security breach. It is possibly an act of mischief," NPCIL Chairman and Managing Director S.K. Jain said in a statement.He said radioactive contamination of the water cooler located outside the reactor building is "a matter of concern and the cause (of the leakage) is being investigated".
Since the incident was detected five days ago, the water cooler - which was identified as the source of radiation leakage - has been isolated and put out of service, Jain said.
In New Delhi, Minister of Science & Technology Prithviraj Chavan confirmed the "sabotage" at the nuclear plant and said a high-level probe has been ordered.
India and Canada have agreed on a civil nuclear deal that will enable New Delhi to access Canadian nuclear technology and uranium after a gap of 34 years. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said the development "augurs extremely well" for the ties between the nations.
The deal is likely to be signed when Manmohan Singh goes to Canada to attend the G20 summit in June next year. The breakthrough was announced here Saturday after Manmohan Singh held talks with his Canadian counterpart Stephen Harper on the sidelines of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) at this Trinidad and Tobago capital.
"We have now got an agreement which means this is a tremendous opportunity for both countries," Harper said here while underlining that it was "a tremendous step forward" in bilateral relations.
"Canada is a supplier, obviously an integrated supplier in the nuclear energy field, and India is an expanding economy that has great energy needs," Harper said.
The nuclear agreement promises to transform bilateral ties that turned frosty ever since Ottawa cut off atomic trade after New Delhi's 1974 nuclear test and accused the latter of misappropriating Canadian reactor designs in the test.
Harper's visit to India earlier this month was to iron out the official differences in the conclusion of the deal that allows India access to nuclear material and technology without being a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT).
Harper, however, added that it will take "a little time to complete the normal legal text and the ratification process".
If this deal is inked, Canada will become the seventh country with which India has struck civil nuclear pacts since the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) allowed India to resume global nuclear trade in September 2008.
India has already signed bilateral civil nuclear agreements with the US, France, Russia, Kazakhstan, Namibia and Mongolia.
Lauding Harper for giving a political push to the negotiations, Manmohan Singh said: "This is a tribute to the prime minister's great leadership and the way the civil service functions in Canada."
"It augurs extremely well for the development of our relations," he added.
The Conservative government of Harper has, however, not released the text of the India-Canada deal, saying it would only be released when implementing legislation is tabled in parliament. The minority government will require the support of parliament members from one opposition party in order to pass the agreement.
The two sides were close to a civil nuclear deal when Harper came to New Delhi last week, but could not conclude the pact as there were lingering differences over the nature of safeguards.
"Prime Minister Harper proved to be absolutely true to his words when he told me he will have this matter looked into and that this exercise could be completed in a short period of eight to ten days," Manmohan Singh said.
The deal will remove the last irritant in the way of stronger political, economic and strategic ties between the two countries. The two countries have declared their resolve to triple bilateral trade from around $5 billion to $15 billion in the next five years.
"It could be the handiwork of a disgruntled employee and we are awaiting the results of the inquiry," Chavan told mediapersons.
Jain pointed out that Unit 1 of Kaiga has been shut down for annual maintenance since Oct 20. Meanwhile Units 2 and 3 continue to be operational even as Unit 4 is under construction.
"All the systems of all the units are healthy and there is no release of radioactivity to the environment within the plant site and outside," he pointed out.
Reactions posted on MSN.com expresses the True Public sentiment! Just See:
li chu
#1
29 November 2009 06:40:27
It is Plain Stupidity to think that the Common Public is so naive to accept the Authorities terming this horrendous incident as a mischief by some disgruntled employee. IT NOTHING BUT A PLAIN ACT OF TERRORISM simply aimed at creating terror & no doubts, its Author is an external Sinister Agency.Devil! We are extremely lucky to have got away so lightly.
"Having the nuclear button in hand is not an issue. Most important thing is that whatever nuclear weapons they have, they should have complete control over them. We are a bit apprehensive that these weapons do not fall into wrong hands," General Kapoor said.
He also said that attempts of infiltration along the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir are likely to increase to disrupt the peace in the State.
"Infiltration in India increased in the last two to three months, as Kashmir's condition has become quite stable and peaceful in the past one to two years. Elections were conducted peacefully and a large number of people participated in it. Some people didn't like it, so before the winters, more number of infiltrators will try to enter the Indian borders, so that they can resume their terror activities," General Kapoor added.
On the development of infrastructure by China in Tibet, he said, "It is necessary that we also develop infrastructure on our side of the border."
General Kapoor also added that India has good relations with China and the two countries would soon discuss the border disputes, if everything goes as per plan.
"There is nothing to get worried about," he said.
Natteri Adigal
#2
29 November 2009 05:52:48
No leak at all? Mischief? Malevolent act? Sabotage? Thus spake plant director, AEC Chief and S&T minister. Now who is going to probe? To prevent a mini-Hiroshima from happening, the probe has to be by a credible authority outside the corrupt and secretive nuke officialdom. Letting AERB conduct an enquiry is a cruel joke! An experts committee will be formed. It will decide the incident as not of SERIOUS safety concern. The pliable watchdog did exactly that when the reactor was under construction. There were serious allegations of lapses in fabricating coolant channel components. It was well known that the compromises will cause grave radiation leaks. Yet NPC engineers hushed up the allegation to bail out favoured contractors. AERB connived in the scandal and appointed an experts committee that contained the very same engineers. The committee opined that the issue was "not of SERIOUS safety concern" (as if there could be non-serious compromises about integrity of materials!) The vigilance department and even the Central Vigilance Commission chose to close the files and shield top guns responsible for the scandal.
SULEIMAN OF INDIA
#3
29 November 2009 04:41:38
This is wake-up call for enhanced training mechanisms to be implemented. Also, this only exposes the casual approach of Government towards safety standards even at such high-risk and high-sensitive areas. Furthermore, everyone needs to re-think if recruiting "SONS-OF-SOIL" with no skills, would ever move us forward, leave alone being a super-power.
DSRAOVISAKHAPATNAM
#5
29 November 2009 02:41:03
Nuclear Plants require highly dedicated staff. "A" grade in-house training. The level of alertness should be of the highest order. Reservations have no place to promote unskilled and unpatriotic persons to find key positions in the unit. Contracts should be awarded to only organizations of proven international repute. Indians are generally lax in keeping up high standards of safety. Think of Chernobyl and other disasters. Spare the people of Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh and drop the proposal of setting up a nuclear power plant there. Mass migrations will be the end result.
swarajyam
29 November 2009 02:13:29
There is always a increased amount of risk to workers in Nuclear power plants as the KAIGA example amply demonstrates. What is frightful is to read that the employees' water cooler is contaminated and they unknowingly drank from it!
The Chairman of the A E C, says :" This is a serious matter that is being investigated. I suspect foul play and someone has surely played mischief "
Is the he trying to distract the attention to "Some one" so that the public does not ask inconvenient questions like how it came out of the coolant area to the "Water cooler"
Tritium is highly toxic (may be not as Polonium) but when consumed internally can be lethal.
The following examples of varying degrees of level of radioactive leaks from low to the disastrous ones of the Chernobyl kind have not taught us any thing?
Dec.12, 1952 : Chalk River plant near Ottawa. Canada
Oct. 1957 : Britain's Sellafield nuclear complex .
Winter 1957-'58 : Kyshtym. Urals (Russia)
Jan.3, 1961: Idaho Falls.
July 4, 1961 :The Soviet Union's first nuclear-powered submarine.
Oct. 5, 1966 : Detroit, Mich.
Jan. 21, 1969 :Lucens Vad, Switzerland.
Dec. 7, 1975: Lubmin, Germany.
Mar. 28, 1979 : Three mile Island, Harrisburg, PA.
Feb. 11, 1981 : TVA's Sequoyah 1 plant, Tennessee.
Apr. 26, 1986 : The Chernobyl disaster.
Mar. 24, 1992 : Sosnovy Bor station nr. St. Petersburg.
Nov. 1992 : Forbach, France.
Nov. 1995 : Monju, Japan.
Mar. 1997: Tokaimura, Japan.
Yes. You are going to tell us that more people die of road accidents and cancers, speaking of the latter, how safe are our X-ray machines?
PLEASE for posterity's sake LET US EXPLORE RENEWABLE SOURCES OF ENERGY.
http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3457477
Posted on: Sunday, November 29, 2009
Obama's ambitious Asia strategy may be start of new doctrine
* Minority cadets needed
By Richard Halloran
In the summer of 1969, President Richard Nixon ended a journey to Asia on the island of Guam to proclaim what later would be called the Nixon or Guam Doctrine. It decreed that henceforth, Asian nations would be responsible for their own frontline defense while the U.S. would assist if requested.
Advertisement
In contrast, President Obama has reversed course in meetings in Asia with the leaders of Japan, South Korea, Indonesia and nine other Southeast Asian nations, and with the leader of India in Washington last week. The president is scheduled to see Prime Minister Kevin Rudd of Australia in the White House tomorrow. With all, the president has reaffirmed America's security commitments. In addition, he had a frosty visit with leaders of a potential adversary, China, in Beijing.
After the Nixon Doctrine had been decreed, the U.S. withdrew in defeat from Vietnam, let the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization wither, and forsook Taiwan to recognize China. Okinawa was reverted to Japan with restrictions on U.S. forces, New Zealand was booted from a treaty with the U.S. and Australia in a dispute over nuclear arms, and U.S. bases in the Philippines were abandoned after a volcanic eruption.
Moreover, the stationing of American troops in East Asia slipped from 106,000 in 1975 to 73,500 this year. Within that, U.S. forces in South Korea dropped from 40,200 to 28,500 over the past 15 years while those in Japan went down from 48,300 to 34,500; another 8,000 are scheduled to leave within five years.
Now Obama has forged an ambitious strategy intended to reverse a perceived decline in U.S. power in Asia.
In Alaska on the way to Japan, he said the U.S. would retain the ability to project military power into Asia. In a press conference with Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama of Japan, the president said: "I intend to make clear that the United States is a Pacific nation." He pledged to maintain a nuclear umbrella, called extended deterrence, over Asian allies even as he seeks to abolish nuclear weapons.
During this first venture into Asia, Obama gave a theme-setting address in Tokyo, saying, "Our commitment to Japan's security and to Asia's security is unshakable." In an unusual move, the text of that keynote speech was translated into Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and Indonesian and is carried on the White House Web site.
Similarly, the president assured President Lee Myung-bak of South Korea of the "unwavering commitment" of the U.S. to South Korea's security. South Koreans have become increasingly anxious that the U.S. is planning to reduce American forces there beyond the current 28,500.
In Singapore, the president told President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of Indonesia and his colleagues in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN: "I reaffirmed to my ASEAN friends that the United States is committed to strengthening its engagement in Southeast Asia."
India, which for many years professed non-alignment, has become more receptive to U.S. overtures in what Obama called a "new strategic dialogue." He told Prime Minister Manmohan Singh last week: "The relationship between the United States and India will be one of the defining partnerships of the 21st century."
China, whose economic progress, political antagonism and military modernization have made it a possible adversary, was wary of Obama. President Hu Jintao insisted that the U.S. accommodate China's nationalistic and territorial aspirations. Obama cautioned that "our relationship going forward will not be without disagreement or difficulty."
Assembling a partnership of Japanese, South Korean, Southeast Asian, Indian, Australian and like-minded nations will be a tall order, especially with the Obama administration bogged down in Iraq and Afghani-stan and mediating the Arab-Israeli conflict. If, however, the president goes beyond the promising rhetoric of this month, it could be a signal accomplishment.
Dare we call it the "Obama Doctrine"?
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20091129/NEWS08/911290353/Obama+s+ambitious+Asia+strategy+may+be+start+of+new+doctrine
Growing, Yes, but India Has Reasons to Worry
ONDICHERRY, India — During President Obama's recent visit to China, many in India speculated that an emerging "G2" would leave their nation out in the cold.
President Barack Obama and the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at the White House on Tuesday.
"Obama's China (credit) card casts shadow on PM's US visit," ran a headline on The Times of India's Web site shortly before India's prime minister left for America and his own meeting last week with Mr. Obama — highlighted by the president's first state dinner.
The country's prickly response points to the lingering distrust with which India, which often leaned toward Moscow during the cold war, still views the United States. It is a reminder, also, of the many sensitivities that drive Indian foreign policy — sensitivities that are not always recognized in America.
For all the talk of a new era of Indo-American collaboration, Americans tend to view India through the narrow prisms of two shared concerns — a battle against Islamic extremists, and the benefits of international trade. But India is a complicated country in a complex part of the world — buffeted by internal insurgencies, surrounded by hostile neighbors, marginalized until recently as underdeveloped.
In the last decade, four of India's neighbors (Pakistan, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka) have dealt with rebellions that, to varying degrees, have filtered into India. Since independence in 1947, India has been involved in armed conflicts in at least five nearby lands (Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, China, the Maldives); it has also become a nuclear power.
Pakistan is the most intense flashpoint, and was on many minds in a week that marked the first anniversary of attacks by Muslim extremists, traced by India to Pakistan, that left 163 people dead in Mumbai. But it is only one potential flashpoint.
Another is China, which humiliated India in a border war in 1962. Last summer, after reports surfaced in the Indian media about increased border incursions by China's army, India began moving aircraft and soldiers closer to China. In October, an editorial in The People's Daily, a Chinese Communist Party publication, accused India of "recklessness and arrogance." For Indians, the verbal and military jousting that followed has stirred deep anxiety, now heightened by suspicions that America is playing up to China. When Presidents Obama and Hu issued a joint statement that appeared to open the door to Chinese involvement in South Asia, the Indian press and political establishment responded with fury, born out of a sense of betrayal.
In adddition to its regional challenges, India is entangled in a host of complicated global negotiations — on climate change, trade, nuclear proliferation, intellectual property rights. As the country emerges onto the world stage, it has often had a hard time balancing its parochial interests with its desire to play the role of a responsible global power.
India's response to all these challenges is complicated by its own difficulty in articulating an overarching strategic doctrine.
Writing in 1992, the late American political scientist George Tanham drew attention to the lack of a broad cohesive vision. Indian foreign policy, he argued, was fragmented; he pointed, for example, to the very different threat perceptions in northern India, which tends to worry about Pakistan and China, and in the south, which is more focused on northern dominance and seaward threats.
It hasn't always been this way. Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first prime minister, envisioned his nation as a force for global peace and justice. He committed India to policies of nonproliferation and anti-imperialism, and professed nonalignment in the cold war. Arguably, India's moral high ground was always somewhat shaky; the country has rarely hesitated to use force to protect its interests. (After Indian troops marched into the then-Portuguese colony of Goa in 1961, President John Kennedy was reported to have remarked that maybe now he could be spared India's lectures about a moral foreign policy.) Nonetheless, India's expression of a moral foreign policy did provide an element of cohesiveness that has frayed in recent decades.
Today, as India tries to define its role as an emerging superpower, the search for a cohesive foreign policy that could articulate a response to the myriad challenges confronting the country continues.Pratap Bhanu Mehta, an Indian political scientist, says a big question for India is how to handle its new status, and in particular whether it wants to adhere to the notion of a moral foreign policy. "Now that we have in a sense arrived, what do we do?" he asked. "Do we participate in the standard great-power exceptionalism, or do we leverage our power to create a rule-bound system?"
Just as for any great power, that would be an easier question for India to answer were it not for problems in its own backyard. Indeed, Mr. Mehta argues that India is in a sense caught in a "defensive crouch" — tied to its neighbors, forced to react to regional security threats, and held back in its aspirations as a global superpower by the volatility of its neighborhood.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/weekinreview/29kapur-web.html
COMMENT: Nuclear stabilisation in southern Asia —Michael Krepon
Several factors could promote a more stable nuclear rivalry in southern Asia with the passage of time. For example, as nuclear arsenals grow and become more diversified, fears of surprise attack could diminish if rivals perceive that their deterrents have become more secure
With support from the National Nuclear Security Administration and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Stimson Centre seeks to analyse the sources of nuclear danger in southern Asia and to suggest ideas for remedial action that may warrant consideration.
The stability-instability paradox predicts that offsetting nuclear weapon capabilities can induce caution against crossing the nuclear threshold, while also abetting risk-taking at lower levels of violence. The security-insecurity paradox is not immutable. Indeed, the record of US-Soviet and Soviet-Chinese relations suggests that, after an initial period marked by nuclear-tinged crises, bilateral relations can become more settled. In the US-Soviet case, the process of détente was uneven, but nuclear dangers were effectively reduced through sustained dialogue that produced confidence-building measures (CBMs) and, with the passage of time, treaties governing the most powerful weapon systems in the superpowers' arsenals. These arrangements were noticeably absent in the Soviet-Chinese case. In this pairing, the nuclear-armed rivals appear to have relied primarily on tacit understandings. The absence of treaty arrangements in the Soviet-Chinese case is understandable due to the disparity in the sizes of their nuclear forces; the absence of formally agreed CBMs and nuclear risk-reduction measures (NRRMs) is harder to explain.
The India-Pakistan case may well evolve in still another way, mixing some CBMs and NRRMs with tacit understandings to stabilise bilateral nuclear relations. Formal treaties governing nuclear forces will be quite difficult to negotiate in this case not because of force imbalances — since Pakistan appears intent on competing with India — but rather because of New Delhi's need to factor in Beijing's nuclear capabilities and intentions. Bilateral treaties regulating a nuclear arms competition are difficult enough; treaties regulating a triangular nuclear dynamic are even harder.
Several factors could promote a more stable nuclear rivalry in southern Asia with the passage of time. For example, as nuclear arsenals grow and become more diversified, fears of surprise attack could diminish if rivals perceive that their deterrents have become more secure. This did not occur in the US-Soviet case because Moscow and Washington pursued prompt, counterforce targeting capabilities alongside the growth and diversification of their nuclear arsenals. Even with growing counterforce capabilities, some stabilisation could occur if particularly neuralgic issues are resolved or set aside. Thus, in the US-Soviet case, Washington and Moscow reached a modus vivendi over Berlin and Cuba. This did not, however, ameliorate their build-up of nuclear arms, which was driven by mutually reinforcing domestic politics, vested bureaucratic and institutional interests, and concerns over the national security consequences of falling behind in the strategic competition. A third stabilising factor was the negotiation and proper implementation of CBMs and NRRMs, beginning with reliable channels of communication during crises. These measures enjoyed widespread support even among deep sceptics of détente.
India and Pakistan began to negotiate and implement CBMs and NRRMs far earlier in their nuclear rivalry than did the US and the Soviet Union. Moreover, both Pakistan and India continue to assert that separate custodial arrangements for warheads and launchers retain stabilising value. (In the US, the early practice of keeping the custody of nuclear warheads separate from the custody of their launchers was quickly changed in deference to presumed military requirements.) If existing CBMs and NRRMs are properly implemented and expanded, and if great value continues to be placed on maintaining nuclear forces at low levels of readiness, important elements of a nuclear stabilisation regime can remain in place on the subcontinent.
The recurrence of crises on the subcontinent works at cross-purposes with nuclear stabilisation measures. Another key factor working to the detriment of nuclear stabilisation is the extent to which Pakistan and India supplement their counter-value targeting capabilities with counterforce capabilities against high-value military targets. The overseers of India's and Pakistan's nuclear deterrents have already decided to pursue a panoply of ballistic and cruise missiles. To what extent they intend to secure counterforce options — or the extent to which they could avoid this slippery slope, if they wished to do so — remains unclear.
Incremental additions of counterforce capabilities would be hard to resist because of the complex, triangular nature of the nuclear competition in southern Asia and because of domestic drivers. The introduction of ballistic missile defences could be expected to prod further increments of nuclear offences. Greater impetus to military programmes would also result from a downturn in Sino-Indian relations or recurring crises between India and Pakistan.
Nuclear risk reduction strategies in southern Asia are likely to remain constrained by longstanding political and structural impediments. India and China appear content to place a low priority on settling their border dispute. Bilateral talks on nuclear stability and confidence building will remain difficult to undertake as long as Beijing refuses to accord New Delhi the standing such talks merit. Bilateral nuclear risk-reduction measures are not easy; the triangular dimensions of nuclear interactions among China, India and Pakistan constitute an even more challenging geometry. In the absence of settled borders and regional discussions on nuclear stabilisation, the moderating influence of improved trade relations can become even more important.
The bottom line of this analysis leaves national leaders in a conundrum: The wild card of Islamic extremism in southern Asia increases the urgency of nuclear stabilisation measures, while making their proper implementation more challenging. —Stimson Publications
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\11\19\story_19-11-2009_pg3_3
Obama and India
President chose well for first state visit
Article Last Updated; Friday, November 27, 2009 12:00AM
It was fitting that the first state visit to be received by the Obama administration, with a formal dinner held Tuesday, would be that of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Relations between the United States and India are of critical and increasing importance to both nations.
India is the world's second most populous country, a rising economic power and a functioning and stable democracy. It is also perfectly positioned - geographically, economically and politically - to be of help with a number of issues important to the United States. While hardly identical, U.S. and Indian interests intersect in ways that, for now at least, make the two nations natural allies.
The longstanding animosity between India and Pakistan is a festering problem that from time to time threatens to erupt into full-scale war. Given that both have nuclear weapons, this has the potential for disaster.
But the tension between those two nations also means India has an even greater interest than the United States in keeping the Taliban or al-Qaida from gaining more power in Pakistan, and in working toward stability in Afghanistan. In that Pakistan's leadership apparently sees continued unrest in Afghan-istan as in its interest, India has all the more reason to back U.S. efforts to stabilize that country. India is already one of Afghanistan's biggest donors.
Plus, so long as Pakistani leaders are wary of India, they are deterred from making too many demands of the United States, such as more vehemently insisting on an end to U.S. drone strikes that have proven so effective in killing al-Qaida leaders.
India is also the only country in Asia with the political will and the economic heft to serve as something of a counterbalance to China. It is already a major U.S. trading partner - to the tune of $61 billion in 2007 - and is rapidly emerging as a global leader in technology.
And in an important subtext, the visit also marked the furtherance of a civilian nuclear agreement between India and the United States, entered into by then-President George W. Bush. That treaty ended India's nuclear isolation - a policy enacted in response to its testing of a nuclear device in 1973 - and could allow it to set up a regional center for reprocessing spent fuel from nuclear power plants. Again, the alternative would appear to be China, a country the United States considers guilty of helping to spread nuclear weapons technology.
At the televised press conference, Obama referred to the United States and India as "nuclear powers," phrasing that signaled both recognition of that reality and U.S. acceptance of it. Obama wants India's help in a nuclear security summit he reportedly wants to hold next spring in Washington.
"As nuclear powers," the president said, "we can be full partners in preventing the spread of the world's most deadly weapons, securing loose nuclear material from terrorists, in pursuing our shared vision of a world without nuclear weapons."
India is home to one of the world's greatest and most ancient civilizations, as well as the birthplace of several of humanity's most influential religions. The clear message of this meeting is that India is now also recognized as one of the world's great powers.
There is every reason to hope that common issues and values will also allow India to be this nation's great friend.
http://durangoherald.com/sections/Opinion/Editorial/2009/11/27/Obama_and_India/
Obama touts partnership with India
November 25, 2009 -- Updated 0445 GMT (1245 HKT)
Washington (CNN) -- President Obama and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed Tuesday to team up and tackle a checklist of economic, nuclear, security and environmental challenges.
Obama welcomed the Indian leader to the White House on Tuesday in what is the first state visit of his presidency.
The two men had what they called a productive sit-down meeting before briefing reporters.
"I believe that the relationship between the United States and India will be one of the defining partnerships of the 21st century" and will reflect the "strategic dialogue" between the countries, Obama said, calling India "the world's largest multiethnic democracy" with a fast-growing economy.
Video: Obama hails U.S. ties with India
Video: Obamas host first state dinner
Video: What are India's expectations?
Gallery: Obama's first state dinner
"We're the world's two largest democracies. We have a range of shared values and ideals. We're both entrepreneurial societies. We're both multiethnic societies. We are societies that believe in human rights and core freedoms that are enshrined in our founding documents," said Obama, who also stressed the dynamic role of the growing Indian-American community.
Singh's visit comes amid his country's continued tense relationship with nuclear rival Pakistan, regional concerns over the Afghan war and the burgeoning trade relationship between the U.S. and India. It also follows a year after the deadly terror attack on the Indian city of Mumbai.
Obama said he and Singh "agreed to strengthen the economic recovery and expand trade and investment" to create jobs from both nations.
"Indian investment in America is creating and sustaining jobs across the United States, and the United States is India's largest trading and investment partner," Obama said.
Obama said he reaffirmed his administration's commitment to implement a civil nuclear agreement with India, which Singh signed with former President George W. Bush. Both countries are attempting to put the finishing touches on the deal, which would provide for the development of Indian nuclear power for peaceful uses.
Obama also supported Singh's backing for nuclear nonproliferation efforts.
"I look forward to ... India's participation as a full partner in our shared vision of a world without nuclear weapons," he said.
Ahead of next month's Copenhagen climate change framework meeting, Obama said he and Singh settled on a "comprehensive" agreement that would "cover all the issues under negotiation" and would build on what the president called the "progress" of his recent trip to China.
Obama said he and the Indian prime minister have agreed to pursue new efforts, such as a clean energy initiative, more affordable energy, a green partnership to reduce poverty and an effort to phase out subsidies for fossil fuels.
"We resolved to take significant national mitigation actions that will strengthen the world's ability to combat climate change. We agreed to stand by these commitments with full transparency, through appropriate processes, as to their implementation," he said.
As for security, he and Singh decided to work closer on information-sharing to prevent the kind of militant attack that happened in Mumbai last year, and they discussed Obama's Afghan policy review, which is expected to lead to an announcement on troop levels next week.
Obama said the pair agreed to widen education exchanges in science and technology and ties between universities and colleges. He said both countries want researchers to work together to reduce hunger and fight disease.
Singh also touched on the same topics and invited Obama and his family to visit India, an invitation the U.S. leader accepted.
Noting the global economic crisis illustrates "the fact that our prosperity is interlinked," Singh reiterated Obama's remarks on tightening trade and investment ties.
"We admire the leadership that President Obama has provided to stimulate and guide the [Group of 20] process that is now fully in place," he said.
He also endorsed collaboration in education, health and agriculture.
"We will deepen our ongoing cooperation in frontier areas of science and technology, nuclear power and space," Singh said, also noting the two agreed on the early and "full implementation of our civil nuclear cooperation agreement."
As for climate change, he said he and Obama "have agreed on the need for a substantive and comprehensive outcome which would cover mitigation, adaptation, finance and technology."
Singh also brought up another issue: that the U.S.-India "strategic partnership should facilitate transfer of high technologies to India."
"The lifting of U.S. export controls on high-technology exports to India will open vast opportunities for joint research and development efforts," he said. "It will enable U.S. industry to benefit from the rapid economic and technological transformation that is now under way in our country."
On Afghanistan, Singh pointed out the importance of helping the war-wracked country emerge "as a modern state."
"The forces of terrorism in our region pose a grave threat to the entire civilized world and have to be defeated. President Obama and I have decided to strengthen our cooperation in the area of counterterrorism."
On Tuesday evening, Singh and his wife, Gursharan Kaur, will attend a state dinner in a tent on the South Lawn, with Oscar-winning singer-actress Jennifer Hudson scheduled to entertain the black-tie crowd.
Singh's visit -- his second to Washington after a meeting with Bush -- will last five days. He arrived in the United States on Sunday.
He attended a luncheon Monday hosted by the U.S. India Business Council and U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and he addressed the Council on Foreign Relations.
On Wednesday, Singh will meet with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates and later will attend a reception for the Indian community hosted by Meera Shankar, the Indian ambassador to the U.S.
Singh on Thursday will fly to Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, to attend the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting.
The 77-year-old Singh is a Cambridge- and Oxford-educated economist who was governor of the Reserve Bank of India from 1982-1985 and the nation's finance minister from 1991-1996.
A member of the Congress Party, he is serving a second five-year term as prime minister.
CNN's Harmeet Shah Singh contributed to this report.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/24/us.india.leader/
Analysis: Why India is at the top of U.S. state visit list
By Elise Labott, CNN State Department Producer
November 24, 2009 -- Updated 1645 GMT (0045 HKT)
Editor's note: Since becoming State Department producer in 2000, Elise Labott has covered four secretaries of state and reported from more than 50 countries. Before joining CNN, she covered the United Nations.
Washington (CNN) -- State visits to the White House are full of show and symbolism, and Tuesday's visit by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is no exception.
But Singh's visit, the first state visit hosted by the Obama administration, reflects India's growing political and economic importance to the United States and the deepening partnership between Washington and New Delhi.
The 2005 civil nuclear cooperation deal between the two countries symbolized a new status in U.S.-India relations. But that deal, yet to be ratified by the Indian parliament, was not in a vacuum. The Bush administration followed that up with agreements for increased cooperation on security, science and technology and education.
Singh's visit this week will build on that, with announcements expected on a range of areas from the economy and defense to climate change and energy.
India is a fellow democracy, and there is a strong Indian-American community in the U.S. So as it rises to power, India is a natural U.S. ally.
On every big global issue today -- from the economy to climate change to fighting terrorism and curbing nuclear proliferation -- Washington needs New Delhi's cooperation.
Video: Putting India center stage
Video: 'Two great republics'
Video: Singh goes to Washington
RELATED TOPICS
* Manmohan Singh
* India
* Pakistan
* Mumbai
India is one of the biggest donors in Afghanistan, with $1.2 billion in aid. Although this has been met with suspicion in Pakistan, it has helped the United States, sharing some of the burden of stabilizing Afghanistan and providing civilian support.
India is also considered a critical U.S. partner in dealing with other instability in the region, in places like Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
Even as the U.S. deepens its cooperation with China on global issues, both Singh's government and the Obama administration want to manage China's meteoric rise.
Strong U.S.-India ties help both countries ensure that the "Asian century" is not merely the "Chinese century."
India has also become a major trading partner with the U.S., with $61 billion in trade in 2007. The U.S. is India's second-largest trading partner.
And India is a major exporter of technology software and services to the U.S., and that's expected to increase as India strengthens its role as a global leader in technology.
The relationship is not without its irritants, however, the biggest one being India's nuclear neighbor, Pakistan.
India believes the U.S. has failed to curb Islamabad's backing of anti-India extremists based in Pakistan, and tensions between India and Pakistan remain high, especially with Pakistan's slow progress on the investigation into last year's Mumbai attack that killed 166 people.
Before coming to Washington, Singh said that Pakistani objectives in Afghanistan aren't necessarily those of the U.S.
Pakistan has long seen instability in Afghanistan as critical to its war strategy against India. India is also nervous about a possible integration of some Taliban into power in Afghanistan.
Climate change is another point of friction. The U.S. wants India, one of world's the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, to accept limits on its carbon emissions. India maintains it is still a developing country and wants developed nations, like the U.S., to assume the lion's share of burden in dealing with climate change.
Another potential difference looms over Iran. India has been careful not to support Iran's government, but if U.S. diplomacy with Iran fails, it remains to be seen if New Delhi will support tougher sanctions if the U.S. decides to go that route.
As India's economy grows, so will its capability to be one of the U.S.' great partners. But as its international position strengthens, New Delhi's interests may not always be aligned with Washington's.
Obama must work to convince India that the U.S. sees it as an important ally and that its rise to power is in the U.S.' strategic interest. The symbolism of giving Singh the administration's first state visit will be a good start.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/24/us.india.relations/index.html
Nuclear and Chemical Accidents
Though nuclear power is a good source of energy and is generally not a threat, there have been instances when security measures have failed. Nuclear meltdowns can cause dangerous radiation to escape into the surrounding environment.
1952
Dec. 12, Chalk River, nr. Ottawa, Canada: a partial meltdown of the reactor's uranium fuel core resulted after the accidental removal of four control rods. Although millions of gallons of radioactive water accumulated inside the reactor, there were no injuries.
1953
Love Canal, nr. Niagara Falls, N.Y.: was destroyed by waste from chemical plants. By the 1990s, the town had been cleaned up enough for families to begin moving back to the area.
1957
Oct. 7, Windscale Pile No. 1, north of Liverpool, England: fire in a graphite-cooled reactor spewed radiation over the countryside, contaminating a 200-square-mile area.
South Ural Mountains: explosion of radioactive wastes at Soviet nuclear weapons factory 12 mi from city of Kyshtym forced the evacuation of over 10,000 people from a contaminated area. No casualties were reported by Soviet officials.
1976
nr. Greifswald, East Germany: radioactive core of reactor in the Lubmin nuclear power plant nearly melted down due to the failure of safety systems during a fire.
1979
March 28, Three Mile Island, nr. Harrisburg, Pa.: one of two reactors lost its coolant, which caused overheating and partial meltdown of its uranium core. Some radioactive water and gases were released. This was the worst accident in U.S. nuclear-reactor history.
1984
Dec. 3, Bhopal, India: toxic gas, methyl isocyanate, seeped from Union Carbide insecticide plant, killing more than 2,000 and injuring about 150,000.
1986
April 26, Chernobyl, nr. Kiev, Ukraine: explosion and fire in the graphite core of one of four reactors released radioactive material that spread over part of the Soviet Union, eastern Europe, Scandinavia, and later western Europe. 31 claimed dead. Total casualties are unknown. Worst such accident to date.
1987
Sept. 18, Goiânia, Brazil: 244 people contaminated with cesium-137 from a cancer-therapy machine that had been sold as scrap. Four people died in worst radiation disaster in Western Hemisphere.
1999
Sept. 30, Tokaimura, Japan: uncontrolled chain reaction in a uranium-processing nuclear fuel plant spewed high levels of radioactive gas into the air, killing two workers and seriously injuring one other.
2004
Aug. 9, Mihama, Japan: nonradioactive steam leaked from a nuclear power plant, killing four workers and severely burning seven others.
2007
July 17, Kashiwazaki, Japan: radiation leaks, burst pipes, and fires at a major nuclear power plant followed a 6.8 magnitude earthquake near Niigata. Japanese officials, frustrated at the plant operators' delay in reporting the damage, closed the plant a week later until its safety could be confirmed. Further investigation revealed that the plant had unknowingly been built directly on top of an active seismic fault.
2008
February 7, Port Wentworth, Georgia: an explosion fueled by combustible sugar dust killed 13 people and injured several others at the Imperial Sugar plant near Savannah.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001457.html
27/11/2009
India backs IAEA Iran vote, but opposes sanctions
Port of Spain: India Friday backed the IAEA resolution against Iran for having developed a secret uranium-enrichment facility, but opposed "renewed punitive approach or sanctions" and underlined the need to "keep doors open for dialogue" with Tehran.
Justifying India's vote for the resolution, passed by a 25-3 margin at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog, external affairs ministry sources said here the adoption of the resolution "should not divert the parties from dialogue".
"This resolution can't be the basis of a renewed punitive approach to new sanctions," an official source stressed.
"In fact, the coming weeks should be used by all concerned parties to expand the diplomatic space to address all outstanding issues satisfactorily," the source said.
"India finally supports keeping the door open for dialogue and avoidance of confrontation."
The IAEA resolution, which was also backed by Russia and China, key Iranian allies in its standoff with the West, demanded that Tehran immediately freeze the uranium-enrichment facility it is developing at Qom and comply with its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), to which Tehran is a signatory.
The resolution, based on a report by IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei, could form the basis for wider sanctions by the UN Security Council against Iran.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is currently in the Trinidadian capital to attend the 53-nation Commonwealth summit. The Iranian nuclear crisis will also figure in his discussions with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy on the sidelines of the Commonwealth summit.
India has consistently supported Iran's right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy, but has qualified it by asking it to maintain its obligations under the NPT.
Source: Indo-Asian News Service
28/11/2009
PM Gilani's PRO acknowledges Headley is his half-brother
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani's public relations officer has acknowledged that David Coleman Headley, a terror suspect detained in the US, is his half-brother but dismissed as incorrect reports that his family is related to the premier.
Public relations officer Danyal Gilani said in a statement that Indian media reports "trying to establish a relationship between Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and the family of detained US terror suspect and my half-brother, Daood Gilani alias David Coleman Headley, is "incorrect, misplaced and totally baseless".
The report is based on speculation and is intended to create "unnecessary hype", Danyal Gilani said.
He said his ancestors migrated to Pakistan from Jastarwal in India's Punjab state and Etawah in Uttar Pradesh while the premier's family has been living in Multan "for centuries" and the two families "have no relationship with each other".
Danyal Gilani also acknowledged that the Prime Minister had issued a condolence message on his father Syed Saleem Gilani's death in December last year and visited his house to offer condolences.
"This he did out of courtesy because I was working as his PRO and also because my father was a renowned broadcaster and a known personality of his time. At that time Daood (Gilani) was not in Pakistan," he said.
Source: PTI
AN OVERVIEW OF THE EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANS
IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ATOMIC ENERGY
1. The Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) has been identified as the nodal agency in the country in respect of man made radiological emergencies in the public domain.
2. For this purpose, a Crisis Management Group (CMG) has been functioning since 1987 in DAE. In the event of any radiological or nuclear emergency in the public domain, the CMG is immediately activated and will co-ordinate between the local authority in the affected area and the National Crisis Management Committee (NCMC). The CMG comprises of senior officials drawn from various units of DAE like the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCIL), Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Heavy Water Board (HWB) and the Directorate of Purchase and Stores (DP&S). It also includes a senior official from the regulatory authority, the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB). Each member is backed by an alternate member, so that the CMG can be activated at a very short notice. Several Resource Agencies from BARC also back up the CMG. They can provide advice and assistance in the areas of radiation measurement and protection and medical assistance to radiation affected personnel.
3. As regards major nuclear facilities of DAE like the nuclear power stations, they have an Exclusion Zone of 1.6 km surrounding the power station in which no habitation is permitted. The entire area is fenced or walled off and defines the boundary of the site. Beyond this is the public domain and an area of 16 km radius around the plant site is called the Off Site Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ).
4. As a general practice, elaborate and comprehensive safety systems are in place for the operation of any nuclear facility. These are in turn overseen by the AERB who have powers to license and even shut down any facility which violates their guidelines. However, as a matter of abundant caution, even some "beyond design basis" accidents are postulated for the nuclear power stations. It is only under such highly unlikely scenarios, that there is a possibility of a radiological emergency in the public domain. Therefore, in addition to the other types of emergency response plans in place within the facility to handle local emergencies, response plans have also been drawn up for handling such emergencies in the public domain, which are called as "Off Site Emergencies". These plans – drawn up separately in detail for each site - which are under the jurisdiction of the local District Administration, cover an area of about 16 km radius around the plant or the Off Site Emergency Planning Zone.
5. The first three type of Emergencies which are foreseen and for which detailed plant specific emergency response plans have been drawn up, are Emergency Standby, Personnel Emergency and Plant Emergency. In all these, the consequences of the accident are expected to be limited to the plant facility only. The next type of Emergency, which is foreseen, is the Site Emergency, wherein the consequences of an accident are not expected to cross the site boundary, that is, the Exclusion Zone - which means that even under this condition, there is no radiological emergency in the public domain. The last type of Emergency, which assumes the highly unlikely possibility of radiological releases in the public domain, is the "Off Site Emergency" and detailed response plans have been drawn up even for this hypothetical scenario at each site. The local District Administration, the Crisis Management Group, DAE and the National Crisis Management Committee (NCMC) get involved in this last type of Emergency.
6. It is mandatory for NPCIL to have comprehensive and well laid out plans to deal with all the above types of Emergencies. Barring the last one, all the others fall within the domain of responsibility of NPCIL, and the AERB as the Regulatory Authority, approves these plans. It is also mandatory for the NPCIL to periodically test out these plans by way of Exercises and Drills, and take corrective measures as stipulated by the Safety Committees and AERB. As the first stage of the trigger mechanism, the Crisis Management Group, DAE and its resource agencies are automatically alerted even when a Plant or Site Emergency / Exercise takes place.
7. In accordance with statutory requirements, it is the local District Administration which is responsible for drawing up and testing the Off Site Emergency Plans. NPCIL has coordinated with all concerned District Administration to enable them to draw up comprehensive Off Site Emergency Plans for each power station. It may be mentioned that the AERB does not permit any nuclear power station to be commissioned unless and until, such plans for all types of Emergencies are in place well before the commissioning date.
8. The Off Site Emergency Plans are also periodically tested, and all power stations have ensured that this is being done at least once in about two years. During these exercises, all the Members and Alternate Members of the Crisis Management Group, DAE, the Resource Agencies and Key Officials in Mumbai and Delhi are alerted. In these Exercises, the district administration is fully involved, and the reports of the independent observers (from AERB, NPCIL and CMG) are used as a feedback to further improve the Emergency Response System.
9. Recognising the importance of communications in the handling of any Emergency, Emergency Control Rooms (ECRs) are maintained at Mumbai at two different locations. These manned and operated on a round-the-clock and on all days of the year and maintain continuous contact with all the critical facilities of DAE. The ECRs are equipped with Wireless, Telephone, Facsimile, VSAT and Electronic Mail facilities. These are tested practically on a daily basis to ensure their continuous availability. Further, each major site also carries out fortnightly or monthly communication exercises to test all the links in the entire communication chain.
10. In addition to about 165 communication exercises, about 110 emergency exercises are carried out every year. During the period from 1987 to 2000, 34 Off Site Emergency exercises have been conducted by the respective district administrations at various locations in the country.These involve direct participation by local district officials like police, health, transport, etc. At the end of each of these exercises, the District Collector / Magistrate chairs a "critique or feedback" session at which the deficiencies are recorded for taking corrective actions.
11. As regards transport of nuclear material, mandatory design specifications for the packaging, systems and procedures for handling and transport, are in place, to ensure that there is no release of radioactivity in the public domain in the unlikely event of such an accident. However, even if such an event were to occur, the procedures are such that the Emergency Control Room at the DAE Secretariat gets an alert, which in turn would immediately activate the Crisis Management Group, DAE.
12. In the event of any other type of nuclear emergency in the public domain arising from the unauthorized presence or suspected presence of nuclear materials, a booklet giving the essential guidelines to be followed has been circulated to State Governments and Union Territories. Among other steps, the guidelines require that the nearest listed DAE facility as well as the DAE Emergency Control Room be also contacted immediately, who would then advise on the further necessary steps to be taken to attend to the emergency.
This short write up is primarily meant to educate the public and instill confidence about the Emergency Response System of DAE to handle radiation emergencies. As regards nuclear facilities of DAE, the regulatory and safety systems ensure that equipment are designed to operate safely and even in the unlikely event of any failure or accident, mechanisms like plant and site emergency response plans are in place to ensure that the public is not affected in any manner. In addition, detailed plans, which involve the local public authorities, are also in place to respond if the consequences were to spill into the public domain. The System is also in a position to respond to any other radiation emergency in the public domain that may occur at locations, which do not even have any DAE facility.
http://www.dae.gov.in/cmgweb.htm#Overview
A History of Nuclear Power Plant Disasters - Part 1
Article by Rose Kivi (3,699 pts ) , published Jul 31, 2009
Read more:
http://www.brighthub.com/environment/science-environmental/articles/13602.aspx#ixzz0YG4hR1CO
If the history of nuclear power plant disasters can teach us anything, it can teach us that nuclear power plant accidents can never be one-hundred percent avoidable. This article is part one of a three part series that details some of the worst nuclear power plant accidents in history.
Nuclear Power Plant Disasters
Accidents in nuclear power plants happen for a variety of reasons, most commonly they are a result of human errors and faulty equipment. Even power plants that provide the strictest of safety measures can not be considered one-hundred percent full proof. Safety measures do not account for the unforeseen or for human error.
Nuclear power plant disasters have contaminated humans, animals and the environment. It is not possible to fully know all of the harmful effects that resulted from these disasters since radiation exposure to humans, animals and the environment can have many long term affects.
Due the number of health and environmental dangers associated with contamination from nuclear plants, the possibility of future nuclear power plant accidents causing radiation contamination to humans, animals, and the environment understandably, has made made some people very concerned with the operation of current nuclear power plants and the possible construction of new ones in the future.
Chalk River - December 12, 1952
The accident in the Chalk River Facility in Canada was caused by mistakes made by employees. An employee accidentally opened four valves that regulated pressure in the system. The opened valves changed pressure causing control rods to partially come out of the reactor. Safety measures were attempted that led to another mistake of a wrong button being pushed. Power output in the reactor rose and the lid blew off the reactor. Large amounts of cooling water contaminated with radioactive waste leaked into the facility. Crews were brought into contain and clean up the radioactive materials.
Mayak Plutonium Facility - September 29, 1957
An accident at the Mayak Plutonium Facility in the South Ural Mountains of Russia is considered by some to have been worse than Chernobyl. Cooling equipment at the Mayak Facility broke down and failed to cool nuclear waste. The overheated nuclear waste exploded. Approximately 270,000 people and 14,000 square miles were exposed to radiation. Five hundred square miles were exposed to extremely high levels of radiation. Prior to the 1957 accident, the Mayak Facility had a history of contaminating the environment with radioactive material through dumping in nearby water sources and several accidents. The accident in 1957 was the most severe of the incidents with the power plant. Today, radiation levels in the area are among the highest in the world, with natural water sources in the area are still contaminated with radioactive waste.
Resources
International Atomic Energy Agency
World Nuclear Association
Read more: http://www.brighthub.com/environment/science-environmental/articles/13602.aspx#ixzz0YG4zFiPE
Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant: A History of Nuclear Disasters - Part 2
Article by Rose Kivi (3,699 pts ) , published Jul 31, 2009
Read more: http://www.brighthub.com/environment/science-environmental/articles/13634.aspx#ixzz0YG56fUJW
This article is part two of a three part series that details some of the worst nuclear power plant accidents in history including the Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant, Windscale & Lubmin.
Windscale Nuclear Power Plant - October 10, 1957
An accident occurred at the Windscale Nuclear Power Plant in England that caused a radiation leak which spread 200 square miles. Faulty equipment at the plant gave inaccurate temperature readings. The temperature readings showed that equipment was cooler than it actually was. Employees actions that resulted from the inaccurate readings, caused the reactor to overheat and graphite in the plant to burn. The burning graphite caused a fire that was not fully put out until the next day, when employees released mass amounts of water into the facility to put out the fire and cool off the reactors. Filters installed in the chimneys of the plant prevented some of the radiation from escaping into the environment. But even those precautions could not prevent the wide spread contamination that occured.
Lubmin Nuclear Power Plant - December 7, 1975
A fire at the Lubmin Nuclear Power Plant in East Germany caused safety systems to fail. Employees quickly acted to release coolant into the facility and avoided a nuclear meltdown.
Three Mile Island - March 28, 1979
The accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania resulted from a malfunction in the cooling system. The malfunction in the cooling system caused the reactor to shut down. Rising pressure in the reactor caused a relief valve to open. The relief valve was located at the top of the pressurizer. The relief valve opened and poured water into the pressurizer, but did not shut when it was supposed to. Employees at the plant did not realize that the relief valve was open, and responded to the increased pressure in the pressurizer by reducing coolant flow. Without any gauges that measured the core coolant level or the position of the valve, the employees wrongfully assumed that the high water levels in the pressurizer sensed by the gauges meant that the coolant level in the core was too high. When the employees reduced the coolant, the system overheated and destroyed the fuel rods, which leaked radiation into the cooling water. Once employees realized what had happened, they were able to release a flow of emergency water into the system to cool it and prevent further mishap.
Nearby residents to the plant who were pregnant and small children were eventually evacuated from the area for health concerns. To date, there are still numerous studies investigating the increased rates of cancer and thyroid problems associated with the incident on top of the sharp change in the rate of infant mortalities that occured at the time. The health risks associated with the Three Mile Island incident is still a hotly debated topic but new research is beginning to show the real dangers of radiation contamination.
Resources
International Atomic Energy Agency
World Nuclear Association
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
People Died At Three Mile Island
Read more: http://www.brighthub.com/environment/science-environmental/articles/13634.aspx#ixzz0YG5FYHF8
Chernobyl & Tokaimura: A History of Nuclear Power Plant Disasters - Part 3
Article by Rose Kivi (3,699 pts ) , published Jul 31, 2009
Read more: http://www.brighthub.com/environment/science-environmental/articles/13667.aspx#ixzz0YG5KnaGt
his article examines both the Chernobyl and Tokaimura; two modern nuclear power plant disasters. Part 3 of a series on some of the worst nuclear power plant accidents in history.
Chernobyl - April 26, 1986
The accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the Ukraine was caused by a faulty reactor design combined with mistakes made by power plant employees. A surge of power destroyed one of the reactors at the plant and released large amounts of radiation. Helicopters dropped boron and sand onto the reactor to prevent more radiation from leaking into the environment.
600 employees were present at the time of the explosion. Of the 600 employees present, 134 were exposed to high levels of radiation. 2 employees died within hours. Another 28 employees died within the next four months. 600,000 people who participated in the radiation clean up were also exposed to radiation. Approximately 200,000 of the people who participated in the clean up were exposed to levels of radiation that are deemed unsafe. The radiation exposure from the plant spread far and exposed approximately five million people who lived in the contaminated areas.
Even though most of the five million were only exposed to low levels of radiation, it is impossible to know the amount of health problems that can be blamed on the radiation exposure due to the large number of people exposed and the long term effectrs; however some deaths and illnesses have been tracked such as the Thyroid cancer in 4,000 exposed children which has been attributed to the radiation exposure. Of those diagnosed with the painful and life threatening disease at least nineteen died early on.
Tokaimura, Japan - September 30, 1999
On September 30, 1999, there was an accident at a nuclear power facility ran by JCO Company in Tokaimura, Japan. The accident was caused as a result of an error made by JCO employees. The accident occurred when JCO employees used too much uranium in the uranium nitric acid mix the plant used to make nuclear fuel. The employees added 35 pounds of uranium to the tank that contained the nitric acid, instead of the 5.2 pounds that they were supposed to use. The improper mix caused a nuclear fission chain reaction explosion to occur. The company brought mass amounts of boron to the plant to absorb the radiation, but could not get near enough to the source to spread the boron. Instead, they broke the water pipes that led to the tank, to flood the area and stop the nuclear reaction. After approximately 20 hours, the nuclear reaction was stopped.
Approximately 39 employees were exposed to measurable levels of radiation as a result of the accident. Three employees were exposed to very high levels of radiation, two of which eventually died as a result of the radiation contamination.
Read more: http://www.brighthub.com/environment/science-environmental/articles/13667.aspx#ixzz0YG5PBhVR
Nuclear Disasters and Accidents
Introduction:
One of the scariest things about nuclear power is when something goes wrong and an accident occurs. Radiation is released into the environment and people get hurt. Two of the most famous nuclear accidents occurred at the Three Mile Island reactor 2 in the United States and the Chernobyl reactor 4 in the former Soviet Union. In this text we will discuss these two disasters, along with correcting a few common misconceptions about nuclear accidents.
The Myth of a Reactor Explosion:
It is impossible for any PWR or LWR nuclear reactor to explode like an atomic bomb. This is because in order for an uncontrolled chain reaction to occur that is similar to an atom bomb, the uranium fuel must be extremely enriched, much more than the 4% 235U that is present in regular, commercial nuclear reactor fuel. So, if it can't explode, what does happen in a nuclear reactor? The answer is what is called a meltdown. When a meltdown occurs in a reactor, the reactor "melts". That is, the temperature rises in the core so much that the fuel rods actually turn to liquid, like ice turns into water when heated. If the core continued to heat, the reactor would get so hot that the steel walls of the core would also melt. In a complete reactor meltdown, the extremely hot (about 2700º Celsius) molten uranium fuel rods would melt through the bottom of the reactor and actually sink about 50 feet into the earth beneath the power plant. The molten uranium would react with groundwater, producing large explosions of radioactive steam and debris that would affect nearby towns and population centers.
In general a nuclear meltdown would occurr if the reactor loses its coolant. This is what occured in the two disasters that we will discuss. Without coolant, the core's temperature would rise, resulting in the meltdown scenario we explained above.
You may be wondering, "Why can't they just drop the control rods in the reactor if it starts to get out of control?". The answer is that they can. The problem is that, even if the control rods are completely dropped in and the nuclear chain reaction stops, the reactor is still extremely hot and will not cool down unless coolant is put back in. The residual heat and the heat produced from the decay of the fission products are enough to drive the core's temperature up even if the nuclear chain reaction stops.
Three Mile Island:
Outside View of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant
Picture of Steam Towers on the Outside of the Three Mile Island Plant
Photo Courtesy Nuclear Regulatory Commission
On an island 10 miles from Harrisburg Pennsylvania resides the Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Station. There are two reactors at the plant, dubbed Unit 1 and Unit 2. One of them is inoperable. Unit 2 experienced a partial reactor meltdown on March 28, 1979. A partial nuclear meltdown is when the uranium fuel rods start to liquefy, but they do not fall through the reactor floor and breach the containment systems. The accident which occurred at Unit 2 is considered to be the worst nuclear disaster in US history. Why did it happen? There are many reasons for the accident, but the two main ones are simple human error and the failure of a rather minor valve in the reactor. In the following paragraphs, we will explain how it was possible for the accident to happen and both its psychological and physical effects on the American people.
The accident at TMI (Three Mile Island) began at about four in the morning with the failure of one of the valves that controlled coolant flow into the reactor. Because of this, the amount of cool water entering the reactor decreased, and the core temperature rose. When this happened, automatic computerized systems engaged, and the reactor was automatically SCRAMmed. The nuclear chain reaction then stopped. This only slowed the rate at which the core temperature was increasing, however. The temperature was still rising because of residual heat in the reactor and energy released from the decaying fission products in the fuel rods.
Because the pumps removing water from the core were still active, and a valve that controlled the cool water entering the core failed, water was leaving the core, but not coming in. This reduced the amount of coolant in the core. There wasn't enough coolant in the core, so the Emergency Core Cooling System automatically turned on. This should have provided enough extra coolant to make up for the stuck valve, except that the reactor operator, thinking that enough coolant was already in the core, shut it off too early.
There still wasn't enough coolant, so the core's temperature kept increasing. A valve at the top of the core automatically opened to vent some of the steam in the core. This should have helped matters by removing the hot steam, but the valve didn't close properly. Because it didn't close, steam continued to vent from the reactor, further reducing the coolant level. The reactor operators should have known the valve didn't close, but the indicator in the control room was covered by a maintenance tag attached to a nearby switch. Because the operators didn't know that the valve had failed to close, they assumed that the situation was under control, as the core temperature had stopped rising with the first venting of steam from the core. They also thought that the coolant had been replaced in the core, because they didn't know that the pump outlets were closed. A few minutes later the core temperature began to rise again, and the Emergency Core Cooling System automatically switched on. Once again, an operator de-activated it, thinking the situation was under control. In reality, it was not.
Soon, because of the coolant lost through the open valve at the top of the reactor, the core temperature began to rise again. At this point the fuel rods started to collapse from the intense heat inside the core. The operators knew something was wrong, but didn't understand what it was. This was about 5 minutes after the initial valve failure. It took almost 2 hours for someone to figure out that the valve releasing steam at the top of reactor hadn't closed properly. During those 2 hours, precious coolant continued to be released from the reactor a meltdown was underway. At approximately 6AM, an operator discovered the valve at the top of the core was open and closed it.
During the day hydrogen gas began to accumulate inside the reactor and caused an explosion later in the afternoon. This explosion did not damage the containment systems, however. Two days later, the core was still not under operator control. A group of nuclear experts were asked to help evaluate the situation. They figured out that a lot of hydrogen gas had accumulated at the top of the core. This gas could have exploded, like the explosion on the first day of the accident, or it could have displaced the remaining coolant in the reactor, causing a complete nuclear reactor meltdown. No one really knew what to do about the hydrogen build-up. A hydrogen recombiner was used to remove some of the hydrogen, but it was not very effective. However, hydrogen also dissolves in water, which is what the coolant was composed of. Thus, over time the hydrogen that had collected at the top of the core completely dissolved in the coolant. Two weeks later the reactor was brought to a cold shutdown and the accident was over.
No one was directly injured as a result of the accident. However, some radioactive gas and water were vented to the environment around the reactor. At one point, radioactive water was released into the Susquehanna river, which is a source of drinking water for nearby communities. No one is really sure what effects these radioactive releases might have had on people living near the power plant.
Chernobyl:
About 80 miles (130 km) north of Kiev, in what is now the Ukraine, is located the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. At this plant the worst reactor disaster to ever occur took place on April 26, 1986. It happened largely because normal reactor operations were suspended; an experiment was to take place in the reactor. As a result, normal safety guidelines were disregarded, and the accident occurred. However, as with most accidents of this type, it was a result of many small mistakes adding up to create a catastrophe. In the following paragraphs, we will outline just how the event transpired:
Early in the day, before the test, the power output of the reactor was dropped in preparation for the upcoming test. Unexpectedly, the reactor's power output dropped way too much, almost to zero. Because of this drop, some control rods were removed to bring the power back up. (As you recall from the fission power text, the more control rods there are in a reactor, the more free neutrons are absorbed and the less fissioning that goes on. So, more control rods means less energy and power output.) The reactor's power output raised up, and all appeared to be normal.
More preparation for the test began later when two pumps were switched on in the cooling system. They increased water flow out of the reactor, and thus removed heat more quickly. They also caused the water level to lower in a component of the reactor called the steam separator. Because of the low level of water in the steam separator, the operator increased the amount of feed water coming into it, in the hopes that the water level would rise. Also, more control rods were taken out of the reactor to raise internal reactor temperature and pressure, also in the hopes that it would cause the water level in the steam separator to rise. The water level in the steam separator began to rise, so the operator adjusted again the flow of feed water by lowering it. This decreased the amount of heat being removed from the reactor core.
Because many control rods had been removed and the amount of heat being taken from the core by the coolant had been reduced, it began to get very hot. Also, there was relatively low pressure in the core because the amount of incoming water had been decreased. Because of the heat and the low pressure, coolant inside the core began to boil to form steam.
The actual test began with the closing of the turbine feed valves. This should have caused an increase in pressure in the cooling system, which in turn would have caused a decrease in steam in the core. This should have lowered the reactivity in the core. Thus, the normal next step when closing the turbine feed valves was to retract more control rods, increasing reactivity in the core. This is what the operator at Chernobyl did. The only problem was that in this case there was no increase in pressure in the cooling system because of the earlier feed water reduction. This meant that there was already a normal amount of steam in the core, even with the turbine feed valves closed. Thus, by retracting more control rods to make up for a reduction in steam that didn't happen, the operator caused too much steam to be produced in the core.
With the surplus of steam, the reactor's power output increased. Soon, even more steam was being produced. The operator realized there was a problem and SCRAMmed the reactor, completely disabling all fission reactions. However, it was too late. The temperature and pressure inside the reactor had already risen dramatically, and the fuel rods had begun to shatter.
After the fuel rods shattered, two explosions occurred as a result of liquid uranium reacting with steam and from fuel vapor expansion (caused by the intense heat). The reactor containment was broken, and the top of the reactor lifted off. With the containment broken, outside air began to enter the reactor. In this particular Soviet reactor, graphite was used as a moderator instead of water. (water was the coolant) As air entered the core, it reacted with the graphite. Graphite is essentially just carbon, so oxygen from the air chemically combined with the carbon to form CO (carbon monoxide). Carbon monoxide is flammable and soon caught fire. The fire emitted extremely radioactive smoke into the area surrounding the reactor. Additionally, the explosion ejected a portion of the reactor fuel into the surrounding atmosphere and countryside. This fuel contained both fission products and transuranic wastes.
During the days following the accident, hundreds of people worked to quell the reactor fire and the escape of radioactive materials. Liquid nitrogen was pumped into the reactor core to cool it down. Helicopters dumped neutron-absorbing materials into the exposed core to prevent it from going critical. Sand and other fire-fighting materials were also dropped into the core to help stop the graphite fire. All in all, over 5000(metric) tons of material were dropped into the core. After the fires were brought under control, construction of what is called "the sarcophagus" began. The word "sarcophagus" is usually used to describe the elaborate coffins the ancient Egyptians used to entomb their dead. In this case, the sarcophagus is a structure erected from about 300,000 metric tons of concrete that surrounds the reactor. It was designed to contain the radioactive waste inside. It has served its purpose well, but, now, ten years after the accident, several flaws have been found in it. Holes have begun to appear in the roof, allowing rainwater to accumulate inside. This water can corrode the structure, further weakening it. Also, birds and other animals have been seen making homes in the sarcophagus. If they should ingest radioactive material, they could spread it around the countryside. Additionally, with time the sarcophagus has become worn down. It is conceivable that an intense event like an earthquake, tornado, or plane crash directly on the sarcophagus could lead to its collapse. This would be catastrophic, as radioactive dust would once again rain down on the surrounding areas. Scientists and engineers are working on ways to repair or replace the structure.
One of the great tragedies of the accident was that the Soviet government tried to cover it up. Clouds of fallout were traveling towards major population centers such as Minsk, and no one was warned. No one outside the Soviet Union knew about the accident until two days later, when scientists in Sweden detected massive amount of radiation being blown from the east.
The effects of the disaster at Chernobyl were very widespread. The World Health Organization (WHO) found that the radiation release from the Chernobyl accident was 200 times that of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombs combined. The fallout was also far-reaching. For a time, radiation levels in a Scotland were 10,000 times the norm. 30 lives were directly lost during the accident or within a few months after it. Many of these lives were those of the workers trying to put out the graphite fire and were lost from radiation poisoning. The radiation released has also had long-term effects on the cancer incidence rate of the surrounding population. According to the Ukrainian Radiological Institute over 2500 deaths resulted from the Chernobyl incident. The WHO has found a significant increase in cancer in the surrounding area. For example, in 1986 (the year of the accident), 2 cases of childhood thyroid cancer occurred in the Gomel administrative district of the Ukraine (this is the region around the plant). In 1993 there were 42 cases, which is 21 times the rate in 1986. The rate of thyroid cancer is particularly high after the Chernobyl accident because much of the radiation was emitted in the form iodine-131, which collects in the thyroid gland, especially in young children. Other cancer incidence rates didn't seem to be affected. For example, leukemia was no more prevalent after the accident than before.
What caused the accident? This is a very hard question to answer. The obvious one is operator error. The operator was not very familiar with the reactor and hadn't been trained enough. Additionally, when the accident occurred, normal safety rules were not being followed because they were running a test. For example, regulations required that at least 15 control rods always remain in the reactor. When the explosion occurred, less than 10 were present. This happened because many of the rods were removed to raise power output. This was one of the direct causes of the accident. Also, the reactor itself was not designed well and was prone to abrupt and massive power surges.
http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/nuclear_disasters/nuclear_disasters.html
US denies Pakistan nuclear report
Hersh, right, said the US team was in Islamabad
in case of a mutiny in Pakistan
The US government has rejected a report that Washington has a team ready to secure Pakistan's nuclear arsenal due to fears that the country is unstable.
Ian Kelly, a state department spokesman, dismissed the report by Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker which said that the US has a special force in place that would move to secure Pakistan's nuclear weaponry in the event of a crisis.
"The US has no intention of seizing Pakistani nuclear weapons or material – we see Pakistan as a key ally in our common effort to fight violent extremists and to foster regional stability," Kelly said.
He said the US was "working very closely with Pakistan on a number of important initiatives regarding regional security".
"We do provide them with assistance, as you know," he said, but added: "We have confidence in the ability of the Pakistani government to provide adequate security for their nuclear programmes and materials."
Rapid response force
Hersh, a Pulitzer prize-winning writer, said in his report that the US and Pakistan have agreed on a security protocol allowing a special US team to assist in the guarding of Pakistan's nuclear armaments.
Pakistan's nuclear weapons
Pakistan is believed to have between 60 and 120 nuclear weapons
Warheads can be delivered by aircraft or by missiles
Pakistan's nuclear programme is under the control of the army's Strategic Plans Division
Location of nuclear weapons is a closely guarded secret, with a range of security measures including physical separation of warhead components
Weapons are believed to have been readied for use twice - first during the Kargil conflict with India in Kashmir in 1999, and second in 2001/2002 during a stand-off with India following an attack on India's parliament
"There certainly is a rapid response force; I'll take it a step further – it is called a 'Tailored Fest'," he told Al Jazeera on Tuesday.
"I just wish they would not deny stuff that is actually publicly available if you know where to look for it. It is a force that [will act] in case of any nuclear incident or any other terrorism-related incident.
"The men, and the women, who I assume will work on it include not only US state department counter-terror people but also the CIA, the FBI and other special operators, as a unified team.
"They have to report within four hours of a crisis to Andrews air field [in Washington DC] and be sent on their way."
Hersh said that the unit was scrambled last summer to respond to an alert in Pakistan, but the incident proved to be a false alarm.
"There was a report that turned out to be aborted [about] some nuclear incident, probably a missing nuke in Pakistan. This is a super worry for the United States of America, and it always has been," Hersh said.
Pakistan is thought to have set up its nuclear programme in 1971, soon after a war with India. The country is estimated to possess between 60 and 120 nuclear weapons.
The Pentagon has said the US is providing some training and equipment to Pakistan to improve its nuclear security.
'Nuclear-armed extremists'
Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, said in the wake of an attack on Pakistan's military headquarters in Rawalpindi in October that Washington had "confidence in the Pakistani government's control over nuclear weapons".
Pakistan is believed to have between 60 and 120 nuclear weapons [EPA]
But during a subsequent visit to Pakistan, she urged Islamabad to acknowledge the threat of what she called "nuclear-armed extremists", while calling on the country to join nuclear non-proliferation talks.
Washington and Islamabad have each denied that US special forces are on standby inside Pakistan, but Hersh insists they are there.
"Eight years ago I wrote about another group in the New Yorker, right after 9/11. [That group] had been set up in the late 90s in the Pentagon.
"So there are at least two groups that are involved, and there is probably a separate group in the [US] department of energy that also does stuff," Hersh told Al Jazeera.
"So we have a lot of groups that have a lot of responsibility in case of a nuclear crisis. The group I am writing about [now], which is on a standby basis, I think is basically in [Pakistan], whether it is in Islamabad or the US embassy.
"This is a standby group whose mission is in case of trauma inside Pakistan – we are not talking about the Pakistani Taliban taking over, that is not going to happen – but basically in case of a mutiny … they are there in case the Pakistanis want back-up."
Source: Agencies
Pakistan nuclear security plan
Monday, November 09, 2009
How much does the US really know?Musharraf says a huge tunnel system has been built; US team had reached Dubai to take out Pak nukes; report claims US negotiating secret understanding with Pakistan Army
News Desk
NEW YORK: The Obama administration has been negotiating highly sensitive understandings with the Pakistani military, the influential magazine 'The New Yorker' says in a detailed report by world famous Pulitzer prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh, published in its latest issue.
"The Pakistanis gave us a virtual look at the number of warheads, some of their locations, and their command-and-control system," Hersh quotes a former senior US intelligence official. "We saw their target list and their mobilization plans. We got their security plans, so we could augment them in case of a breach of security," he said.
"We're there to help the Pakistanis, but we're also there to extend our own axis of security to their nuclear stockpile."The secret understandings between the US and Pakistan would allow specially trained American units to provide added security for the Pakistani nuclear arsenal in case of a crisis, the report said.
The 7,000-word article said the Pakistani military would be given money to equip and train Pakistani soldiers and to improve their housing and facilities — goals that General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the chief of the Pakistan Army, has long desired.
Hersh quoted former President Musharraf, after an interview with him in London recently, saying that his government had held extensive discussions with the Bush Administration after 9/11 attacks, and had given State Department non-proliferation experts insight into the command and control of the Pakistani arsenal and its on-site safety and security procedures.
Musharraf also confirmed that Pakistan had constructed a huge tunnel system for the transport and storage of nuclear weaponry. "The tunnels are so deep that a nuclear attack will not touch them," Musharraf told me, with obvious pride. The tunnels would make it impossible for the American intelligence community—"Big Uncle," as a Pakistani nuclear-weapons expert called it — to monitor the movements of nuclear components by satellite.
Safeguards have been built into the system. Pakistani nuclear doctrine calls for the warheads (containing an enriched radioactive core) and their triggers (sophisticated devices containing highly explosive lenses, detonators, and krytrons) to be stored separately from each other and from their delivery devices (missiles or aircraft). The goal is to ensure that no one can launch a warhead — in the heat of a showdown with India, for example — without pausing to put it together. Final authority to order a nuclear strike requires consensus within Pakistan's 10-member National Command Authority, with the chairman — by statute, President Zardari — casting the deciding vote.
Hersh quoted an American former senior intelligence official saying that a team that has trained for years to remove or dismantle parts of the Pakistani arsenal has now been augmented by a unit of the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the elite counterterrorism group. He added that the unit, which had earlier focused on the warheads' cores, has begun to concentrate on evacuating the triggers, which have no radioactive material and are thus much easier to handle.
The detailed American planning even includes an estimate of how many nuclear triggers could be placed inside a C-17 cargo plane, the former official said, and where the triggers could be sequestered. Admiral Mullen, asked about increased American insight into the arsenal, said, through his spokesman, "I am not aware of our receipt of any such information." A senior military officer added that the information, if it had been conveyed, would most likely "have gone to another government agency."
Early this summer, a consultant to the Department of Defense said a highly classified military and civil-emergency response team was put on alert after receiving an urgent report from American intelligence officials indicating that a Pakistani nuclear component had gone astray. The team, which operates clandestinely and includes terrorism and nonproliferation experts from the intelligence community, the Pentagon, the FBI, and the DOE, is under standing orders to deploy from Andrews Air Force Base, in Maryland, within four hours of an alert. When the report turned out to be a false alarm, the mission was aborted, the consultant said. By the time the team got the message, it was already in Dubai.
A spokesman for the Pakistani military said, in an official denial, "Pakistan neither needs any American unit for enhancing the security for its arsenal nor would accept it." The spokesman added that the Pakistani military "has been providing protection to US troops in a situation of crisis" — a reference to Pakistan's role in the war on terror — "and hence is quite capable to deal with any untoward situation."
Hersh said the arsenal was a source of great pride among Pakistanis, who view the weapons as symbols of their nation's status and as an essential deterrent against an attack by India.
After interviews with several current and former officials, Hersh reported that the Pakistan Army was in full control of the nuclear arsenal, but the Taliban overrunning Islamabad was not the only, or even the greatest, concern. "The principal fear is mutiny — that extremists inside the Pakistani military might stage a coup, take control of some nuclear assets, or even divert a warhead."
Hersh said a senior Pakistani official who has close ties to Zardari exploded with anger during an interview when the subject turned to the American demands for more information about the arsenal. After the September 11th attacks, he said, there had been an understanding between the Bush Administration and then President Pervez Musharraf "over what Pakistan had and did not have."
Today, he said, "you'd like control of our day-to-day deployment. But why should we give it to you? Even if there was a military coup d'état in Pakistan, no one is going to give up total control of our nuclear weapons. Never. Why are you not afraid of India's nuclear weapons?" the official asked. "Because India is your friend, and the longtime policies of America and India converge. Between you and the Indians, you will — (four letter word) — us in every way. The truth is that our weapons are less of a problem for the Obama Administration than finding a respectable way out of Afghanistan."
The magazine said: "The ongoing consultation on nuclear security between Washington and Islamabad intensified after the announcement in March of President Obama's so-called Af-Pak policy, which called upon the Pakistan Army to take more aggressive action against Taliban enclaves inside Pakistan.
"I was told that the understandings on nuclear cooperation benefitted from the increasingly close relationship between Admiral Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and General Kayani, his counterpart, although the CIA and the Departments of Defense, State, and Energy have also been involved." Hersh said.
The magazine said all three departments declined to comment for this article. The national-security council and the CIA denied that there were any agreements in place.
In response to a series of questions, Admiral Mullen acknowledged that he and Kayani were, in his spokesman's words, "very close." The spokesman said that Mullen is deeply involved in day-to-day Pakistani developments and "is almost an action officer for all things Pakistan." But he denied that he and Kayani, or their staffs, had reached an understanding about the availability of American forces in case of mutiny or a terrorist threat to a nuclear facility.
"To my knowledge, we have no military units, special forces or otherwise, involved in such an assignment," Mullen said through his spokesman. The spokesman added that Mullen had not seen any evidence of growing fundamentalism inside the Pakistani military.
In interviews in Pakistan, Hersh obtained confirmation that there were continuing conversations with the United States on nuclear-security plans — as well as evidence that the Pakistani leadership put much less weight on them than the Americans did. In some cases, Pakistani officials spoke of the talks principally as a means of placating anxious American politicians. "You needed it," a senior Pakistani official, who said that he had been briefed on the nuclear issue, told me. His tone was caustic.
"We have twenty thousand people working in the nuclear-weapons industry in Pakistan, and here is this American view that Pakistan is bound to fail." The official added, "The Americans are saying, 'We want to help protect your weapons.' We say, 'Fine. Tell us what you can do for us.' It's part of a quid pro quo. You say, also, 'Come clean on the nuclear program and we'll insure that India doesn't put pressure on it.' So we say, 'O.K.' " But, the Pakistani official said, "both sides are lying to each other. We haven't told you anything that you don't know." The Americans didn't realise that Pakistan would never cede control of its arsenal: "If you try to take the weapons away, you will fail."
In an actual crisis, would the Pakistanis give an American team direct access to their arsenal? An adviser to the Pentagon on counterinsurgency said that some analysts suspected that the Pakistani military had taken steps to move elements of the nuclear arsenal "out of the count" — to shift them to a storage facility known only to a very few — as a hedge against mutiny or an American or Indian effort to seize them. "If you thought your American ally was telling your enemy where the weapons were, you'd do the same thing," the adviser said.
"Let me say this about our nuclear deterrent," President Zardari told me, when asked about any recent understandings between Pakistan and the United States. "We give comfort to each other, and the comfort level is good, because everybody respects everybody's integrity. We're all big boys."
Zardari and I met twice, first in his office, in the grand but isolated Presidential compound in Islamabad, and then, a few days later, alone over dinner in his personal quarters. He is chatty but guarded, proud but defensive, and, like many Pakistanis, convinced that the United States will always favor India. Over dinner, he spoke of his suspicions regarding his wife's death. He said that, despite rumors to the contrary, he would complete his five-year term.
Zardari spoke with derision about what he depicted as America's obsession with the vulnerability of his nation's nuclear arsenal. "In your country, you feel that you have to hold the fort for us," he said. "The American people want a lot of answers for the errors of the past, and it's very easy to spread fear. Our Army officers are not crazy, like the Taliban. They're British-trained. Why would they slip up on nuclear security? A mutiny would never happen in Pakistan. It's a fear being spread by the few who seek to scare the many."
Zardari offered some advice to Barack Obama: instead of fretting about nuclear security in Pakistan, his Administration should deal with the military disparity between Pakistan and India, which has a much larger army. "You should help us get conventional weapons," he said. "It's a balance-of-power issue."
In May, Zardari, at the urging of the United States, approved a major offensive against the Taliban, sending thirty thousand troops into the Swat Valley, which lies a hundred miles northwest of Islamabad. "The enemy that we were fighting in Swat was made up of twenty per cent thieves and thugs and eighty per cent with the same mind-set as the Taliban," Zardari said. He depicted the operation as a complete success, but added that his government was not "ready" to kill all the Taliban. His long-term solution, Zardari said, was to provide new business opportunities in Swat and turn the Taliban into entrepreneurs. "Money is the best incentive," he said. "They can be rented."
A former State Department official who worked on nuclear issues with Pakistan after September 11th said that he'd come to understand that the Pakistanis "believe that any information we get from them would be shared with others — perhaps even the Indians. To know the command-and-control processes of their nuclear weapons is one thing. To know where the weapons actually are is another thing."
The former State Department official cited the large Pakistan Air Force base outside Sargodha, west of Lahore, where many of Pakistan's nuclear-capable F-16s are thought to be stationed. "Is there a nuke ready to go at Sargodha?" the former official asked. "If there is, and Sargodha is the size of Andrews Air Force Base, would we know where to go? Are the warheads stored in Bunker X?" Ignorance could be dangerous. "If our people don't know where to go and we suddenly show up at a base, there will be a lot of people shooting at them," he said. "And even if the Pakistanis may have told us that the triggers will be at Bunker X, is it true?"
The former high-level Bush Administration official was just as blunt. "If a Pakistani general is talking to you about nuclear issues, and his lips are moving, he's lying," he said. "The Pakistanis wouldn't share their secrets with anybody, and certainly not with a country that, from their point of view, used them like a Dixie cup and then threw them away."
Hersh flew to New Delhi from Pakistan and met with two senior officials from the Research and Analysis Wing, India's national intelligence agency. Our worries are about the nuclear weapons in Pakistan," one of the officials said. "Not because we are worried about the mullahs taking over the country; we're worried about those senior officers in the Pakistan Army who are Caliphates" — believers in a fundamentalist pan-Islamic state.
"We know some of them and we have names," he said. "We've been watching colonels who are now brigadiers. These are the guys who could blackmail the whole world" — that is, by seizing a nuclear weapon.
The article by Hersh also quoted noted journalist Rahimullah Yusufzai, Group Editor of The News Shaheen Sehbai, Lt General ® Hamid Gul, writer Brian Cloughley, Sultan Amir Tarar, known to many as Colonel Imam, Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy and others.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=25453
November 24, 2009
White House Fact Sheets on U.S. India Cooperation
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_______________________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 24, 2009
Fact Sheets on U.S. – Indian Cooperation
Attached are a series of factsheets highlighting some of the key outcomes of this visit. In total 6 Memoranda-of-understandings were signed, 2 memoranda-of-interest as well as several other initiatives and agreements. Below are some of the highlights from the four papers covering global security and counter-terrorism, education and development, health cooperation, economic trade and agriculture, and green partnerships.
Advancing Global Security and Countering Terrorism
* Expansion of the U.S.-India Counterterrorism Cooperation Initiative, Prime Minister Singh and President Obama committed to redouble their collective efforts to deal effectively with terrorism, while protecting their countries' common ideals and shared values, and committed themselves to strengthening global consensus and legal regimes against terrorism.
* Support for an early start of negotiations on a multilateral, non-discriminatory and internationally verifiable Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. The two leaders also look forward to the April 2010 Nuclear Security Summit and agreed to consult each other regularly. They affirmed their commitment to work together to prevent the spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction- and missile-related technology and to realize their shared vision of a world free of nuclear weapons.
Green Partnerships
* Launch of a "Green Partnership" to strengthen U.S./India cooperation on clean energy, climate change, and food security. This reflects our two countries' commitment to taking vigorous action to combat climate change, ensuring mutual energy security, working towards global food security, and building a clean energy economy that will drive investment, job creation, and economic growth throughout the 21st century.
* Launch of an Indo-U.S. Clean Energy Research and Deployment Initiative, supported by U.S. and Indian government funding and private sector contributions. This new Initiative will include a Joint Research Center operating in both the United States and India to foster innovation and joint efforts to accelerate deployment of clean energy technologies. The Initiative will facilitate joint research, scientific exchanges, and sharing of proven innovation and deployment policies.
* Support for an Indian EPA that will focus on creating a more effective system of environmental governance, regulation and enforcement. Working with the India's Ministry of Environment and Forests, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will provide technical support to help establish an Indian National Environmental Protection Authority.
Economic Trade and Agriculture
* Meeting of the United States – India CEO Forum brought together leaders of the U.S. and Indian business communities — approximately ten from each side across various industry sectors — with senior government officials on November 23. Forum members conveyed their interest in working on recommendations on how the public and private sectors can work together to strengthen economic and commercial ties between the two countries, stimulate innovation, spur job creation, and promote sustainable inclusive growth.
* Launch of a new Agriculture Dialogue and agreed on a Memorandum of Understanding on Agricultural Cooperation and Food Security that will set a pathway to robust cooperation between the governments in crop forecasting, management and market information; regional and global food security through the L'Aquila Food Security Initiative; science, technology, and education; nutrition; and expanding private sector investment in agriculture. The United States and India expect cooperation under the agreement to expand access to knowledge to improve productivity, safety, and nutritional quality of food crops; to strengthen market institutions and foster growth of agribusiness investment and improve food security and access to adequate quantities and quality of food, particularly for women and young children.
* Renewed bilateral cooperation in the field of intellectual property through a Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Commerce's United States Patent and Trademark Office and Indian Ministry of Commerce and Industry. The memorandum and action plan will focus on human resource development, capacity building and public awareness programs in intellectual property protection and enforcement.
Enhancing U.S.-India Cooperation on Education and Development
* Expansion of the bi-national Fulbright-Nehru Scholarship Program through a 45% increase in funding by each government to support increased exchanges of students and scholars in priority fields, bringing total support for these scholarships to $6.7 million this year.
* Launched the Obama-Singh 21st Century Knowledge Initiative which will provide $10 million in combined funding to increase university linkages and support junior faculty development between U.S. and Indian universities.
* Formation of the Women's Empowerment Dialogue (WED) to further the full participation of women in all aspects of society in order for the global community to address the complex challenges we face in this new century. During the initial meeting of the Women's Empowerment Dialogue in New Delhi, both sides agreed to explore the creation of a "Women's Empowerment Fund," that would be able to support WED initiatives such as women's social and economic empowerment, female literacy, political participation of women, and healthcare.
Health Cooperation
* Creation of a seventh Regional Global Disease Detection Center in India as a part of the Global Disease Detection (GDD) network. This GDD collaboration will include a range of activities, such as emerging disease detection and response, pandemic influenza preparedness and response, laboratory systems and biosafety, field epidemiology training, health communications, and zoonotic disease investigation and control. Other Regional Centers include Kenya, Thailand, Guatemala, Egypt, China, and Kazakhstan.
* Launch of the Health Dialogue: The first meeting of the U.S.-India Health Dialogue is planned for early 2010 in Washington. Secretary of Health and Human Services Sebelius is the U.S. lead and Minister of Health and Family Welfare Azad will lead for India.
* Cooperation on Urban Health through U.S. Agency for International Development's, soon to be launched, new Health of the Urban Poor Program, which aims to improve reproductive and child health in urban poor populations, especially for those dwelling in slums, by building the local capacity, improving program implementation and increasing resource allocation for urban health through policy analysis. The program will work in close collaboration with urban local bodies and Indian national and state governments.
Email This Page Print This Page
After you, your majesty
K.P.NAYAR
Port of Spain, Nov. 27: After being the toast of Washington for most of this week, it is a big come down for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh here at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM).
Britain's Queen Elizabeth II, who is head of the Commonwealth, forced Singh to change his travel plans from Washington to Port of Spain yesterday to accommodate the will of Buckingham Palace.
When the Prime Minister's state visit to the US was being planned many weeks ago, Singh was to fly out from the Andrews Air Force Base near Washington at 9.15am after a ceremonial farewell by the Americans and arrive here at 3.05pm.
But a few days before Singh was to leave New Delhi for Washington, the Prime Minister's office (PMO) was informed that Queen Elizabeth's British Airways Boeing 777 would be landing at Piarco International Airport here at 2.44 pm.
And the British protocol and security insisted that they did not want any aircraft landing or taking off from this airport one hour before or after the arrival of the VVIP British Airways plane.
Some 40 of a total of 53 Commonwealth heads of state arrived at Piarco International Airport one after another in quick succession yesterday, quite a feat for a relatively small airport and Port of Spain's infrastructure, albeit upgraded for the CHOGM summit.
But no other country demanded that there should be such a big gap in VVIP flight arrivals and departures before or after their head of state or government had landed. Except the UK.
Although the Americans were informed about a change in Singh's departure plans well before the Prime Minister left India for the US, it was still a reminder for many people of the country's colonial baggage and history.
Twenty four hours after the Prime Minister left Washington, the US was still the talking point in the Indian delegation here.
That was because India today voted at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to censure Iran, demand that Tehran should forthwith freeze construction work at its recently newly revealed nuclear facility and adhere to UN Security Council resolutions to stop uranium enrichment.
India's vote, its second at the IAEA against Iran, came a day after the US National Security Adviser James Jones, urged New Delhi to play a role on the Iranian nuclear issue.
"To begin with, India could be helpful in persuading Iran to accept the offer on the table for low enrichment uranium that is currently being negotiated with the IAEA," Jones, a retired Marine Corps General, said.
By voting with the big five, the permanent members of the UN Security Council, in a reflection of India's much-touted emerging power status, India broke with its traditional friends at multilateral fora, Brazil and South Africa of the so-called IBSA (India, Brazil, South Africa) group and with non-aligned Egypt.
Pakistan abstained from the vote on the resolution and is expected to seek an IOU from Tehran at some stage. Even the government in Kabul, which cannot survive without US military support, abstained from voting on the Washington-supported resolution.
Only Cuba, Malaysia and Venezuela voted against the censure, which was favoured by an overwhelming 25 members of the IAEA's board of governors.
India's hope, which has not been spelt out, is that the vote against Iran will spur the US to operationalise the Indo-US nuclear deal by reaching an agreement with New Delhi on reprocessing spent fuel.
The Prime Minister would have liked this agreement to have been sewn up and announced during his visit to Washington, but that failed to materialise.
If India had voted in support of Iran or abstained at the IAEA today, the powerful Jewish lobby in the US would have played merry hell and blocked the advancement of the nuclear deal.
The Indian delegation to the IAEA, in an "explanation of vote" said "our support for the resolution is based on the key points contained in the report" of the IAEA's director-general (DG), Mohamed ElBaradei. It was ElBaradei's report, which formed the basis for today's vote.
"India has considered the role of the DG has having a vital bearing on the consideration of all issues by the board of governors," the Indian delegation rationalised. "The conclusions he has drawn in his report are, therefore, difficult to ignore."
Despite New Delhi's justification for the vote, the Left parties in India and sections of the Opposition will point out that in 2006, when the UPA government voted against Iran at the IAEA for the first time, ElBaradei was neutral on the issue. But at that time, India disregarded the DG's stand and voted with the Americans in a move that soured relations between the government and the Left parties.
At that time too, like now, the unstated truth was that India's IAEA vote was clearly linked to the nuclear deal with Washington.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1091128/jsp/frontpage/story_11796876.jsp
Agni's failure raises eyebrows
Hemant Kumar Rout, TNN 25 November 2009, 09:46pm IST
BALASORE: The recurring failures of the Agni series, considered one of the most trusted missiles in the Indian arsenal, have raised serious
concerns not only among scientists but across the nation as well.
In the past 20 years, since the beginning of Agni's developmental trails, it has failed four times to meet many of the mission parameters, which has left the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) scientists worried.
More importantly, nuclear capable 2000 km plus range Agni-II missile has failed to deliver desired results, consecutively twice in the past six months during the "trainer user trials".
Unfortunately, the debacle happened at the deployment stage, five years after the induction of the missile in the armed forces.
"It's come as a shock for the DRDO. I think they should be more careful before going for user trials of Agni," said Maj Gen (Rtd) R K Sahu.
So far three variants Agni-I, Agni-II and Agni-III with strike range of 700 km, 2000 km and 3500 km respectively. have been tested 15 times. While the second test of Agni-I from ITR at Chandipur-on-Sea on May 29, 1992 had failed, the maiden test of much-hyped Agni-III from Wheeler Island on July 9, 2006 could not meet mission parameters.
And now the two consecutive miscarriages of the Agni-II. Even more surprising is that, DRDO, the agency which is solely responsible for the development of the missiles, has not come out with any credible explanations.
Crores of rupees are being spent on the missile development programmes. It is high time the government took a serious look into the matter. The DRDO should come out with facts, for it relates to the country's security and tax payer's money," said Jayanta Das, president of a citizens' forum
Defence analysts feel that something tangible needs to be done to stem the rot or else it would be too late to maintain the territorial integrity of the country.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bhubaneswar/Agnis-failure-raises-eyebrows/articleshow/5269110.cms
Pakistan: Threats to Fissile Materials and Issue of Disaster Management
Dr. Mohammed Badrul Alam
Article No:119, June 05, 2007
Like in any nuclear weapon state, multiple vulnerabilities exist in a nuclear weapons complex. In the case of Pakistan, it is possible that groups or individuals may violate security rules for a variety of reasons, including profit making, settling a vendetta, or religious or ideological motives. Rogue elements may try to gain control over sensitive items for their own use or to transfer these items to another state or to other non-state actors for financial or ideological reasons. A special concern is that Pakistan, as its history suggests, may suffer another military coup at some point of time. A new leadership, in that case, can be expected to place a high priority on seizing the country's nuclear assets.
The threat of theft or diversion of fissile material or nuclear weapons falls into three general areas: 1) Outsider Threat–The possibility that armed individuals or groups from outside a facility gain access and steal nuclear weapons, weapons components or fissile material; 2) Insider Threat–The possibility that individuals who work inside the facility will remove fissile material, nuclear weapons, or weapons components without proper authorization; 3) Insider/Outsider Threat–The possibility that insiders and outsiders conspire together in connivance to obtain fissile materials, weapons, or weapon components.
If Pakistan suffers extreme instability or civil war, additional threats to its strategic nuclear assets are also possible. This may happen, as Muthiah Allagappa(2001) comments, due to military's inherent struggle for attaining legitimacy and in "military's inability to construct an acceptable political framework for the management of the state, including the acquisition and exercise of state power" and in facilitating the emergence of a viable civil society:
Loss of Central Control of Storage Facilities– Clear lines of communication code and control over weapons, weapons components, and fissile material may be broken or lost entirely.
Coup– In the most extreme case, a coup takes place and the new regime attempts to gain control of the entire nuclear complex. The New York Times (March 11, 2007) report suggests US policy makers envisioning alternatives for Pakistan after Musharraf. Under this scenario, the Vice-Chief of the Army, Ahsan Saleem Hyat, take over from General Musharraf as head of the military and former banker Mohammedmian Soomro installed as president, with General Hyat wielding most of the power. In this context, Sydney J. Freedberg writes in Natonal Journal (December 16, 2006), "He is just the latest leader to stand precariously atop Pakistan's three ever-shifting tectonic plates - generals, politicians and mullahs. Sooner, not later, he will lose his footing. To understand what might happen next, it's important to understand the three major power centers at work in Pakistan." It is also possible that foreign government(s) may intervene to prevent hostile entity from seizing the strategic nuclear assets.
In the current situation, Pakistan must also increasingly worry that experts from the nuclear complex could steal sensitive information or assist nuclear weapons programs of other countries or terrorist groups. The information could include highly classified nuclear weapons data, exact storage locations of weapons or fissile material, access control arrangements, or other sensitive, operational details about these weapons.
On the related issue of disaster management, there is no reference in Pakistan's nuclear doctrine as to the appropriate disaster control system should a potential accident does occur. Pakistan, at the present time, does not have anything even close to the capabilities of managing a nuclear disaster, should it occur either from a nuclear first strike or from a retaliatory strike by the adversary.
In a chilling report published by Britain based New Scientists (May 24, 2002), it was reported that a massive loss of men and materials would occur should a nuclear exchange take place between India and Pakistan. As per this report, "At least 2.9 million people would be killed and another 1.4 million severely injured based on 10 Hiroshima type bombs, five in India (Bangalore, Mumbai, Kolkata, New Delhi, and Chennai) and five in Pakistan (Karachi, Lahore, Faisalabad, Islamabad, Rawalpindi). India side with 1.5 million dead and 900,000 injured. and Pakistan side with 1.2 million dead and 600, 000 injured. If the bomb explodes on the ground instead of in the air, resulting radioactive dust could kill more people. Due to prevailing winds from west to east, India would incur more casualties than Pakistan. This is just ten bombs, which is 1/10th of estimated nuclear bomb both countries are believed to have possessed."
Another report published in Indian Express (May 28, 2002), provided even a scarier picture. "Nuclear exchange could kill up to 12 million people at one stroke plus injury up to 7 million. Even a so-called ' limited war' would have cataclysmic effect overhauling hospitals across Asia and requiring vast foreign assistance to battle radioactive contamination, famine and disease. More deaths would occur later caused by urban firestones, ignited by the heat of a nuclear exchange, deaths from longer term radiation, or the disease and starvation expected to spread."
In this regard, India's Home Ministry is currently raising eight battalions to tackle natural disasters and combat nuclear, biological and chemical warfare. In all likelihood, Pakistan is expected to follow India's path in having a National Emergency Response Force battalions so as to be deployed in strategic locations under the supervision of the director-general of civil defense should such consequence management contingencies arise.
[ Dr. Mohammed Badrul Alam is Professor of Political Science at Jamia Millia Islamia University, New Delhi, India. ]
http://sspconline.org/article_details.asp?artid=art132
NUCLEAR DISASTER - Core Group
For improving the quality of life in India with its one billion plus population, Indian Economy has to ensure its growth at about 10% per year on a sustainable basis. For ensuring this DGP growth on a sustainable basis, one of the most crucial inputs in the economy department is energy growth security in general and that all the electricity and particular fall back on its huge thorium reserve for generation of electricity through nuclear power programme. Further, applications of radioisotopes and radiation technology in the areas of medicine, industry, agriculture / food preservation and research are also of immense importance in the society. In view of large programme on nuclear power generation and applications of radioisotopes and radiation technology, its possibility of radiation emergency in India can not be ruled out, particularly because of the possibility of nuclear materials falling in the hands of the terrorists that can be used in the form of Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD), definite likelihood of popularly known as "dirty bomb". For prevention, mitigation & preparedness and response, a workshop on Nuclear Disaster Management was organized by National Disaster Management Authority. The workshop was convened by Hon'ble Member, Lt. Gen (Dr.) J.R. Bhardwaj on 17th may, 2006 under the chairmanship of Hon'ble Vice-Chairman, General N.C. Vij, PVSM, UYSM, AVSM (Retd), NDMA. A total number of 52 distinguished professionals (as shown in Annexure-I) from Ministries/Departments including Department of Atomic Energy, Bhabha Atomic Research Center, Defence Research & Development Organization, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of Defence.
Consequent to the workshop, a core group (as shown in Annexure-II) was constituted to prepare National Guidelines for Nuclear Disaster Management. Major General, J.K. Bansal, VCM was appointed as Core Group Coordinator. The first and second meeting of core group was held under the chairmanship of Lt. Gen. (Dr) J.R. Bhardwaj, PVSM, AVSM, VSM, PHS (Retd). A format and a comprehensive draft were prepared. The draft constitutes introductory aspects of uses of radiation, discusses about the present status of Nuclear Disaster Management, and identified the critical gaps. The draft has focused on the guidelines and recommended the detailed roles of various stakeholders in terms of preventive, preparedness, capacity development, response at site and at hospital, rehabilitation, recovery and research. Subsequently, the activities of Nuclear Disaster Management were taken over by Hon'ble Member, Shri B. Bhattacharjee while Lt. Gen. (Dr) J.R. Bhardwaj continued to be a core group member. The preparation of guidelines is under process that is likely to be ready very soon.
National Disaster Management Authority
Nuclear Disaster Management
4th Meeting of Core Group for drafting
National Disaster Management Guidelines- Nuclear Emergency
(NDMG-NE)
http://ndma.gov.in/ndma/manmadedisaster.htm
Minor leak, major reaction
TMI takes a hit for delay in reporting radiation incident.
Sunday News
Nov 29, 2009 00:18 EST
Middletown
Thirty years after the nation's worst nuclear disaster unfolded at Three Mile Island, any unusual event at the nuclear power plant is still hot news.
And so delayed reporting of an accident there last weekend has the governor — and others — steaming.
The incident happened about 4:15 p.m. Saturday, Nov. 21, when radioactive particles unexpectedly gusted out of a pipe in the Unit 1 reactor building, contaminating about 12 workers.
In all, about 150 employees were evacuated from the building, where the reactor has been shut down since Oct. 26 for refueling and to install two new massive steam generators.
About five hours later, TMI reported to Dauphin County's emergency management office, which relayed word to officials in Harrisburg and Lancaster County.
The company reportedly waited another hour to contact state officials directly.
Normal notification channels would be through the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency or the Department of Environmental Protection, said Gary Tuma, Rendell's press secretary.
Ralph DeSantis, plant spokesman, said he did not know if any of the affected workers were from this county.
The incident apparently did not alarm the public.
No calls from residents came in here, according to Eric Bachman, duty officer with the county Emergency Management Office.
But, according to published reports, Gov. Ed Rendell called the delay "totally unacceptable" in a pointed letter to John Rowe, CEO of Exelon Corp., the Chicago-based company that owns Unit 1.
Rendell complained again after company officials did not promptly report false alarms that set sirens blaring Monday night and early Tuesday.
Officials from the state and Exelon met last week, according to DeSantis.
Tuma said even minor contamination should be disclosed immediately, given public "sensitivities" about TMI history.
Unit 2 sustained a partial meltdown in 1979 and has been mothballed since.
The plant was back to normal a few days after the incident last weekend, according to DeSantis.
"It's not unusual for a worker to become contaminated" while performing maintenance, he added.
Last weekend, he said, radioactive particles were dislodged when a ventilation fan was switched on, changing the air pressure; the problem has been fixed.
No radiation escaped the reactor building, DeSantis said. The dozen workers who received "detectable" radiation doses absorbed less than 1 percent of the allowable federal total for a year.
Even though public safety was never threatened, DeSantis added, "We did make dozens of calls to stakeholders and elected officials" that evening. "We put a news release out Saturday night."
The Sunday News did not receive a release that night. The next day, the Associated Press sent out a 10:02 a.m. story that was picked up later by other media.
Eric Epstein, chairman of the TMI Alert watchdog group in Middletown, conceded the minor nature of the event. But he said in an e-mail that it's "a harsh reminder that nuclear power is neither clean or green."
Epstein added that although the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved TMI's relicensing last month, and a supposedly revitalized industry is pushing hard for new state and federal subsidies, troubling safety and communications problems persist at TMI and other plants.
"The Pony Express delivers messages faster than Three Mile Island alerted elected officials" about last weekend's incident, Epstein said.
Nor is the plant equipped to adequately detect radiation leaks in the community, according to Epstein, whose group has been doing its own monitoring around the clock for 17 years.
NRC officials contacted TMI Alert the day after the incident because "we could independently verify that there were no offsite releases," Epstein said.
"The plants are getting older and this [kind of accident] is going to happen" regularly, he predicted.
Diane Screnci, a spokeswoman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said the contamination level was low and "not required to be formally reported to the NRC. Was the state notified in a timely manner? That's a question for the commonwealth or the company."
http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/245641
Nuclear fleet shows its age
A three-decade life extension might make economic sense, but is it too risky for residents?]
Image
By Tyler Hamilton Energy and Technology Columnist
Kathy Hogeveen remembers the sugar cubes most.
They were there, along with the free coffee, at the visitor's centre at Pickering nuclear station. It was the mid-1970s and Hogeveen and her friends were typical teenyboppers — restless and bored. They used to ride to the plant on their bikes to watch movies about the wonders of safe, clean, low-cost nuclear power. There, in what seemed like their own private theatre, they'd suck on a seemingly endless supply of cubed sweets.
It wasn't a long trek. The station's reactor containment buildings were just 1,200 metres away from Hogeveen's yard on Colmar Ave., a block from her public school. Surrounded by empty fields and without much to do, popping into the neighbouring nuke facility seemed perfectly normal.
"I probably watched that movie over 50 times," Hogeveen recalls of her visits to Canada's first commercial nuclear plant, which between 1971 and 1986 grew from one to eight reactors. "It's amazing how much time we spent hanging around that place."
Thirty-five years later, the Pickering station is under the microscope. Its four Pickering B reactors, built in the mid-1980s, will within a few years come to the end of their safe operating lives. Ontario Power Generation, the Crown corporation that owns and operates the plant, is expected to decide before year's end whether it makes sense to mothball the Candu reactors or spend billions of dollars extending their life beyond 2050. One stop-gap being considered is a quick tune-up and short life extension.
The clock is ticking. Pickering B's reactors contribute more than 2,000 megawatts to the province's power mix, enough electricity over a year to supply 1.6 million homes. If they are to be shut down as early as 2012, then Ontario must make sure it has another source of power to take their place. Those who argue against refurbishment cite the high cost of operating the Pickering station and the poor performance of two Pickering A reactors that were renewed between 2003 and 2005. They also point to the cost overruns and delays related to refurbishments of two Candu reactors at the Bruce generating station, a three-hour drive northwest of Toronto, and one reactor at the Pointe Lepreau generating station in New Brunswick.
"The industry has not delivered on its promise of rebuilding old reactors on time and on budget," said Greenpeace activist Shawn-Patrick Stensil.
But risks related to safety are what most concern the former head of Canada's nuclear safety regulator. Linda Keen, president of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission between 2001 and 2007, told the Star during an exclusive series of interviews that the rate of population growth around Pickering isn't being taken seriously enough.
TORONTO STAR ILLUSTRATION
"Population growth means the risk has increased," Keen said. "To be honest, I don't know how you'd vacate the Pickering area alone in the event of an emergency."
Pickering was much smaller back when Hogeveen was a child. In 1974 fewer than 25,000 called it home. Since then the population has almost quadrupled to 95,000 and is expected to surpass 132,000 in 2013. Neighbouring Ajax, with a population similar in size to Pickering, has seen near identical growth.
As OPG has pointed out at community meetings, Pickering is "an emerging growth centre and is expected to lead the nation in residential growth over the next 10 to 20 years."
Both Pickering and Ajax fit almost entirely within what's called the "primary zone," a circle around Pickering generating station that extends in every direction for 10 kilometres. It also includes parts of Scarborough to the west and Whitby to the east.
In the event of a nuclear accident that requires evacuation of the primary zone, it's estimated more than 240,000 people in as many as 100,000 vehicles would need to be relocated within 24 hours. That's on top of the plant's 2,800 employees.
By comparison, Ukraine authorities evacuated a 30-km zone after the Chernobyl reactor explosion in 1986. About 14,000 people living in the area were told to leave. They never came back.
A faulty Russian reactor design and poor training was found to be the cause of the Chernobyl disaster. Ontario Power Generation and its predecessor Ontario Hydro have assured over the two decades since that such an accident could not happen with a Canadian-designed Candu.
But accidents aren't the only risk. A no-fly zone does not exist around Pickering station, according to regulatory documents. The reactor containment buildings were not designed to withstand a large airplane crash, making the plant more vulnerable to the kind of terrorism witnessed in 2001.
Keen adds that the risks are statistically higher because of the design of Pickering station, which at one point was host to eight reactors. "That's not the norm," she said, noting that most nuclear plants in Europe and the U.S. only have one or two reactors.
Pickering has six. Just east, Darlington station has four and is slated to get two more. The Bruce plant has six, growing to eight after refurbishments. "The concept of multi-unit reactors is, to my knowledge, quite unique to Canada."
It's for this reason that Keen, in mid-2007, asked her commission to study population densities and "buffer zones" surrounding nuclear plants around the world. She wanted to know the international norm, suspecting that Pickering likely wouldn't be built today based on current population numbers around the sensitive primary zone.
She was equally concerned about population trends. "The aspect of future as well as current population is important as a refurb (refurbished reactor) could be there in 25 or 40 years and a new plant for 100 years," said Keen, adding that neither OPG nor the Ontario government seem concerned.
Keen understands the challenges of enforcing nuclear safety. In November 2007 she was head of the safety commission when it ordered Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. to shut down its medical isotope-producing research reactor at Chalk River. The regulator, citing safety concerns, issued the order because emergency power systems on the half-century-old National Research Universal reactor had not been connected and was in violation of Atomic Energy's licence.
The problem, politically, is that the shutdown led to a global isotope shortage and, to calm international concerns, Parliament overturned the regulator's decision. Days later Keen was fired, taking the fall for what the natural resources minister at the time, Gary Lunn, called a "lack of leadership."
Many industry experts have since come to Keen's defence, arguing she acted the way a nuclear safety regulator should. Keen, who is a cancer survivor, knows all about the importance of isotope-assisted diagnosis and treatment. But "my job was not to worry about the supply of isotopes," she told the Star. "It was to make sure the facility was safe."
It's the same reason Keen ordered the study on buffer zones just a few months before her dismissal. Two years later, that study is still not done. Aurèle Gervais, a spokesman for the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, said the agency has not proceeded "due to competing priorities."
He said a study is now anticipated to begin in late 2010 or early 2011 – too late to influence a refurbishment or life-extension decision for Pickering.
In the meantime, life goes on within the contiguous zone, the area that would be most affected by an accident at Pickering. Over at Sir John A. Macdonald Public School, built a year before Ontario Hydro broke ground on the nuclear plant, the containment buildings and surrounding transmission lines are as much a part of the scenery as the local parks, plazas and fire hall.
Sir John's has the distinction of being one of the closest elementary schools in the world to a nuclear power plant, if not the closest. About 460 students go there, and 37 graduating classes have passed through its halls.
Principal Michael Bowman said the station, while less than two kilometres away, is accepted as part of the community. Students don't appear bothered by its presence, and parents – many of them employees of the plant – have not raised concerns.
"I don't really even think about it, to tell you the truth," said Bowman, 39. "It's been there as long as I've been around." In that time there have been no major incidents.
Still, students are routinely reminded of the plant and the risks of being so close. The school holds annual evacuation drills, and every few years it takes part in a Durham Region drill that puts students on a bus and takes them to a designated holding location. "It's the real deal," said Bowman.
At the beginning of every school year parents are asked to sign a waiver form giving school officials approval to hand out potassium-iodide pills to their children in the event of a serious radiation leak. The pills flood the thyroid glands so they won't absorb as much deadly radioactive iodine.
Every school within the three-kilometre zone has a stockpile of the pills, along with a list of students allowed to take them. Daycares, hospitals and seniors' homes have their own supply. But the risk of a major accident at Pickering station is low, according to a study last year for OPG as part of an environmental assessment of Pickering B. If such an accident was to happen, the utility assured the safety regulator last fall that the primary zone could be evacuated in less than seven hours, well within the 24-hour window required by law.
Even with a near doubling of the surrounding population expected after 2025, evacuation could be done in less than 10 hours – and that's taking into account bad winter weather, rush-hour driving conditions, and psychological factors such as mass panic, according to the study.
OPG makes another key assumption: Road capacity will improve as population grows, so no need to worry about an additional 70,000 cars trying to flee the primary zone.
In such an unlikely event, "effective evacuation of the three-kilometre and 10-kilometre regions around Pickering Nuclear can be accomplished well before any required release of radioactivity following an event at the station," OPG spokesman Ted Gruetzner said.
But some industry observers, including Keen, warn that such evacuation plans fail to anticipate the chaos likely to result. They also tend to overlook what happens to people after they have been evacuated. How are they fed? How long are they kept? When and how do they return home?
"I still believe it's one of the most unplanned things," said Keen.
The number of organizations with overlapping responsibilities can also complicate the outcome. On the federal level there's the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, Health Canada, Transport Canada and Public Security Canada. Provincially, there's Emergency Management Ontario and Ontario Power Generation. On a municipal level, there's Durham Region, the City of Toronto, municipal fire and police.
As a teenager, Hogeveen and her friends just went about their days, occasionally riding to the Pickering plant to snatch a few sugar cubes.
Today, in her late 40s, Hogeveen has five children and lives in Cambridge. Asked whether she'd ever move back to her old neighbourhood, she doesn't think twice. "I wouldn't want to live that close to a nuclear plant."
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/731959--nuclear-fleet-shows-its-age
The Hindu : News / National : India, Canada clinch nuclear deal
Harper had said that Canada is an "emerging super power" in the in energy sector while India is in need of energy. Keywords: India, Canada, nuclear deal, ...
beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article56728.ece - 11 hours ago -The Hindu : News / National : India, Canada clinch nuclear deal
28 Nov 2009 ... India on Saturday reached a civil nuclear agreement with Canada. ... Harper had said that Canada is an "emerging super power" in the in ...
beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article56728.ece?homepage=true -Indianexpress.com : comments : Again, India votes against Iran's ...
And these muslim made India with nuclear weapon but Hindu India never be ... relationship with terrorist breeding neibhours and leave superpower USA. ...
www.indianexpress.com/comments/again-india-votes...nuclear.../547319/ -Again, India votes against Iran's nuclear programme
28 Nov 2009 ... India has voted along with the US, China and other major powers in favour .... to see an emerging powerful muslim nation with super power status. ... And these muslim made India with nuclear weapon but Hindu India never ...
www.indianexpress.com/news/again-india-votes...nuclear.../547319/ - Cached -US Media on India's Nuclear Tests
has overwhelmingly welcomed the tests as a reminder to the world that India can become a nuclear superpower if it feels provoked or threatened. ...
www.indianembassy.org/pic/usmedia/selig.htm - Cached - Similar -India, a Superpower in the Third Millennium B.C. - and A.D.
India, superpower in the 3rd millennium BC - and AD. By Koenraad Elst ... In current discussions about this development, the Pokharan nuclear tests ... world It is still customary in the Western media to see 'Hindu India' as one half of ...
koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/politics/3rdmilleniumBC.html - Cached -Lahore Declaration and nuclear issues
India's National Magazine From the publishers of THE HINDU ... as the currency of an illusory super-power status, underplaying for now other aspects. ... In the initial stages, the nuclear weapons of India and Pakistan will not be on a high-alert status similar to that of the advanced nuclear weapons powers. ...
www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1605/16050120.htm - Cached -India as Global Military Superpower? « Pakistan Ka Khuda Hafiz
6 Nov 2009 ... "If India is really emerging a global super power then why isn't the US ... The possibility of nuclear use in South Asia increases with the ...
pakistankakhudahafiz.wordpress.com/.../india-as-global-military-superpower/ - Cached -Hindunet: The Hindu Universe: West's difficulty accepting India as ...
Re: West's difficulty accepting India as a Super Power- Pioneer [Re: madan] .... "We remain deeply concerned by the dangers posed by nuclear weapons and ...
www.hindunet.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat... - Cached -Pakistan Politics: India as Global Military Superpower?
11 Nov 2009 ... "If India is really emerging a global super power then why isn't the US ... The possibility of nuclear use in South Asia increases with the ... But you should not get angry if a hindu fires on an islamist who tells that ...
pakistanpal.blogspot.com/.../india-as-global-military-superpower.html - Cached -Book results for Nuclear Super Power Hindu India
You have removed results from this search. Hide them
Loading...
This Maximum City Belongs To All Of UsTimes of India - Nov 28, 2009 It would have been nice to examine the implications of the Mumbai attacks of one year ago in the context of a shared South Asian Muslim identity. ... Is it really India?DAWN.com - Nov 27, 2009 Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi says that Pakistan is 'compiling hard evidence of India's involvement' in terrorist attacks on Pakistan's public and ... Peace bid suffers as India seeks to malign PakistanDaily Times - - Nov 27, 2009 ISLAMABAD: The peace process between Pakistan and India remains in a state of limbo despite hectic international efforts to revive it, ...
Lingering stench poisons relationsNew Zealand Herald - Nov 27, 2009 Islamabad has admitted that terrorist Ajmal Kasab, who is being tried in India, is a Pakistani national. Photo / AP At the rear of Mumbai's Sir JJ Hospital ... No forward movementDAWN.com - - Nov 26, 2009 A woman offers prayers near a sand sculpture of the Taj Mahal hotel, one of the sites of last year's terror attacks in Mumbai, ... One year on, India-Pakistan chill deepens (One Year After 26/11)Sify - Nov 26, 2009 26-28, 2008 - three days that took India-Pakistan ties from a high note of hope to a crashing low. One year on, after seven dossiers given by India linking ... India remembers Mumbai attacksMoneycontrol.com - Nov 26, 2009 Hundreds of Mumbai residents gathered in India's financial capital on Thursday to mark the first anniversary of the three-day attack by 10 Pakistani ... Mumbai marks first anniversary of terror strikesIrish Times - - Nov 26, 2009 POLICE AND commando units, showcasing new armoured vehicles and hardware, paraded through the streets of India's financial capital, Mumbai, yesterday, ... India and Pakistan relations 'better than feared'Times Online - - Nov 26, 2009 A year after the Mumbai attacks, relations between India and Pakistan are better than many feared. That goes, too, for relations between India's Hindus and ... Mumbai remembers, voices anger 12 months after attacksSify - Nov 26, 2009 One year on from the deadly Islamist militant attacks in Mumbai, the city remembered its dead in solemn prayers and candlelit vigils, with public anger at ... | Timeline of articlesNumber of sources covering this story
|
Europe And The New China India Asian Power BlocGov Monitor - 2 hours ago Europeans have tended to believe that their own shortcomings are the sole origin of difficulties faced in the relationship with China; the Asian superpower ... Indo-US Mutual DeceptionsA Pakistan News - Nov 22, 2009 Indian ambition of becoming a superpower will also prove a dream as non-state actors who are present almost in every South Asian state are likely to ... India has taken note of assertiveness by China: PM Indian Express What Next in Afghanistan? Project Syndicate - Nov 27, 2009 Follow it, and you will conclude that, ultimately, the war is all about the American superpower's military victory over the Taliban, so that it can finally ... Pak 'hosted' HeadleyExpress Buzz - Nov 17, 2009 Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto told Saudi Arabia, Iran and Libya about the Pakis have a Islamic bomb programme to counter Christian, Jewish and Hindu nuclear bombs. ... Contrasting responses to catastrophesAsian Tribune - - Nov 26, 2009 They have managed to hoodwink the world for such a long period since they sit firmly in the lap of a super power and become their loyal cronies. ... :. Can Islamic World be Saved? Kashmir Watch In Flourishing India, An Old Obsession With PakistanNPR - Nov 16, 2009 Islamabad is not a superpower," Kakkar says. But Kakkar believes Indian attitudes toward Pakistan have since hardened. "Today, I don't think there's any ... N-deal, Pak, terror on agenda during PM-Obama meetIndian Express - Nov 22, 2009 8) Close NASA-ISRO satellite agreements 9) Get Nuclear agreement closed and operational. Nitin Mathur , INDIA NEEDS PEOPLE LIKE YOU IN POLITICS FOR BETTER ... Of saints and sinnersDaily Pioneer - - Nov 23, 2009 When Joseph Stalin started off in the Kremlin, it was a Russia of the plough; he left the country a nuclear superpower, said Churchill. ... |
Nuclear power in India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to Nuclear power plants: Currently, seventeen nuclear power reactors produce 4120.00 MW (2.9% of total installed base). ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_India - Cached - Similar -Nuclear power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Brunswick Nuclear Plant discharge canal. Many countries remain active in developing nuclear power, including Pakistan, Japan, China and India, all actively ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power - Cached - Similar -Nuclear Power Plant Company - Nuclear Power Corporation of India ...
Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited is a Public Sector Enterprise under the administrative control of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), ...
www.npcil.nic.in/ - Cached - Similar -Nuclear Power Plants in India
Nuclear Power in India | Indian Nuclear Power
Now, foreign technology and fuel are expected to boost India's nuclear power plans considerably. All plants will have high indigenous engineering content. ...
www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf53.html - Cached -- [PDF]
NUCLEAR ENERGY IN INDIA
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
4. Nuclear Power Plants in India. 4.1 Overview. 4.2 Profiles of Nuclear Power Plants in Operation. 4.2.1 Plants at Tarapur. 4.2.2 Plants at Rawatbhata ...
www.cygnusindia.com/.../Nuclear%20Energy%20in%20India-Synopsis%20%20TOC.pdf - Similar - Nuclear Power Plants | India Environment Portal
Indian Oil Corporation has signed an MoU with Nuclear Power Corporation of India for setting up a nuclear power plant of at least 1000 mw, ...
www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in › ... › Energy › Nuclear Power - Cached - Similar -India nuclear power
India's Nuclear power developments are under the purview of the Nuclear Power ... consider them the most inefficient nuclear-power plants in the world. ...
www.indianchild.com/india_nuclear_power.htm - Cached - Similar -GMR nuclear power plant for India in 5 years | DWS Business
GMR Energy, a unit of GMR Infrastructure Ltd. has announced India' first privately owned and operated nuclear power plant, close on the heels of the NSG ...
www.dancewithshadows.com/.../gmr-nuclear-power-plant-for-india-in-5-years/ - Cached - Similar -INSCDB: Maps: INDIA
Maps of Nuclear Power Reactors: INDIA ... the above map: China, Pakistan, Asia, and INDIA . Individual plants within the country as shown on the above map: ...
www.insc.anl.gov/pwrmaps/map/india.php - Cached - Similar -
| Searches related to: Nuclear Power Plants in India | |||
| tarapur nuclear power plant | kalpakkam nuclear power plant | nuclear power plant reactor | bwr nuclear power plant |
| uranium nuclear power plants | pwr nuclear power plant | nuclear power plant mw | planned nuclear power plants |
You have removed results from this search. Hide them
Loading...
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next |
No comments:
Post a Comment