|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
| << July12, 2008 - [India Thinkers Net]Nuke deal news , On Iran ,neo-liberalism etc |
July18, 2008 - [India Thinkers Net] More and more nuke news >> |
|
[1] Education In Punjab ? A Dream By Pardeep http://www.countercurrents.org/pardeep130708.htm All the schools I visited in Punjab, I saw many slogans written on the walls of schools that? Vidya bechari ta par-upkari? means ?Education is for welfare/improvement?, ?Vidya ? 3rd ankh? means ?Education - 3rd eye? etc. But the condition of education in Punjab is like drowning Titanic ship. Education has become business and not for opening 3rd eye or for welfare ------------- [2] From: "Sukla Sen" <sukla.sen@gmail.com Date: Mon Jul 14, 2008 10:25 am Subject: Re: [IHRO] RE: [India-Force] Indo-US Nuclear Deal: Role of Nuclear Power in India's Energy Security Nuclear energy, anywhere in the world, is as of now uneconomic as compared to coal and gas (this is the least of the objection); intrinsically hazardous throughout the fuel cycle from mining to power plant as it handles radioactive material - and there is no foolproof method for waste disposal and even less so for outlived plants which would remain radioactive for too long a period; potentially catastrophic - as graphically brought out by the Chernobyl accident turning Chernobyl a nuclear grave, causing large-scale additional deaths and uprooting two hundred thousand people permanently from their habitats. (Private insurance companies do not insure nuclear power plants.) It also has a strong technological linkage with nuclear weapons and thereby works as a powerful political driver - India being perhaps the most vivid illustration. As regards emission of CO2, while the plant doesn't do so, from mining to plant - including transportation and construction of the plant, involved emission of CO2. As the grade/quality of the uranium ore declines, the net energy gain dips and the CO2 emission becomes higher and higher per unit of energy output. Nuclear energy cannot substitute for energy from liquid hydro-carbon mainly used in transport or generators etc. More importantly, highly centralised huge power production units, as mandated by nuclear power generation, further aggravates a development paradigm that leads to deepening ecological crisis - including CO2 emission and global warming etc. Japan is an instructive example. Nuclear power being highly capital expensive and thereby front-loaded expenditure tends to elbow out other sensible options of developing small decentralised power units out of environmentally benign renewable sources encouraging an economic model which could be ecologically sustainable. In much of the West, for over two decades, particularly since Chernobyl in 1986, there is a virtual freeze on nuclear power. Only very recently there is a feeble movement towards revival spearheaded by the rightwing regimes utterly callous about environment in the first place. Sukla From: Abhiyya <abhiyya@yahoo.com Date: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:49 pm Subject: Karat meets Mayawati in a move to 'vote out' UPA abhiyya Offline Send Message Edit Membership A good move, if it works - Abhiyya Karat meets Mayawati in a move to 'vote out' UPA http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Karat-meets-Mayawati-in-a-move-to-vote-out-\ UPA/335031/ CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat and BSP supremo Mayawati, two staunch opponents of the Indo-US nuclear deal, met in an apparent move to take on the Government during the trust vote in Lok Sabha on July 22. Karat, who is spearheading the Left opposition on the deal, drove to the UP Chief Minister's residence for the meeting. This is the first meeting between the two leaders after the recent political developments that saw Mayawati withdrawing support to the Government followed by the Left last week. After the 45-minutes meeting, the Marxist leader hailed Mayawati's opposition to the nuclear deal and said the two parties would cooperate in the "struggle" against the agreement. "We wanted the two parties cooperate in the struggle against the Government," Karat said in apparent reference to the trust vote being sought by the Manmohan Singh ministry. While the Left has 59 MPs in the Lok Sabha, the BSP has 17. Karat had on July 11 said he was in touch with "all parties" which can take a stand against the deal, an issue on which the Left parties withdrew support to the Government reducing it to a minority. Mayawati has so far declined to divulge her strategy on the trust vote but there were reports that she was attempting to woo several SP and Congress MPs in UP into her fold to vote against the Government in the trial of strength in the Lok Sabha. With Regards Abi -------------- [3] From: "Sukla Sen" <sukla.sen@gmail.com Date: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:46 pm Subject: Indo-US Nuclear Deal: Role of Nuclear Power in India's Energy Security Membership *Reports Of IAEA, US, Plan Panel Group Say N-Power Overhyped * *Shankar Raghuraman TIMES INSIGHT GROUP * New Delhi: Congress spokesperson Manish Tiwari said on Wednesday that India could ill afford to opt out of the nuclear power race at a time when 24 of the 35 nuclear power plants under construction in the world are in Asia. He also suggested that the Indo-US deal was a must for guaranteeing India's energy security. These statements might convey the impression that India is at present nowhere in the picture when it comes to building nuclear power plants and also that nuclear power is the key to India's future energy security. Both are far from the truth. India has six nuclear power plants under construction and only Russia has more with seven being built in that country. As an article in the bulletin of the IAEA put it: "India gets less than 3% of its electricity from nuclear, but it is, along with China and Russia, one of the leaders in current new construction, boasting six of the world's 35 reactors under construction.'' As for the imputation that nuclear energy holds the key to India's future energy security, neither the country's own official projections nor those done by its partner in the deal, the US, bear this out. The Energy Information Agency (EIA) of the US department of energy on June 25 put out the highlights of its latest International Energy Outlook, which contains projections by region/country for the use of different types of fuels up to 2030. The projections for India suggest that total installed power capacity will reach 3,98,000 MW by 2030, up from 1,38,000 MW in 2005. How much of this will be from nuclear plants? The EIA projection says about 20,000 MW. It means nuclear power will contribute barely 5% of India's total installed capacity in 2030 under this scenario. That doesn't quite sound like the key to energy security, does it? However, Indian estimates suggest a somewhat bigger role for atomic energy and sooner than the EIA projections. The Planning Commission's Working Group on Power for the 11th Plan took note of the Indo-US civil nuclear cooperation agreement as well as the likely opening up of atomic energy to the private sector and concluded that "the effect of this is likely to be visible in the 12th Plan period'' (2012-2017). Based on that assumption, it estimated that about 15,960 MW of nuclear power capacity could be added over the 11th and 12th Plan periods. That would take the total installed capacity of such plants to a little over20,000 MW by 2017, a lot earlier than the EIA feels India will reach that level. However, even by the Working Group's estimates, the 20,000 MW would constitute only 6.7% of the country's total installed capacity, which hardly makes it a determinant of India's energy security. Even globally, India, China, Russia and Japan are exceptions to the projected trend of nuclear power accounting for a lower portion of energy needs. Its contribution to global installed capacity is projected by the EIA to come down from 9.6% in 2005 to 7.1% by 2030. Even in Russia and Japan, its contribution is expected to rise just a wee bit from 10.6% to 11.6% in the former and from 19% to 21.2% in the latter. In China too, the increase in share of nuclear power is slated to rise from 1.6% in 2005 to 3.2% in 2030. If nuclear power isn't the key, what is? The EIA estimates suggest that coal will still remain the primary fuel for power in India accounting for 1,73,000 MW or over 43% in 2030. But the fastest growth will be in natural gas-based plants, which will account for 1,33,000 MW or over onethird of the total capacity. The Working Group's report does not give a break-up of thermal capacity, so one doesn't know how much of the planned capacity addition is coal-based and how much gasbased. However, it does say, "natural gas is the fastest growing primary energy source among fossil fuels''. It also acknowledges that India is likely to have only about 49 billion cubic metres (BCM) of gas production by the end of the 11th Plan against an estimated demand of 114 BCM. "It is reasonable to expect that sizable quantity of natural gas would need to be imported to meet the demand in future, either as LNG or through transnational pipelines," the report says. That indicates that deals like the India-Iran gas pipeline could really hold the key to India's energy security. Whether such a deal will be possible if India gets into a strategic embrace with the US, which has indicated its disapproval of the pipeline project, is another matter. July 12 2008 http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Daily/skins/TOI/navigator.asp? Daily=TOIM&login=de\ fault&AW=1215944730203 ----------------- [4] From: "Sukla Sen" <sukla.sen@gmail.com Date: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:38 pm Subject: AAPSO on Indo-US Nuclear Deal * AFRO-ASIAN PEOPLES' SOLIDARITY ORGANIZATION - AAPSO PERMANENT SECRETARIAT Consultative Status- ECOSOC, DPI, UNCTAD, UNIDO, UNESCO. Observer Status- NAM and African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights. 89, Abdel Aziz Al-Saoud St. Manial El Roda, P. O. B.: 61-11559 El Malek El Saleh, Cairo, Egypt Tel: (202)2 3622946 -2 3636081 Fax: (202)23637361 E.Mail: *aapso@idsc.net.eg* <aapso@idsc.net.eg / AAPSO on U. S. India Nuclear Deal The nuclear deal which culminated in signing an agreement between President Bush and Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh in 2005 has a long history. In 1974 India detonated a nuclear devise that used plutonium harvested from a heavy water reactor supplied by Canada and the United States in violation of bilateral peaceful nuclear use agreement. This raised loud agitations around the world. The U. N. Security Council Resolution 1172 calls on India and Pakistan to sign the comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and stop producing fissile material for weapons. This had not happened. India at the same time refuse to sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) perhaps with a sound argument that the NPT does not provide ultimate elimination of nuclear weapons which would be exclusively held by the "Nuclear Club" ? U. S; Russia, France, Britain and China, Moreover the nuclear powers will continue to modernize, improve and stockpile nuclear weapons which paused a danger to the world. According to NPT, non-nuclear countries have the right to get assistance through the IAEA once they become signatory to the NPT. Since India did not sign the NPT, it does not have such rights but under the deal between the U. S. and India; the U. S. could provide nuclear know how to India once the 45 nation Nuclear supply group exempt India from the rule. Both within India, the United States and around the world, this issue became a debating point. The treaty also has other implications as it was bound by the 123 agreement and the Hyde Act, which the Indian critics believe violate the sovereignty of India by linking with the U. S. strategic Alliance. 123 agreement is the relevant clause in the U. S. Atomic Energy Act which is binding to operationalise the U. S. India bilateral nuclear agreement which the U. S. congress has to accept in order 45 nation nuclear suppliers group (NSG) must grant India a special exemption from nuclear trade. The left parties in India which supported the congress party led coalition government in Delhi from outside refuse to support the deal but ultimately as the Prime Minister Singh was determined to accede, the left-parties on their meeting on 8th July 2008 withdrew their support to the government thereby reducing into a minority; Meanwhile another regional party Samajawadi Party with 39 members of parliament had agreed to prop up the central government and whether government has a majority could be seen only when they seek a vote of confidence in the Indian Parliament. The treaty has international implications. AAPSO from the very beginning joined with other peace forces around the world against this treaty as it violates the NPT and provoke more nuclear proliferation around the world. More over India being a strong pillar in the Non-Aligned Movement, this action contradicts the NAM principles. Under this condition, AAPSO is of the opinion that IAEA and the 45 nation NSG need to thoroughly study the request of India for a safeguard exemption before granting such a privilege in keeping with the interest of the world public opinion. ------------------ [5] Dismantling Democracy, Science And The Public Interest By Vandana Shiva http://www.countercurrents.org/shiva140708.htm Dismantling Democracy, Science and the Public Interest to put GMO's on Fast Track: The Proposed National Biotechlogy Regulatory Authorigy (NBRA) and National Biotechnology Regulatory Bill, 2008 |
|
| << July12, 2008 - [India Thinkers Net]Nuke deal news , On Iran ,neo-liberalism etc |
July18, 2008 - [India Thinkers Net] More and more nuke news >> |
|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
|
Archives powered by Zinester's Mailing List Service
Details on India Thinkers Net |
Browse for more newsletters at Zinester's Ezine Directory
Managed by Zinester's Mailing List Management |