Comments on: Youth Protest Indo-US Nuclear Deal

By: Godhra Train`Conspiracy’ and Indo US Nuke deal: Condense Muslim Hate Based Global Hegemony Justifies Ethnic Cleansing! « Palashbiswaskl’s Weblog

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:14:37 +0000

[...] Youth Protest Indo-US Nuclear Deal « It’s Getting Hot In Here 19 Mar 2008 … The Indo-US Nuclear deal, also known as the “1, 2, 3″ Deal has been full of controversy ever since its inception. … itsgettinghotinhere.org/2008/03/19/youth-protest-indo-us-nuclear-deal/ - 47k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this [...]

By: Robin

Robin — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 05:58:18 +0000

I am glad our prime minister went ahead with this historic deal against all the bulwarks opposing it.Some of the obvious merits of the deal are:
1) India, a non-signatory of the NPT & CTBT gets the nuclear weapons states
status.
2) India can walk away from the deal & can conduct nuclear tests but will get
sufficient uranium fuel for its reactors to operate at maximum output
hitherto.
3) As per the separation plan, only civilian nuclear facilities will be
inspected by the IAEA.
4) This deal ends the 30 year of nuclear apartheid because of which India has
been isolated & deprived of the latest nuclear technology which would have
lended impetus to its long term nuclear plans.

Lets debate the issue of energy security.Nuclear power contributes less than
3% to our energy,meagre by any standards.Over the next decade this can
increase to upto 10%,still way less than oil & coal but substantial.Everyone
witnessed the way crude oil prices dealt a sever blow to our economy &
spurred inflation to double digits.Yes, agreed, to some extent this deal &
India’s proximity to US puts the IPI gas pipeline deal in jeopardy but
then we cant turn a blind eye to environment friendly nuclear energy.India
has 30% thorium reserves but is yet to develop the technology to harness it.
Once she does, we will have electricity cheaper than that produced from
coal.
The technology and the uranium fuel for its reactors would propel the
nuclear programme which has stagnated in the last 3 decades.India needs to
emulate France where nuclear power contributes 70% to its energy needs.

By: R Margolis

R Margolis — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:31:49 +0000

Sounds like NIRS does not know the difference between the RBMK and current designs. Modern reactors such as the AP-1000 or ESBWR (not to mention current light water reactors) cannot have run-away nuclear reactions like Chernobyl. TMI was much more localized because the driver of the accident was the decay heat rather than the chain reaction. It is physically impossible for a light water reactor to undergo a chain reaction explosion like a bomb [re: Sagar's comment].

I don’t believe I have claimed that nuclear has no issues, only that it is a strong contender for a transition source (especially if the energy storage technologies do not pan out).

By: Mattie Reitman

Mattie Reitman — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:06:51 +0000

whoa. hey y’all, nuclear power is scary, and it’s certainly not an answer to climate change.

“Adding enough nuclear power to make a meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas emissions would cost trillions of dollars, create tens of thousands of tons of lethal high-level radioactive waste, contribute to further proliferation of nuclear weapons materials, result in a Chernobyl-scale accident once every decade or so, and, perhaps most significantly, squander the resources necessary to implement meaningful climate change mitigation policies.”

http://www.nirs.org/climate/climate.htm

No Coal, No Nukes, No Kidding.

http://energyjustice.net/nuclear

By: navya

navya — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 13:04:58 +0000

i think there is no need of such a deal with sucha dangerous country instead developing technologies in our country and trying to effort money for developing individually is better than sigininig a deal.

By: sagar

sagar — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:31:53 +0000

may be TMI was minor
but in us major nuclear explosiond have taken place which were 30 to 40 times more stronger than hiroshima & nagasaki atomic explosions

TO R MARGOLIS

By: Why Indo-US Nuclear Deal When Oceans can Give Clean Energy | MarineBuzz.com

Why Indo-US Nuclear Deal When Oceans can Give Clean Energy | MarineBuzz.com — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:37:15 +0000

[...] points against the deal as comments by Protik Maitra from North Carolina in ‘ Youth protest Indo - US nuclear deal [...]

By: dr veeri

dr veeri — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 10:08:05 +0000

we may need nuclear deal with US for many purposes like energy, geopoliticle strategy etc etc but it should not take away us from our basic tenants of NAM which remained our mark of identification & also helped us during testing times in the past 40 years. At the same time we must think about our neighbouring countries, how are they perciving the deal. It should also not act as a suger coated pill which will have long term adverse consiquences like that of east india company.

By: Protik Maitra (North Carolina)

Protik Maitra (North Carolina) — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:41:45 +0000

There are many who support this deal, while many who oppose this deal. Those who are saying that the Left is opposing the deal, are not correct. The left has 9 points which they want to be addressed, some of them are:

1. Hyde Act, which is a US domestic act, put many Indian N-facilities under their jurisdiction, and therefore, will be able to force the US government to pressurise the NSG (which works on consensus) to stop supplying Nuclear Fuel to India, should India do something that the US does not like. For exmaple, the Indian Parliament condemned the NATO attack on Iraq without UN sanction. This shows India’s foreign policy is independent. It will not be any more with Hyde Act in place.
2. Australia, which has the highest known Uranium reserves, continues the sell Uranium to China, a clear proliferator, and US, which used N-Bombs on Japan, yet shows double standards towards selling Uranium to India. The 1-2-3 Agreement does not address that concern.
3. Indian army is deployed in Afghanistan and India send supplies to them via Iran. India is also building a railway line connecting Iranian shore and Iran-Afghan border. Iran can be a vital source for the Gas-Pipeline project, which will be beneficial to India. We need that energy resource, since we cannot run cars and buses with nuclear generated electricity. We need oil for that. Adopting an anti-Iran posture under pressure from US will hamper India’s energy security and military presense in Afghanistan.
4. India is still being judged from the fact that India is a NPT-non-signatory, which in itself is discriminatory.
5. The US is trying to sell India N-technology that is meant from Uranium Reactors, for which, India will have to spend her resources to buy or build reactors using Uranium. This would make India dependent on foreign Uranium imports.
6. India has 25% of the world knows Thorium resources, which, would be a better way to invest India’s resources on, than on Uranium based old technology, that the US is trying to sell.
7. To separate Civil and Military N-facilities in India will incur enormous cost, which, till date, has not been confidently estimated by BARC. That would be a great overhead on our economy. Not to mention the years, if not decades, it will take to complete the separation process.
8. Keeping the above in mind, opening up our facilities for foreign inspection will cause leakage of our N-secrets and will compromise our N-deterrent.
9. Many scientists in BARC have openly admitted their concerns regarding this deal, which has not been addressed by the government.
10. The deal will place many Indian facilities under foreign scrutiny for perpetuity, yet, there is not guarantee that Uranium will be made available to India till perpetuity.

True, we need N-power, but at what cost are we getting it?

By: Tarun(NIT JALANDHAR)

Tarun(NIT JALANDHAR) — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:44:08 +0000

Communists of india have responded to the nuclear deal issue(of course issue made by them only) in a unexpected way. Communists of india have nothing to give to the nation. Then are like one who are always against the reforms carried out by any political party of india. Their main motive is to oust the two major political power of india and come to the power as 3rd front. They want to do this by first spoilin all the attempts of development of the nation by political parties like congress and denigrate the congress leadership both domestically and internationally. They want to follow the footsteps of its parent russia and china. Even russia which is rival of US has supported this deal. If foreigners can see the obvious benefit of the deal, then why left is becoming oblivious with this. If left is this much concerned with the deal then why dint it oppose the deal in its early stages. This volte face of left is only because it wants to bring bad name to india in world for its own certain motives. This imbroglio directed and produced by left is havin an impact on the sensex. Left must think for the energy needs indian developing economy require to sustain a consistent development. I cant figure out how they can reprimand such an important deal for their own political motive. With this progression of the deal issue, left has become a anathema Every indian whoever knows something about the deal hates the left. In this predicament situation, i would like to appreciate the role played by mr. Singh. It was only because of his stature and his stern attitude that made it possible to fetch the deal. If this deal is made all credits will go to mr singh only. I request the govt not to surrender to the unfair demands of left and try to extricate country out of the energy crisis.