ABSTRACT

Energy security for a country as large as India can only be provided by a diversified portfolio
and this has to include nuclear power. While India is amongst the top 10 countries of the world
in terms of production of electricity by hydro, coal, oil and gas, it is nowhere near the top 10
with respect to nuclear power generation. For a large country like India, this is an anomaly in
need of correction. In 1960s country get its first nuclear power plant in Tarapur which is
producing 320 MW of electricity. From that time to today India is having 7 nuclear power plants
with 22 reactors producing 6780 MW of electricity, but it is only contributing 3.22% of country
electricity need. 6 nuclear power plants are under construction which can produce 4300 MW of
electricity when it complete. Country like Russia, France & Germany are the partner in these
projects and helping India to setup nuclear energy ecosystem in country. Recently just 2 days
back on (13-03-2019) India signed an agreement with United States to set up 6 more nuclear
power plants in the country to fulfill the need of the country. In this paper we are going to
discuss the role of nuclear power in electricity production in India, its evolution in India & how
it is environmentally & economically viable in India.

Key Words: - Energy Sector, Nuclear Energy, Power Generation, Electricity Production,
Environmentally & Economically Viable etc.

1
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The research methodology of this study is done with the help of different sources such as:-

 Primary Source (Supreme Court and High Court Judgements, Acts).

 Secondary Sources (Research Article, Text book, Online Journals etc).

CITATION METHOD

Citation Method use in this study is OSCOLA1 (Oxford University Standard for the Citation of
Legal Authorities) 4th Edition, 2018.

OBJECTIVES

1. To find out the implication of use of nuclear energy for electricity production.
2. To find out the proliferation concern of India civil nuclear energy.
3. To find out the economically & environmentally viability of nuclear energy.

1
Oscola_4th_edn_hart_2012.Pdf’ <https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxlaw/oscola_4th_edn_hart_2012.pdf>
accessed 26 March 2019.

2
 NUCLEAR POWER IN INDIA: PACE OF CHANGE

INTRODUCTION

Energy is a multiplier for human effort and is the engine for economic growth and human
development. To ensure continued economic growth, India has to find energy resources and
develop corresponding energy technologies. The relationship between energy growth and
economic growth ex- pressed in terms of elasticity is well known and can be used to build
scenarios for required energy growth in the country. Energy growth scenarios have been
developed for the world as well as for individual regions and countries including India. Based on
the present situation and future projections, one can make several observations:

1. Unevenness in the development in the different regions of the world is also reflected in
unevenness in energy usage.
2. The developed countries are not only using a large share of energy supplies, they are
also using the cleaner energy options.
3. As the developing countries move ahead on the development path, the demand for
energy resources will gallop and will cause a situation of stress in the energy supplies.
4. Under these circumstances, it is necessary to utilise all known energy resources and
pursue research and development in identifying new energy resources and energy
technologies.

3
 ROLE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY

To delineate the role of nuclear energy, one has to look at energy growth scenarios at the global
level and the national level. For global scenarios, we will refer to the book titled, Energy to 2050
- Scenarios for a Sustainable Future by International Energy Agency [IEA 2003]. It has given
several exploratory scenarios and finally, given one normative scenario, which aims at meeting
three general objectives:

(i) Climate change mitigation

(ii) Energy security and diversification
(iii) Energy access

With a view to determine the growth plan for nuclear energy, a group in the department of
atomic energy (DAE) studied energy growth scenario in India.2 Using available GDP forecast,
this study developed a scenario for the growth of electrical energy in India and estimates based
on this study indicate that even after recognising that energy intensity of GDP would continue to
decline as in the past, the total electricity generation by the middle of the century would be an
order of magnitude higher than the generation at present. This calls for developing a strategy for
the growth of electricity generation based on a careful examination of all issues related to
sustainability, particularly abundance of available energy resources, diversity of sources of
energy supply and technologies, security of supplies and self sufficiency.

To meet the projected demand, the study presents a strategy which incorporates, wherever
available, recommendations of various organs of the government of India. This includes
augmenting nuclear installed capacity to 20 gigawatts of electricity (Gwe) by 2020 based on a
mix of pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs), light water reactors (LWRs) and fast breeder
reactors (FBRs) and realisation of full potential of hydro and renewable energy sources. In view
of very large energy requirements, it is necessary that the pace of addition in nuclear installed
capacity is maximised. Considering that India has only modest reserves of uranium, this calls for
deploying fast reactor technology, which makes it possible to recycle spent fuel after
reprocessing and re- fabrication. Further, to accelerate the growth of fast reactors, it is

2
Grover, R B and Subhash Chandra (2004): 'A Strategy for Growth of Electrical Energy in India', DAE report No
10, also accepted for publication in Energy Policy

4
necessary that R&D to set up uranium-plutonium metal based FBRs of short doubling time and
associated fuel reprocessing technologies is completed in the next 15 years to ensure that the
FBRs set up after 2020 have desirable growth characteristics. By following this route, nuclear
installed capacity can reach a figure of 275 Gwe by the middle of the century. After accounting
for the contribution by nuclear, hydro and renewable energy sources, rest of the demand has to
be met by fossil fuels: from domestic sources or by imports. Based on this scenario, it is observed
that the cumulative energy import during the next 50 years will be about 30% and the nuclear
contribution towards electricity generation will increase from the present 3 per cent to about a
quarter of the total.

Fossil fuels will continue to dominate the Indian energy scenario. Moreover, though in
percentage terms the cumulative imports and the level of imports around the middle of the
century could continue to be at the same level as at present, the absolute numbers will be many
times larger and will become a major factor with worldwide influence on prices and availability
of all fuels. A comparison of results of the study done by the DAE and the study done by the IEA
indicates the following:

1. The present hydrocarbon (oil and gas) usage in India is about 2.5 per cent of the
worldwide usage and this would grow close to 10 per cent by the middle of the
century.
2. The present coal usage in India4 is about 6 per cent and could grow to be above 45
per cent of likely world's usage. One may postulate a scenario different from the one
used for generating the above numbers and come up with a different set of numbers,
but one cannot escape from the conclusion that increase in the share of nuclear
energy in India's energy mix, beyond what is possible based on the domestic
programme, is desirable to minimise stress on global fossil fuel resources. This is
also desirable from global environmental consideration. A viewpoint about the role of
nuclear power in India is very well articulated by Mattoo3, "For a variety of reasons
that may not find favour with anti-nuclear absolutists, there is a consensus, across the
major political parties, that given India's existing and future energy needs, nuclear
power provides a potentially attractive source." It is worthwhile to note that from

3
Mattoo, Amitabh (2005): 'Striking a Balance', Economic and Political Weekly, August 27, pp 3815-18

5
 1990 through 2004, global nuclear electricity production increased from 1901 to
2619 TWh IAEA4. Installed nuclear capacity rose from 327.6 to 366.3 GWe due to
both new construction and uprates at existing facilities, and the global average
capacity factor improved from 71.6 to 83.3 per cent.

EVOLUTION OF NUCLEAR ENERGY

In the beginning of the nuclear era there was euphoria about nuclear generated electricity and
led to prophecy5 of it being "too cheap to meter". This has been used by the sceptics all over the
world to criticise nuclear energy without realising that, as George Milton said, "Among all
forms of mistake, prophecy is the most gratuitous". This has happened in India as well. The
three-stage nuclear power programme being pursued by the DAE in India was conceived during
the mid- 1950s, when expectations from nuclear energy were at their peak. Growth in nuclear
has been slower than envisaged and the critics never tire of commenting on this slow growth of
nuclear installed capacity. This is without realising that in spite of the state of the then industrial
infrastructure in the country, what has been achieved by the DAE is spectacular. One of the
authors M R Srinivasan 5 was associated with the construction of the first research reactor
APSARA and had to struggle with issues like aluminum welding, which one may consider
commonplace today.

The nuclear establishment in India has not only built nuclear reactors, but has also contributed
to the growth of industrial infrastructure as a very useful spin-off. For manufacture of different
complex and large-sized components of PHWRs, the DAE has interacted with Indian industry
and helped them to adapt to sophisticated technologies for the manufacturing processes, highest
levels of quality control, quality surveillance and quality assurance. First of a kind

4
'Factors Contributing to Increased Nuclear Electricity Production’: 1990-2004', Nuclear Power Newsletter, Vol 2,
No 3, September.
5
Srinivasan, M R (2005): 'Challenge and Opportunity', Economic and Political Weekly, August 27, pp 3806-08

6
manufacturing of many components to meet the critical requirements of various inter- national
nuclear codes was done in Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC). Indian industry was
unfamiliar with various international codes such as "ASME code for Boiler and Pressure Vessel"
and by interacting with engineers from the Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL) and
BARC, they could learn a lot. NPCIL had to modify equipment design to suit the manufacturing
capability available in India. Various test facilities were set up in BARC to qualify the
components and equipment manufactured by Indian industry. A similar effort is now being put in
by the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research (IGCAR) for the technology development of
the FBR. As a spin-off, the vendors have used the expertise generated to manufacture
sophisticated equipment for other sectors of the Indian economy. This has led to a win-win
situation. Increased capability of the vendors is a signal to the DAE to take up further
challenges.6

6
Grover, R B (2001): 'Technology Management by the Department of Atomic Energy', National Seminar on
Technology Management, October 12-13

7
As a part of the three-stage programme, PHWRs were chosen for deployment in the first stage.
The necessary institutional set- up was created to design, build and operate the reactors and a
large R&D programme was simultaneously launched. The first reactor at Rawatbhata was set up
with Canadian collaboration and subsequently reactors were set up with indigenous effort and
involved several innovative design improvements. The changes continued from Kalpakkam to
Narora. Standardised design evolved only after having constructed six reactors. As a result of
this evolution, several innovative features have been incorporated in Indian PHWRs and these
include changes in the containment system, in the shut-down system and so forth.7 PHWRs of
220 MWe and 540 MWe rating designed by India are already operating and a design of 700
MWe rating has been finalised for building in the near future. 8 Indian PHWRs have
demonstrated excellence in plant availability as well as safety.

Safety is a topic that engages the attention of everyone. The nuclear industry all over the world
has been conscious of this challenge and has been making all efforts to enhance safety. If we
compare various methods of electricity generation, nuclear industry has the best record. If we

7
Kakodkar, Anil and R B Grover (2004): Nuclear Energy in India. Vol 45, No 2, pp 31-36, March/April
8
Bhardwaj, S A (2005): 'The Future 700 MWe Pressurised Heavy Water Reactor', to be published in Nuclear
Engineering & Design

8
compare various methods of electricity generation, the nuclear industry has the best record.
Immediate fatalities for the period 1970-92, normalised to deaths per Twy of electricity is 342
for coal, 85 for natural gas, 883 for hydro and 8 for nuclear. 9 Nuclear industry is the only
industry where operators from all over the world have come together and set up an institution
called the World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO). This association conducts a peer
review of all nuclear power plants and is evolving industry- wide procedures and practices to
continuously enhance safety. NPCIL is a founder member of WANO and most of the reactors
operated by it have already been subjected to sheer review. The very fact that NPCIL joined
WANO and offered its reactors for peer review, indicates the level of confidence it has in its
operation. NPCIL is not resting on its laurels and is continuously working towards enhancing
safety and availability.

ECONOMICS

While the nuclear industry continues to provide electricity competitive rates and several
countries in need of additional generation capacity are going ahead with plans to set up nuclear
plants, a divergent view is also expressed that nuclear is not competitive. In early 2005, the
Nuclear Energy Agency International Energy Agency released their joint report titled, Projected
Costs of Generating Electricity: 2005 Update with objective to provide reliable information on
key factors affecting the economics of electricity generation using a range of technologies.10 The
report gives cost ratios of electricity generation from nuclear and coal and also from nuclear
and Experts from 19 countries participated in the study. The results indicate the following:

At 5 per cent discount rate, nuclear is cheaper as compared to gas in all the 19 countries. At
10 per cent discount rate, except Japan and the US, nuclear is cheaper compared to gas. US

9
'Generation IV: To 2030 and Beyond', Modern Power Systems, February, pp 28-29
10
‘Projected Costs of Generating Electricity’: 2005 Update', Nuclear Energy Agency and International Energy
Agency

9
offered two gas-based plant designs for this study and gas cheaper in the case of only one. At 5
per cent discount rate, except South Korea and the US, nuclear is cheaper as compared to In
South Korea, out of the four comparative evaluations given in the study, coal is cheaper for
only one case. At 10 per discount rate, in South Korea, the US and Germany, nuclear cheaper
compared to coal. In South Korea, for all the four comparative evaluations reported and in the
US for the two given, coal is cheaper. For Germany, for four cases analysed, coal is cheaper
in case of two.

There have been several national studies, including by as reported later, on comparative
economics of various methods of electricity generation. In a recent paper,11 has a comparative
analysis of all these studies. The studies examined by him include the DIDEME report from
France, MIT University of Chicago studies from the US, TARAJANNE study from Finland and
other studies. He concludes, "All recent European cost studies show that third generation
nuclear competitive with coal-fired plants, and may be up to 20 per cheaper than CCGTs for
base load electricity generation, when CO2 emissions costs are disregarded." He continues, "EU
picture should also apply to the US once the first new nuclear plants will have been successfully
built and operated in country."

A study done by NPCIL indicates that nuclear power from PHWRs is competitive as compared to
coal fired thermal power, when the nuclear plant is located about 1,000 km from the coal pit-
head. There are several regions in the country where such haulage is involved.

The figure compares the average tariff charged by the NPCIL with the average rate of purchase
of power by the state electricity boards (SEBs). Average rate of purchase of power by the SEBs
includes purchase from coal-fired power plants located at or near coal pit-heads. One may note
that when electricity is transmitted from plants near pit-heads to load centres, one needs
infrastructure for transmission and there are some transmission losses. The tariff also depends
on the age of the plant. In spite of the fact that several new plants have been added by NPCIL,
the average tariff charged by NPCIL is competitive considering the fact that NPCIL plants are

11
Proust, Eric (2005): 'Economic Competitiveness of New (3rd Generation) Nuclear Plants: A French and
European Perspective', proceedings of ICAPP05, Seoul, Korea, May 15-19

10
located away from pit-heads. Studies by IGCAR12 indicate that the cost of electricity from the
fast reactor will also be competitive.

Another study published in India is, 'Economics of Nuclear Power from Heavy Water
Reactors’.13 This study is based on specifically chosen nuclear and thermal power plants and has
been used to arrive at general conclusions. For coal fired plants, they have selected the Raichur
Thermal Power Station, which is an expansion project (seventh at the same site) and makes use,
of the infrastructure already built for the earlier plants. Its capital cost is about Rs 29.1 million
per MWe including interest during construction and Rs 23.4 million per MWe excluding IDC
and is in no way representative of the coal plants being constructed in the country. The Central
Electricity Authority's on its internet home page, gives data on plant costs. We looked at data for
plants under construction by the National Thermal Power Corporation on the home page on
September 29, 2005. Several plants are listed as under construction and the estimated cost per
MWe varies from Rs 37.7 million for Kahalgaon STP St-II Phase II to Rs 50.72 million for Bhilai
CCPP-II Expansion. For nuclear, Ramana et al have selected two cases: Kaiga 1 and 2, and
Kaiga 3 and 4. Kaiga was a green field site and NPCIL encountered a certain unusual situation
during the construction of Kaiga 1 and 2 leading to construction delays of around three years.
Considering that nuclear power projects are being constructed in 5 to 5.5 years, as
demonstrated by TAPP-4, this cannot be said to be representative of nuclear power plants. All
this is essentially to say that for any such analysis, it is desirable to take average capital costs
rather than that for specific plants. It must be remembered that nuclear technology is much
younger than coal power technology.

The analysis reported by Ramana et al has been examined in detail by NPCIL.14 Kaiga 3 and 4
are under construction and are scheduled to be completed in March and September 2007
respectively. Assumptions by Ramana et al about Kaiga 3 and 4 which need updating and have
significant impact on levelised cost of generation are the following: (a) The original approved
12
Bhoje, S B (2003): 'Status of Fast Reactor Development in India', Conference on Nuclear Power Technologies
with Fast Neutron Reactors, Obninsk, December
13
Ramana, M V, Antonette D'Sa and Amulya K N Reddy (2005): 'Economics of Nuclear Power from Heavy Water
Reactors', Economic and Political Weekly, April 23, pp 1763-73
14
Thakur, S (2005); personal communication, September; see also this issue of Economic and Political Weekly.
Tellis, Ashley J (2005): 'India as a New

11
cost of the project had an IDC component of 12.7 per cent based on approved financing pattern
of the project. The financing pattern of the project was revised to provide for higher debt thereby
making debt to equity ratio as 2:1. Accordingly, IDC increased to 16.9 per cent, but the authors
have used the original figure of 12.7 per cent. (b) As per the original plan, four additional units
of 220 MWe were planned to be constructed at the Kaiga site. This was later revised to two units.
The expenditure on advance procurement incurred for the then Kaiga- 3 to 6 (four units) has
been considered as expenditure for Kaiga 3 and 4 (only two units). (c) A nuclear power plant
uses power for its operation and this is called auxiliary power consumption. The authors have
used the auxiliary power consumption for Kaiga to be 12 per cent of full power (FP) whereas the
actual at Kaiga 1 and 2 at 100 per cent FP is about 9.5. (d) The article assumes the cost of heavy
water to be Rs 24,880 per kg. This is based on extrapolation of 1986 data. Energy cost is the
major component of the cost of heavy water. The Heavy Water Board, the agency responsible for
the production of heavy water in India, has successfully implemented several measures aimed at
reducing specific energy consumption in the production of heavy water.

INDIA AND PROLIFERATION CONCERNS

From the beginning of the programme till the mid-1970s, India and other countries of the world
did cooperate in the development of nuclear technology and this cooperation has been mutually
beneficial. Critics of India talk about the benefits of cooperation to India and forget the benefits
which have accrued to others. This requires elaboration. For any system analysis, it is necessary
to first construct a system boundary and the results of the analysis will depend on the boundary
chosen. To deal with the issue at hand, the boundary has to be chosen in the time domain as well
as across disciplines as nuclear technology is inherently inter- disciplinary.

Now let us take the boundary in terms of disciplines of science and engineering. Developments in
one discipline influence the other and it is well nigh impossible to unambiguously delineate the
boundary of what one might call nuclear science and engineering. Researchers from India have
been contributing to advanced research while in India and also while working in the developed

12
world. While India has benefited from cooperation with others, Indian scientists and engineers,
who have been educated in the Indian education system, have contributed a lot to developments
in other countries. While critics of India refer to cooperation received by India from the west,
they forget the reverse flow of the talent. Specifically nuclear engineers and technologists who
worked at Tarapur and Rajasthan and else- where are working in large numbers in the US and
Canadian nuclear programmes, in the fashion of the usual brain drain from India as in many
other fields.

Let us come to time domain. Results are still more interesting. One end of the system boundary
for the time domain has to be the present; while the other boundary could be shifted as far back
as we want for the sake of argument. Let us take it as the last decade of the 19th century, when
radiation was first discovered. This will tell us that knowledge flowed in all directions from all
countries. It continued to do so till about the middle of the previous century. It was only
subsequently that controls on information started coming in. That was the time when all
countries were providing benefits of knowledge to others. There has even been significant
transfer of nuclear material and know- how for the development of nuclear weapons. Writing on
a hypothetical possibility of India threatening to proliferate,15 Perkov writes, 'China proliferated
to Pakistan and Pakistan proliferated to Libya, Iran, and North Korea. Nor does proliferation
that occurred before the NPT was negotiated justify promiscuous proliferation behaviour today."

Therefore, one has to look at the credentials of a country not in terms of imaginary systems, but
in terms of systems to which it is legally committed to and in that context; India's conduct with
regard to proliferation to others has been exemplary. Considering that India already possesses
nuclear weapons, to quote Ritch (1999), "proliferation is not even an issue." Thus from both the
considerations, proliferation from India and proliferation to India, there cannot be any concern.
It will be worthwhile to recall what Manmohan Singh, prime minister of India7 has to say,
"While we are determined to utilise our indigenous resources and capabilities to fulfil our
national interests, we are doing so in a manner that is not contrary to the larger goals of nuclear
non-proliferation."

15
Perkovich, George (2005): 'Faulty Promises: The US-India Nuclear Deal', Policy Outlook, Carnegie Endowment,
September

13
It is surprising that in spite of an impeccable past record on issues related to non-proliferation
and firm commitment to maintain moratorium on nuclear test explosions, analysts like16 write
about the need to sign the CTBT, which stands rejected by the US senate.

IMPORTANCE OF INDIA NSG MEMBERSHIP

India is not a signatory to the NPT. China has stuck to its stand that new members should sign
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), making India’s entry difficult as the group is
guided by the consensus principle.

NSG AND ITS IMPORTANCE

16
Kimball, Daryl G (2005): 'A Non-proliferation Reality Check', Economic and Political Weekly, August 27, pp
3818-20

14
 1. Brought in 1974– in response to the Indian nuclear test (smiling Buddha).

2. It is a multilateral export control regime.

3. It is a Group of nuclear supplier countries that seek to prevent nuclear proliferation by

controlling the export of materials, equipment and technology that can be used to
manufacture nuclear weapons.

4. The NSG first met in November 1975 in London, and is thus popularly referred to as
the “London Club”.

5. It is not a formal organization, and its guidelines are not binding. Decisions, including
on membership, are made by consensus.

6. Membership: 48 supplier states.

IMPORTANCE

1. Membership will increase India’s access to state-of-the-art technology from the other
members of the Group.

2. Access to technology and being allowed to produce nuclear equipment will give a boost
to the Make in India program. That will, in turn, boost the economic growth of our
country.

3. As per India’s INDC under the Paris Climate agreement, we have committed to
reducing dependence on fossil fuels and ensuring that 40% of its energy is sourced
from renewable and clean sources. In order to achieve this target, we need to scale up
nuclear power production. This can only happen if India gains access to the NSG.

4. Namibia is the fourth-largest producer of uranium and it agreed to sell the nuclear
fuel to India in 2009. However, that hasn’t happened, as Namibia has signed
Pelindaba Treaty, which essentially controls the supply of uranium from Africa to the
rest of the world. If India joins the NSG, such reservations from Namibia are expected
to melt away.

5. India will get an opportunity to voice it’s concern if in case of change in the provision
of the NSG guidelines.
15
 FURTHER EVOLUTION OF NUCLEAR ENERGY IN INDIA

India is a large country with a large population. To fuel economic growth, every source of
energy needs to be exploited. While meeting today's needs, we have to continue to look into the
future and work out strategic plans to meet future energy requirements. While coal deposits in
India are significant, they are not going to last for more than a few decades. We have to make
conscious efforts to develop all possible energy technologies so that the well being of future
generations is not compromised because of non-availability of energy. This includes energy
technologies based on fission and fusion.

India has interest in both fission and fusion. Fission technologies under development include fast
reactors, a reactor to develop technologies to exploit thorium, a high temperature reactor and
accelerator driven systems. Work on fast reactor development has reached a stage, which has
given India the confidence to launch the construction of a 500 MWe prototype unit.17 Along with
the construction of the reactor, vigorous efforts are being made to develop associated fuel cycle
technologies. 18 There was worldwide interest in fast reactors, but subsequently, due to
availability of uranium at competitive prices and perceived proliferation concerns, the interest
declined. However, rising uranium prices and increasing energy demand has rekindled interest
in fast reactors with a closed fuel cycle. The time frame to deploy fast reactors has to be decided
by nations depending on their energy requirements and fuel resource position. Generation IV
International Forum, a US led multination initiative has selected six reactor concepts for de-
tailed study and these include concepts based on closed fuel cycle and fast reactors [Anonymous
2003]. The various concepts are gas-cooled fast reactor (closed fuel cycle), lead-cooled fast
reactor (closed fuel cycle), molten salt reactor (closed fuel cycle), sodium- cooled fast reactor
(closed fuel cycle), supercritical water-cooled reactor (two options: open thermal and closed

17
Chetal, S C, V Balasubramaniyan, P Chellapandi, P Mohankrishanan, P Puthiiyavinayagam, C P Pillai, S
Raghupathy, T K Shanmugham and C Sivathanu Pillai (2005): 'The Design of the Prototype Fast Reactor', to be
published in Nuclear Engineering and
18
Baldev Raj, 'An Overview of R& D on Fast Reactor Fuel Cycle', International Journal of Nuclear Energy Science
and Technology, Vol 1, Nos 2/3, 2005, pp 164-177

16
fast) and very high temperature gas cooled reactor (open cycle). Thus, the majority of concepts
are based on fast reactors and the closed fuel cycle.

A study carried out by the French utility EdF envisages industrial deployment of a first series of
fast reactors by around 2040. 19 The nations are thus deciding about the deployment of fast
reactors depending upon their energy needs and uranium availability.

Thus, fast reactors have not been abandoned as made out by some authors.20 Considering India's
nuclear fuel resource position and international controls on trading in uranium, it is necessary
for India to embark on fast reactor programme earlier than others. Even if the rules of
international trade are amended to allow India to access supplies of uranium from international
market, India cannot afford to abandon the fast reactor programme keeping in view of the
burgeoning energy requirements. Based on similar arguments, India has to pursue development
of technologies for utilisation of thorium, which is no doubt a difficult technology.21 However, as
22
written by Bagla quoting Mujid Kazimi from Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
"everything they (Indians) have reported to date indicates they are on course." The assessment
that the three-stage programme would leave India "awash with more plutonium than it could
ever use either for energy production or nuclear weaponry"23 is not in consonance with India's
huge energy needs.

The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) is a project being developed

jointly by an international consortium consisting of European Union, US, Japan, South Korea,
Russia and China. ITER will be located at Cadarache in south of France and aims to develop a
plant for demonstration of generation of electricity based on fusion and in view of potential of
this technology, India is proposing to join this international consortium. India already has a
19
Carre, Frank (2005): 'Fast Reactors R&D Strategy in France for Sustainable Energy Supply and Reduction of
Environmental Burdens', JAIF International Symposium, Tokyo, March
20
Mian, Zia and M V Ramana (2005): 'Feeding the Nuclear Fire', Economic and Political Weekly, August 27, pp
3808-12.
21
Sivasubramanian, S, S M Lee and S A Bhardwaj (2000): 'Current Status and Future Possibilities of Thorium
Utilisation in PHWRs and FBRs', INSAC - 2000, June 1-2, Mumbai.
22
Bagla, Pallava (2005): 'India's Home Grown Thorium Reactor', Science, Vol 309, August 19, pp 1174-
23
Tellis, Ashley J (2005): 'India as a New Global Power: An Action Agenda for the United States', Carniegie
Endowment for International Peace

17
sizeable programme in fusion research and a well-trained workforce of scientists and engineers
to be able to make contribution to this project. However, this is a complex technology; an
autarkic route is not the preferred path for development of this technology and the decision of
the government to join ITER programme is well advised.

In his statement to the 49th General Conference of the Inter- national Atomic Energy Agency on
September 28, 2005, Anil Kakodkar, chairman, atomic energy commission said24, "We would like
to see a rapid increase in nuclear power generation capacity in India well above the planned
programme of achieving 20,000 MWe by the year 2020. This capacity could consist of imported
light water reactors (LWRs) which run on imported fuel, domestic pressurised heavy water
reactors (PHWRs) which run on imported fuel, domestic PHWRs which run on domestic fuel and
fast breeder reactors. Progressively power reactors running on thorium would get added to this
list." Considering the inherent strength of Indian industry, international cooperation in civilian
nuclear energy can in no way lead to "an erosion in self-reliance built up over the last four
decades", rather "could enable India to build a number of light water reactors, using imported
enriched uranium".25

EXISTING LEGAL FRAMEWORK

The establishment and regulation of the nuclear energy regime in India has largely been effected
through the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act, 1962 (‘1962 Act’ hereinafter). Although the
essential scope of this enactment has been to facilitate the development of atomic energy, the
range of the regulatory arm of this enactment is much longer and broader to include any activity
that relates to or involves a radioactive substance. In other words, any substance, whether a
material or a mineral that could be regarded as radioactive substance, could come under the
purview of this enactment. The precursor to the 1962 Act has been the Atomic Energy Act, 1948,

24
‘Key World Energy Statistics', International Energy Agency, Kakodkar, Anil and R B Grover (2004): Nuclear
Energy in India. Vol 45, No 2, pp 31-36, March/April
25
Challenge and Opportunity', Economic and Political Weekly, August 27, pp 3806-08

18
a legislation enacted soon after India’s independence by the Constitutient Assembly. This also
shows the urgency and the perception with which the immediate political establishment of post
independent India sought to locate the development and use of nuclear energy. The 1948
enactment envisaged the constitution of an Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). The Department
of Atomic Energy was established in 1954. The 1962 Act replaced the 1948 1 enactment. The
atomic energy regulatory framework as envisaged under the 1962 Act is an umbrella legislation
that, inter alia, provides for a broad canvas covering areas such as identification, sitting,
installation, operation and safety of the atomic reactors. Mining and other related issues are
also covered within the framework of the 1962 Act. Further, to carry out all these activities, the
1962 Act requires more specific details to be worked out by various rules and regulations.
Accordingly, rules and regulations have been formulated and all of them together form the entire
nuclear regulatory framework within India. For example, Section 17 provides for the safety
aspects and accordingly it authorises the Central Government to make such rules as are
necessary to take care of safety aspects relating to “premises are places, in which radioactive
substances are manufactured, produced, mined, treated, stored or used by any radiation
generating plant, equipment or appliance.”

SALIENT FEATURES OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT, 1962

The formal legal framework to regulate atomic energy was put in place by 1948 by passing the
Atomic Energy Act by the then existing Constitutient Assembly. It should be noted that India was
still in the process of framing its Constitution and was also taking a relook at several colonial
legislations. This perhaps reflects the keenness of India not to fall behind in harnessing the
peaceful uses of atomic energy. It was felt at that time that nuclear science held out great
potential for future developmental aspects in India. It should be noted that India in the post-
colonial context was a pioneer among developing and newly emerging countries to enact such a
law relating to atomic energy. Major countries of the time that had the requisite technological
know-how relating to atomic energy also had just put in place legislative mechanisms to develop,
control and regulate activities relating to this form of energy. For India, the tangible result was

19
not only creation of such legal and institutional structures, it also resulted in the establishment of
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) in 1954 and two research reactors in quick succession,
namely APSARA (1956) and CIRUS (1960).

The strategy adopted at that time was to put to use the country’s modest and vast thorium
resources. In line with this approach a three-pronged strategy was adopted and one could see
the reflections of this strategy in the newly enacted 1962 Act. The salient features of this strategy
were:

1. In the first stage, based on setting up pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs) using
indigenously available natural uranium and plutonium to produce electricity.
2. In the second stage, based on plutonium fuelled fast breeder reactors (FBRs) producing
electricity and additional quantity of plutonium and also uranium 233 from thorium.
3. In the third stage, based on thorium-uranium 233 cycles.

NETWORK OF RULES AND REGULATIONS

The 1962 Act, as stated above, is a framework legislation providing, inter alia, broad areas for
regulation specifically of the use and development of radioactive substances. Section 30 of the
1962 Act itself specifies areas in which rules and regulations are needed. If one looks at these
broad areas it is clear that these rules and regulations are necessary for effective
implementation and operation of the 1962 Act. These are, briefly,

1. Restrictions on information and to prescribe measures to guard against lunauthorised

dissemination or use of such restricted information;
2. Declaring any area as prohibited area and prescribing measures to provide against
lunauthorised entry into or departure from this area;
3. Reporting of information relating to the discovery of uranium, thorium and other
prescribed substances and payment of rewards for such discoveries;
4. Control over mining or concentration of substances containing uranium;

20
 5. Regulating by licensing and encouraging by award of concessions including rewards,
floor prices and guarantees, mining and prospecting for other prescribed substances;
6. Compulsory acquisition of prescribed substances, minerals and plants;
7. Regulating the production, import, export, transfer, refining, possession, ownership,
sale, use or disposal of the prescribed substances and any other articles that in the
opinion of the Central Government may be used for, or may result as a consequence of
the production, use or application of atomic energy ;
8. Regulating the use of the prescribed equipment ;
9. Regulating the manufacture, custody, transport, transfer, sale, export, import, use or
disposal of any radioactive substance;
10. Regulating transport of such prescribed substances as are declared dangerous to
health (under Section 17 (2) of the 1962 Act)
11. Developing, controlling, supervising and licensing the production, application and use
of atomic energy; fees for issue licenses; manner of serving notices etc.
12. Land promoting co-operation among persons, institutions and countries in the
production, use, application of atomic energy and in research and investigation in the
field.

A survey of the available and notified rules and regulations shows that some of them are in place
and some are not. Some of these rules are extremely crucial for the regulation and disposal of
radioactive substances e.g. radiation protection rules, safe disposal of nuclear wastes and safety
aspects of atomic energy.

Although the 1962 Act provides the basic regulatory framework for the regulation of nuclear
energy-related activities, other laws, as they are applicable, also form part of this regulatory
framework. These include a large number of related laws and regulations such as Factories Act,
1948, Indian Electricity Act, 2003, the Environment (Protection Act), 1986, Disaster
Management Act, 2005, The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, The Air
(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, The Water (Prevention and Control of
Pollution) Cess Act, 1977, Indian Explosives Act, 1884 and enactments relating to the
management and handling of hazardous wastes.

21
A preliminary assessment of these rules and regulations framed pursuant to Section 30 of the
1962 shows that they are drafted in a manner making some of the provisions broad enough to
allow private participation. The definition of ‘person’ in all these rules and regulations, for
example, is broad and includes, besides government entities and companies, individuals,
corporate entities and other similar bodies.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Diversifying Energy Mix: Steady and sustained high rates of growth of the Indian
economy in the coming decades, in line with the growth experienced during this past
decade, points to a rapidly increasing energy demand. To satisfy these demands,
keeping in view the changing pattern of fuel consumption worldwide and the
uncertainty about future hydrocarbon supply and prices, India must diversify its
energy mix. The current very low share of nuclear energy in India's total energy supply
coupled with the recent changes to the international rules governing nuclear
commerce points to the possibility of rapidly increasing the share of nuclear energy in
India's future basket of energy sources.

2. Fast Breeder Reactors: In view of the very limited reserves of natural uranium in the
country and the advanced nature of fast reactor science and technology in the country,
there is an urgent need to expedite the operationalisation of the Fast Breeder Reactors
[FBRs]. Once developed and functional, additional FBRs must be constructed and
made operational in the shortest time period possible. This will help India reprocess
spent fuel and will provide multiplier effect thereby accelerating the progress of civil
nuclear energy generation in the country.

3. Three Stage Nuclear Energy Programme: India has one the largest deposits of thorium
in the world and India is one of the leaders today in research in studying the properties
of thorium and its utilization in energy generation. The long standing three stage

22
 strategy of the Indian nuclear energy program to exploit thorium in the last stage must
be pursued vigourously to rapidly expand India's nuclear energy generation capacity
in the coming decades leading upto the second half of the century.

4. The Atomic Energy Act of 1962: The rapid and accelerated development of nuclear
energy in the country calls for major changes in the manner in which nuclear sciences
and technologies have been planned and directed in the country. In particular
expansion of nuclear power generation and the attendant required large capital
infusion calls for entry of private capital in the field. Therefore, the Atomic Energy Act
of 1962 needs to be amended suitably in the context of the changed circumstances
under which the Indian civil nuclear program is intended to be developed.

5. The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board: The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB)
regulates all aspects of civil uses of nuclear energy. There is a need to make the AERB
an independent regulatory agency separate and distinct from and independent of the
Department of Atomic Energy (DAE). It should be a statutory board accountable only
to the Indian Parliament entrusted with the licensing and regulation of all civil nuclear
activities in India both in the public and private domains.

6. Fuel Supply Assurance: In view of the limited domestic reserves of natural uranium in
the country and the need to rapidly increase the availability of reliable source of
energy, the Licensing authority and regulatory agencies must ensure that all potential
nuclear power plant operators have assurance of fuel supply for the life cycle of the
plants before being given any license for operations.

7. Export Controls and safeguards: India has so far maintained an impeccable record in
maintaining high standards of safety and security in the area of nuclear materials and
technology. India is also one of the leading countries in the field of nuclear science
and technology. In addition in the coming years the private sector in India is expected

23
 to play a leading role in the field of nuclear energy generation. Increasing global
concerns about non-state actors gaining access to nuclear material and technology for
illicit purposes, therefore, points to the need for India to enact strict laws and
regulations for strict export controls on nuclear commerce and trade. Further the
safeguards to be applied on the nuclear facilities and nuclear material in the civilian
nuclear activities must be transparent and applied strictly and rigourously.

8. Civil Nuclear Liability Bill: If India is take advantage of the opportunity afforded by the
relaxation of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Guidelines in respect of
international civil nuclear commerce with India, it is necessary to enact a civil nuclear
liability bill in line with international practice in respect of such liability laws. The
proposed Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, 2010 is in line with the international
norms. However, if desired, changes can be made in some of the clauses of the bill
without detracting from its adherence to international conventions. The report
discusses the bill in depth and offers some suggestions on the scope and limits to
changes in the bill that can be made, if considered necessary, and still keep the bill
within the requirements of the international conventions on nuclear liability regimes.
As a matter of fact many of the recommendations of the parliamentary Standing
Committee on Science and Technology that examined the proposed fall in this
category. Such legislation must be enacted as soon as possible to operationalise the
many nuclear cooperation agreements that India has signed so far with a large number
of countries including some of the major international nuclear suppliers such as
Russia, US, France, UK etc.

24
 CONCLUSION

From considerations of economics, sustainability and energy security a large-scale

augmentation of nuclear generating capacity in India is desirable. It is a safe technology as
demonstrated by about 12,000 reactor-years of cumulative commercial operation. As per the
IAEA database, at present 441 reactors are operating in 30 countries and another 24 reactors
are under construction. There have been only two major accidents in the history of nuclear
power. The first occurred at Three Mile Island, USA in 1979 where the reactor was damaged,
but there were no adverse health effects or environmental consequences. The second occurred at
Chernobyl, Ukraine in 1986, where the destruction of the reactor by explosion and fire killed 31
people immediately. The just released report by the Chernobyl Forum26 says that as of mid-2005,
fewer than 50 deaths had been directly attributed to radiation from the disaster. Burton Bennett,
chairman of the Chernobyl Forum explain a very serious accident with major health
consequences, especially for thousands of workers exposed in the early days who received very
high doses, and for the thousands more stricken with thyroid cancer. By and large, however, we
have not found profound negative health impacts to the rest of the population in surrounding
areas, nor have we found widespread contamination that would continue to pose a substantial
threat to human health, with a few exceptional, restricted areas." Energy security for a country
as large as India can only be provided by a diversified portfolio. An examination of data 27
indicates that India is the fifth largest producer of electricity in the world. However, while India
is amongst the top 10 countries of the world for production of electricity by hydro, coal, oil and
gas, it is nowhere near the top 10 with respect to nuclear power generation. For a large country
like India, this is an anomaly in need of correction. We hope the winds of change now blowing
will enable India to correct this anomaly.

26
'Factors Contributing to Increased Nuclear Electricity Production: 1990-2004', Nuclear Power Newsletter, Vol 2,
No 3, September.
27
“Key World Energy Statistics”, International Energy Agency, Kakodkar, Anil and R B Grover (2004): Nuclear
Energy in India. Vol 45, No 2, pp 31-36, March/April

25
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. https://idsa.in/system/files/book/book_NuclearEnergyIndia.pdf
2. http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-g-
n/india.aspx
3. https://www.orfonline.org/research/the-future-of-nuclear-energy-in-india/
4. https://dae.nic.in/?q=node/171
5. https://energypost.eu/17408-2/
6. https://www.npcil.nic.in/WriteReadData/userfiles/file/Promotion_of_scientific_environm
ent_in_India.pdf

26