Skip to main content

U.S. and India to Announce Details of Bilateral Nuclear Agreement

By Eric McErlain
From Bloomberg:
The U.S. will today announce details of a civilian nuclear accord with India, an agreement allowing power plants in the energy-starved nation access to fissile material and technology.

Nicholas Burns, the U.S. undersecretary for political affairs, will brief reporters from Washington on the just- concluded, so-called ``1-2-3 agreement'' at 8 p.m. India time, the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi said in an e-mailed media advisory. Indian officials, including Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon, will brief the local media at 6 p.m. local time.
We'll be keeping an eye on this story today.
Labels:

Comments

Paul Nelson said…
I did not see any followup. But the New York Times kindly filled that gap, with an editorial published August 5, entitled "“A Bad Deal Gets Worse.” As they declined to publish my rebuttal following, perhaps you would be willing to consider? This is approximately 150 words, per their policy for letters, but I would be delighted to provide you an expanded version, if you would be willing to consider posting same.

An Imperfect Good Deal

Re “A Bad Deal Gets Worse” (New York Times editorial, August 5).

The agreement reduces India’s capacity to produce nuclear weapons, by placing its “civilian nuclear facilities under … safeguards in perpetuity.”

It ensures fuel for civilian nuclear energy. This reduces the risk some future government will discard that program, to focus India’s considerable nuclear capability on weapons.

The reprocessing arrangement will allow India to apply its existing reprocessing capability to dispose of spent fuel in the manner most appropriate to its situation. It also will provide incentive for India’s fast breeder reactors to be declared as civilian.

The agreement is a creative effort to bring India “in from the nuclear cold.” India will not accept nonproliferation measures (e.g., fissile-material cutoff) perceived as harming its deterrence toward two nuclear-armed neighbors.

The agreement is another of the choices between the unattainable perfect and some attainable good that mark the history of nuclear nonproliferation efforts.

Paul Nelson is professor emeritus of computer science, nuclear engineering and mathematics at Texas A&M University, a fellow of the American Nuclear Society and Associate Director for International Affairs in Texas A&M University’s Nuclear Security Science and Policy Institute. The opinions expressed are the authors’ personal views and do not represent official positions of any institution.

Phones: 979-845-4132 (O)
979-229-7421 (C)
1102 Woodhaven Circle
College Station, TX 77840
August 21, 2007 at 5:39 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wednesday Update

By
From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...
23 comments
Read more

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

By
Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...
Post a Comment
Read more