Civilian Nuclear Power Industry- Is India on the Right Track?
India, in quest to not put all the eggs in one basket, has selected the following designs to expand its civilian nuclear power fleet in the country.
1-Westinghouse’s AP1000 reactors for Mithi Virdi (Gujarat),
2-General Electric’s Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactors (ESBWR) for Kovvada (Andhra Pradesh),
3-Areva’s European Pressurized Reactors (EPRs) for Jaitapur (Maharashtra),
4-Russian VVER reactors for Kudankulam (Tamil Nadu) and possibly at one another location, in Andhra Pradesh.
There is nothing in public domain on the selection process, but I have heard that generation cost was an important criterion in making the final decision. And that is how it should have been. India would never have taken the route of importing reactors from the western countries if it had enough Uranium in hand to feed its indigenous reactors (i.e., PHWR). This is a give and take situation for India, you buy my reactors, and I will let you have Uranium for your PHWR, otherwise due to lack of fuel PHWR would run at low capacity factors which may be detrimental to India’s power need.
There are murmurs in the news media about variety of things and foremost among them is the question of safety and eventual cost that may come out once these imported reactors go online. These off course are genuine concerns.
Being acquainted with the rigorous process of certification, I will not worry too much about the safety aspect, but cost escalation, if it happens, is worrisome. I have seen how the economics is shutting down operating nuclear power plants in United States, leaving the life in them, or the extensions they got on the license, unutilized.
It is also wrong to blame the selected designs in context of being “untested”. These designs have been evolved from operating power plants, by integrating in them the best practices, and the lessons learned around the world over decades of successful operation. The technology has matured over the years and had got incorporated in newer designs. And it is wrong to say that the newer designs provide no empirical track record of safe operation. The individual models in the design go through rigorous process of benchmarking, or comparison with test data to give confidence in the design, or in the modelling that provides the nuts and bolts to the newer designs.
There are ways to reduce the cost without compromising on the safety. It is likely that the first unit of a particular design may see escalated cost, but subsequent units may benefit from the lessons learned while installing the first unit. It is the same phenomenon we witness in any other industry. Think about how expensive the VCRs were when they first came in the market?
India is definitely on the right track.
India, in quest to not put all the eggs in one basket, has selected the following designs to expand its civilian nuclear power fleet in the country.
1-Westinghouse’s AP1000 reactors for Mithi Virdi (Gujarat),
2-General Electric’s Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactors (ESBWR) for Kovvada (Andhra Pradesh),
3-Areva’s European Pressurized Reactors (EPRs) for Jaitapur (Maharashtra),
4-Russian VVER reactors for Kudankulam (Tamil Nadu) and possibly at one another location, in Andhra Pradesh.
There is nothing in public domain on the selection process, but I have heard that generation cost was an important criterion in making the final decision. And that is how it should have been. India would never have taken the route of importing reactors from the western countries if it had enough Uranium in hand to feed its indigenous reactors (i.e., PHWR). This is a give and take situation for India, you buy my reactors, and I will let you have Uranium for your PHWR, otherwise due to lack of fuel PHWR would run at low capacity factors which may be detrimental to India’s power need.
There are murmurs in the news media about variety of things and foremost among them is the question of safety and eventual cost that may come out once these imported reactors go online. These off course are genuine concerns.
Being acquainted with the rigorous process of certification, I will not worry too much about the safety aspect, but cost escalation, if it happens, is worrisome. I have seen how the economics is shutting down operating nuclear power plants in United States, leaving the life in them, or the extensions they got on the license, unutilized.
It is also wrong to blame the selected designs in context of being “untested”. These designs have been evolved from operating power plants, by integrating in them the best practices, and the lessons learned around the world over decades of successful operation. The technology has matured over the years and had got incorporated in newer designs. And it is wrong to say that the newer designs provide no empirical track record of safe operation. The individual models in the design go through rigorous process of benchmarking, or comparison with test data to give confidence in the design, or in the modelling that provides the nuts and bolts to the newer designs.
There are ways to reduce the cost without compromising on the safety. It is likely that the first unit of a particular design may see escalated cost, but subsequent units may benefit from the lessons learned while installing the first unit. It is the same phenomenon we witness in any other industry. Think about how expensive the VCRs were when they first came in the market?
India is definitely on the right track.