What's new

India can make world’s cheapest N-reactors

MUMBAI:

Now, India can build cheaper nuclear reactors, than even South Korea. Talking to TOI on the eve of his retirement, Dr Srikumar Banerjee, secretary in the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), said India can now manufacture nuclear reactors at $1,700 per unit. Come May, Banerjee will make way for Ratan Sinha, currently director of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), who will take over as secretary, DAE.

"We are now the world's most economical manufacturer of nuclear reactors. Our cost per unit, of $1,700 (for a 700mw reactor) is substantially less than our nearest competitors. The average international cost is now between $2,500 and $3,000 (for a 1,000mw reactor). South Korea demonstrated its ability to build nuclear reactors for less when it wrested a massive reactor deal for the UAE from French giant, Areva, a couple of years ago.

With the protests in Kudankulam piping down, Banerjee said DAE was waiting for a couple of clearances from the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) to start Kudankulam-1.

The AERB will have to conduct a robotic inspection of the pressure vessel in the Kudankulam plant. This is done after what they call the "hot run", which is a kind of a rehearsal but without nuclear fuel. "After this, they open the cap of the pressure vessel to do a robotic inspection. Only after clearing this inspection are we allowed to put in nuclear fuel," said Banerjee.

The DAE chief said he was looking at Kudankulam going "critical" by mid-June. "The approach to criticality should happen around that time," he said. "That will be exciting." Six months down the line, Banerjee said the DAE hopes to commission the second Kudankulam plant as well.

Indian companies manufacturing components and systems for nuclear reactors, Banerjee said, can now do the same work for much less cost. For instance, he said, L&T, which supplies many critical components for the Indian nuclear and defence sectors, can make the large reactor vessel in their new Hazira plant. This is something of an achievement because it's traditionally been the preserve of Japanese engineering expertise.

Banerjee was clear that the despite Fukushima, countries like India will have a high demand for nuclear energy. "In the months after Fukushima, we have received expressions of interest from Haryana, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh to set up nuclear power plants. We will do all of them," asserted a confident DAE chief.

Article Window

:rofl:

They make it sound like I could buy a 700 megawatt nuclear reactor from them for $1,700. In reality, that's the cost per kilowatt, so the total cost of a 700 megawatt reactor comes out to a more reasonable $1.19 billion.
 
Dear the "Indian Point" reactor in the article isn't in India, it is in N.Y USA. Please read before posting.

I have provided the required fodder to troll below, the list in my post gives incidents around the world. Now go ahead and enjoy.
hate for india loll
 
Loss of life is not the criteria. The only reactor incidents causing loss of life that I remember were Chernobyl and the tsunami caused reactor problems in japan. Our "Three Mile Island" incident caused no loss of life, or even injury. But it did cause huge economic losses to the USA nuclear power industry as it introduced a huge element of fear into the US population.



Thanks, very interesting. My "thanks" button is not on for me to thank your post.

Another interesting point is that India in 2006 became a member of MDEP (Multinational Design Evaluation Programme for Nuclear reactors). Currently Canada, China, Finland, France, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States are members of this body.

Though i will not say we are great, we are not doing that bad if a select group of nations accepts us a member.
 
the only issue here is the reliability.. a large order book may help to get market in foreign countries..
 
what happened to our thorium reactors? ever gonna materialize or not??

And private sector is allowed active participation in building nuclear power reactors. One such example of a company is L&T

oldest nuclear reactor in India is based at Tarapur in Maharashtra state, commissioned in 1969 and built by bechtel and GE.

The indigenous reactors have been operational in India since 1991/92 and so far a total of upto 16 have been constructed.
 
I wonder if the Indian insurance industry will offer insurance, at affordable rates, against any losses due to the functioning of these reactors? How will buyers know about the long term safety of these designs when an operating track record has not yet been established?

WTH are you talking about? India has been building and operating reactors since the 1960s. Not enough time for establishing a track record?
Each power plant is insured by Indian insurance companies. None of them has had to make payouts yet. Says something!

Please research before posting.
 
:rofl:

They make it sound like I could buy a 700 megawatt nuclear reactor from them for $1,700. In reality, that's the cost per kilowatt, so the total cost of a 700 megawatt reactor comes out to a more reasonable $1.19 billion.

No they do NOT make it sound like that. The article very clearly states the cost per UNIT (Kw). There is no ambiguity.
 
The trouble is that many people reading it would assume that "unit" refers to a reactor, not a unit of electricity, from the context.

HeHeHe, then for $1700 a pop; I'd buy a reactor for each room in my house. :D
 
Back
Top Bottom