Scraps Stuffs - Random musings from apun ka desh

A brilliant article from Dr. A. Gopalakrishnan who was a chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board details the issues facing Indo-US nuclear co-operation. This is reproduced below because I couldn't find a link to this excellent article from the Asian Age.

Dr A. Gopalakrishnan says that neither does the U.S. possess crucial nuclear safety experience of direct relevance to India, nor does India need its assistance

Civilian nuclear cooperation between India and the US is said to be one of the topics for discussion when our Prime Minister visits Washington in mid-July. The officials of the ministry of external affairs (MEA) are quite upbeat about this, the department of atomic energy (DAE) maintains a stoic silence on the matter, and the media analysts in the country anticipate a more optimistic outcome than everyone else. But, no official in India or the US is willing to provide a clear picture on what exactly is being discussed.

In this regard, the central questions we need to ask are these: What concrete assistance does India need from the US to further our civilian nuclear programme? In relevant areas, are the foreign policy stances of the two countries close enough to warrant the successful initiation of any meaningful nuclear cooperation, without India having to make unacceptable compromises? What is it that the US wants in return from us for this cooperation? And, what are the short-term and long-term strategic implications of such cooperation?

India today has 14 operating nuclear power reactors and nine more are under various stages of construction or commissioning. A detailed examination reveals that the US has no current experience in any of the types of nuclear reactors India is presently operating or constructing. Therefore, the DAE certainly realises that the US has no worthwhile knowledge in the design, construction, operation, maintenance or safety of any of the present or future installations of the Indian nuclear power programme.

The US and MEA officials keep hinting that the US is willing to cooperate with us in nuclear safety, but the DAE which has the primary responsibility for safety, has never asked for any such help. In fact, without any foreign technical assistance, the DAE engineers have rectified almost all the safety deficiencies which I had documented and submitted to the government as chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) in 1995. Therefore, invoking the need for safety assistance from the US is merely a ploy to indirectly plant doubts in the minds of the Indian public that DAE’s capability to maintain safety in our reactors is inadequate in comparison to US expertise. With my experience and awareness of nuclear safety in the US and India, I am convinced that neither the US possesses any crucial safety experience of direct relevance to India nor does India badly need its assistance.

The glaring indictment against the advisability of importing nuclear reactors from the US is the predicament in which we find ourselves today in the case of Tarapur reactors. The US having reneged its contractual obligation to supply lifetime fuel to these reactors, India finds itself going from country to country to get enriched uranium to keep these reactors running. Contrary to past DAE expectations, there is also no chance of attracting any foreign investment in conjunction with reactor imports.

Dr Homi Bhabha had energy security and self-reliance in mind when he framed the three-stage nuclear power plan for the country, which envisaged the use of our natural uranium and the abundant thorium resources we have, to establish a totally indigenous nuclear technology base. Today, some 50 years after Bhabha unveiled his plan, his vision rooted in self-reliance still remains the best approach for India in this increasingly unipolar world.

To meet the nuclear power targets, India needs to build a sufficient number of natural uranium fuelled PHWRs first, so that adequate plutonium is produced for effecting a rapid transition to the second stage breeder programme. However, at present the DAE is facing a serious shortage of natural uranium, even to fuel the current 18 reactors in hand. The Nuclear Power Corporation (NPCIL) is having to deliberately lower the power levels in their operating PHWRs, in order to stretch out the available fuel for a longer period. The known uranium resources in Jaduguda mines are depleting fast and the DAE is unable to start fresh mining in Domiasiat in the Northeast and Nallagunda in Andhra Pradesh due to local opposition to uranium mining. DAE may argue that the depleted uranium available from the spent-fuel reprocessing plants will supplement our limited natural uranium stocks, but in reality, there will be no substantial alleviation of the problem.

As for ensuring the continued operation of Tarapur reactors, we will need concessions from the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to obtain additional fuel. All the nations which produce enriched uranium are now members of the NSG, and their current rules will not allow any such fuel sales to India. DAE’s comment that we could operate the Tarapur reactors with plutonium-based indigenous fuel is impractical and dangerous, since world-wide studies have established that introducing more than 30-35 per cent plutonium into boiling water reactors could bring about adverse changes in their safety-related physics and kinetics parameters.

The Indian fast breeder reactor experience is limited to operating a test reactor, supplied by France in the early Seventies, at about one-third its rated power level for several years. Based on this limited experience, and some very good R&D work, India is designing and building a large 500 MWe prototype fast breeder reactor (PFBR). France and Russia are two countries which have considerable experience in building and operating commercial size fast breeder reactors, and India is well-advised to initiate detailed technical discussions and consultations with these countries on the PFBR design and our safety philosophy. DAE experts may differ with me on this, but such a step is essential to further ensure public safety. But, again, these countries can openly interact with India only if the NSG does not raise objections.

Therefore, if the seriousness of the US in providing meaningful "civilian nuclear cooperation" to India is to be tested, the Prime Minister must seek US intervention in the following three subjects. Firstly, request the US to assist India in purchasing sufficient quantities of natural uranium or yellow cake from the international market. In return, we may have to agree to place all reactors which will use that uranium under IAEA safeguards. Secondly, we must ask pointedly how the US is planning to help us meet the enriched uranium requirement for Tarapur reactors. And, thirdly, ask the US to help remove any NSG objections that may come in the way of India, Russia and France having bilateral consultations on the design, construction, operation and safety of our PFBR. Let the US demonstrate the sincerity of its offer through meeting these three genuine needs we face.

India maintains the official position that it is a nuclear weapon state, and considers the NPT and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) to be discriminatory. India has decided to maintain a minimum nuclear deterrent and will therefore maintain an active nuclear weapons programme. As such, India cannot agree to the IAEA full scope safeguards applicable to non-nuclear weapon states. India is also unlikely to accept IAEA’s right for intrusive, short-notice inspections under its Additional Protocol.

The US wants India to eventually join the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state and has called for India to sign and ratify the CTBT, though it itself has not ratified it. The US has also formally exhorted the NPT member states to refrain from having any meaningful nuclear cooperation with non-NPT countries like India. The US Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act 1978 (NNPA) prohibits nuclear cooperation between the US and India, and the US Congress will have to amend the NNPA if it were to happen. The US was the creator of two multinational nuclear export control groups, the NSG and the Zangger Committee, and both totally preclude any nuclear or dual-use technology cooperation with India. Finally, the US wants the acceptance of the Additional Protocol to be a condition for nuclear cooperation.

Given the above mismatch, one wonders where the MEA’s optimism stems from, unless there are discussions going on between the two official sides on certain serious quid pro quo, which only the MEA and the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) are privy to. Therefore, it is high time that the government considers the preparation of a comprehensive white paper on the objectives and status of India-US nuclear cooperation and table it in Parliament, so that the interim status is known to the nation and an informed debate on the issue can take place in Parliament and outside. The MEA, the DAE and PMO would certainly benefit from such constructive debates and the feedback therefrom in their subsequent pursuit of policy.

Dr Gopalakrishnan is a former chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board of the government of India. He can be contacted at agk37@hotmail.com

It started raining cats, dogs, elephants and camels from about 4.00 pm today and it still continues as I write. Its literally pouring buckets. This is coupled with occasional hail stones. Its so dark now that it looks like night. I haven't seen such rains in Bangalore ever. It reminds me of Mumbai during the monsoons where occasionally such cloudbursts and downpours would continue for a couple of days.

Its going to be fun when I head back home.

The last few days have seen stormy weather in Bangalore. It started last Saturday (21/5) and continued on Monday (23/5) with a lull on Sunday. Tuesday was fine but it was back to lots of rain, wind and hail on Wednesday (25/5).

No complains though since the temperature has dropped and pollution too by a wee bit. I'm enjoying this weather and wish it continues until the monsoons arrive.

There has been so much lightning its a wonder no one has been hit! Oddly I didn't hear much thunder. It's been very windy too.

The effects of the stormy weather has been significant. Roads are in worse shape, if that were possible. Trees have been uprooted and there are lots of broken branches everywhere. We have been having big electricity outages with Monday and Wednesday being totally devoid of power! Since most, if not all, power lines in Bangalore are strung along poles rather than being underground as in, say, Mumbai, the moment the winds start howling, the power disappears!

BESCOM must be having a tough time attending to all the calls. They should attempt laying new cables underground rather than up on poles as this would help in reducing outages.

Conway's Law

In any organization there will always be one person who knows what is going on. This person must be fired.

It was breezy last night and continued being the same way this morning too. Maybe it'll start getting cooler, its been blazingly hot the past few days and few clouds to help temper the fire.

What is happening in Bangalore these days is a complete abdication of the responsibility to govern - responsibility that lies with the Dharam Singh led Congress- J.D.(S) coalition. This manifests itself in a complete breakdown of an infrastructure improvements. One flyover has been stuck in the initial stages of development and its completion is nowhere in sight. Same for an underpass. And other agencies are taking their cues from this government's inaction - the Lake Development Authority seems to be sitting quiet. At least one lake under its jurisdiction has been completely taken over by weeds - no de-weeding operation is being done. Roads are in a complete mess. Trees are being cut down indiscriminately, ostensibly for road expansion. It would be stating the obvious that no road expansion is being done where the trees were cut down.

I shudder to think what will happen to Bangalore within the next five years.

The Keys to Your Heart

You are attracted to good manners and elegance.

In love, you feel the most alive when things are straight-forward, and you're told that you're loved.

You'd like to your lover to think you are stylish and alluring.

You would be forced to break up with someone who was ruthless, cold-blooded, and sarcastic.

Your ideal relationship is lasting. You want a relationship that looks to the future... one you can grow with.

Your risk of cheating is 100%. You are not suited for a monogamous relationship.

You think of marriage as something that will confine you. You are afraid of marriage.

In this moment, you think of love as something you thirst for. You'll do anything for love, but you won't fall for it easily.

WHY EMPLOYEES LEAVE ORGANISATIONS? - Azim Premji

Every  company  normally  faces one common problem of high employee turnout
ratio.  People  are  leaving  the company for better pay, better profile or
simply  for just one reason' pak gaya '. This article might just throw some
light on the matter...


Early this year, Arun, an old friend who is a senior software designer, got
an  offer  from  a  prestigious  international  firm  to  work in its India
operations  developing  specialized software. He was thrilled by the offer.
He  had  heard  a  lot about the CEO of this company, charismatic man often
quoted in the business press for his visionary attitude.


The  salary  was  great.  The  company  had  all the right systems in place
employee-friendly human resources (HR) policies, a spanking new office, and
the  very  best  technology,  even a canteen that served superb food. Twice
Arun  was sent abroad for training. "My learning curve is the sharpest it's
ever  been,"  he  said soon after he joined. "It's a real high working with
such cutting edge technology."


Last  week,  less than eight months after he joined, Arun walked out of the
job.   He  has  no  other  offer  in  hand  but he said he couldn't take it
anymore.  Nor, apparently, could several other people in his department who
have  also  quit  recently.  The CEO is di stressed about the high employee
turnover. He's distressed about the money he's spent in training them. He's
distressed because he can't figure out what happened.


Why  did  this  talented employee leave despite a top salary? Arun quit for
the  same reason that drives many good people away.  The answer lies in one
of  the  largest  studies  undertaken by the Gallup Organization. The study
surveyed  over a million employees and 80,000 managers and was published in
a book called First Break AllTheRules.


It came up with this surprising finding: If you're losing good people, look
to their immediate supervisor. More than any other single reason, he is the
reason  people stay and thrive in an organization.  And he's the reason why
they  quit,  taking  their  knowledge,  experience  and contacts with them.
Often, straight to the competition.


"People  leave managers not companies," write the authors Marcus Buckingham
and  Curt  Coffman.  "So  much  money  has  been thrown at the challenge of
keeping  good  people  - in the form of better pay, better perks and better
training - when, in the end, turnover is mostly manager issue." If you have
a  turnover  problem, look first to your managers.  Are they driving people
away?


Beyond  a  point, an employee's primary need has less to do with money, and
more  to  do  with  how  he's treated and how valued he feels. Much of this
depends  directly  on  the  immediate  manager. And yet, bad bosses seem to
happen  to good people everywhere. A Fortune magazine survey some years ago
found  that  nearly  75 per cent of employees have suffered at the hands of
difficult  superiors.  You  can  leave  one  job  to find - you guessed it,
another wolf in a pin-stripe suit in the next one.


Of  all the workplace stressors, a bad boss is possibly the worst, directly
impacting  the  emotional  health and productivity of employees. HR experts
say  that  of  all  the  abuses, employees find public humiliation the most
intolerable.  The  first time, an employee may not leave, but a thought has
been planted.


The second time, that thought gets strengthened.  The third time, he starts
looking  for  another job.  When people cannot retort openly in anger, they
do so by passive aggression. By digging their heels in and slowing down. By
doing  only  what  they are told to do and no more. By omitting to give the
boss crucial information.


Dev  says:  "If  you  work  for  a jerk, you basically want to get him into
trouble.  You don't have your heart and soul in the job."


Different  managers  can  stress out employees in different ways - by being
too  controlling,  too suspicious, too pushy, too critical, but they forget
that  workers are not fixed assets, they are free agents. When this goes on
too long, an employee will quit - often over seemingly trivial issue.


It  isn't the 100th blow that knocks a good man down. It's the 99 that went
before.  And  while  it's  true  that  people  leave  jobs for all kinds of
reasons-  for  better opportunities or for circumstantial reasons, many who
leave  would  have  stayed - had it not been for one man constantly telling
them,  as  Arun's  boss  did:  "You are dispensable. I can find dozens like
you."  While  it  seems  like  there are plenty of other fish especially in
today's  waters,  consider  for  a  moment  the  cost  of losing a talented
employee. There's the cost of finding a replacement.


The  cost of training the replacement. The cost of not having someone to do
the  job  in  the meantime. The loss of clients and contacts the person had
with  the  industry.  The  loss  of morale in co-workers. The loss of trade
secrets  this  person may now share with others.  Plus, of course, the loss
of  the  company's  reputation.  Every person who leaves a corporation then
becomes its ambassador, for better or for worse.


We  all know of large IT companies that people would love to join and large
television  companies  few want to go near. In both cases, former employees
have  left  to tell their tales. "Any company trying to compete must figure
out a way to engage the mind of every employee,"


Jack  Welch  of GE once said.   Much of a company's value lies "between the
ears  of  its  employees".   If  it's bleeding talent, it's bleeding value.
Unfortunately, many senior executives busy traveling the world, signing new
deals and developing a vision for the company, have little idea of what may
be going on at home.


That  deep within an organization that otherwise does all the right things,
one man could be driving its best people away.

A few days back I finished reading Peter Matthiessen's The Snow Leopard. I loved the book and was sorry it was over. Usually I buy books and then don't get around to reading them until much later.

I'm beginning to suspect that you read a book when you are ready for it and not before.

Peter Matthiessen describes a journey he took, along with George Schaller, to the Inner Dolpo region of Nepal. This place is situated in northern Nepal bordering Tibet and most of the region can be classified as trans-Himalayan cold dessert. The author starts the foot journey in Pokhara in October 1973 and goes to the Inner Dolpo region and gets back to Kathmandu in December 1973. The whole trek is beautifully described and the scenery is described very well too. Word pictures. The external journey takes place along with the author's inner spiritual quest and he's nicely added Zen Buddhism, Mahayana Buddhism and other philosophical thoughts too. Though he didn't get to see the Snow Leopard, both he and George Schaller are satisfied with the other things they saw and experienced - wolves, bharal and lots of birds. The best part I liked was the description of the changes in landscape from the foothills of the Himalaya in Pokhara, through the Himalayan region and through it to the start of the Tibetan plateau.

This book was a satisfying read and I plan to read it again sometime. Highly recommended.

May be an urban legend but I like this one a lot:

It's God's responsibility to forgive the terrorist organizations
It's our's to arrange a meeting between them

Watched Kaal last weekend purely because we expected nice footage of Corbett National Park. What a disappointment of a movie! It could have been made so much better. There are huge plot holes and loose editing. Too many gimmicky Ram Gopal Verma like effects. Characters are not believable and therefore you can empathize with them. Acting barring one exception is horrendous.

Some random thoughts:

1. What's with the actresses moving around in the jungle in skimpy clothes? While I certainly don't mind the eye-candy, it makes little sense. Esha Deol in a cammo-patterned bra takes the cake!

2. John Abraham just cannot act to save his life. If he is wondering why he doesn't feature in Dhoom 2, here's the clue: watch your performance in Kaal.

3. Vivek Oberoi plays the brat role to pretty good effect, but that's all he plays. There is no depth to his acting and his dialogues get tiresome after some time.

4. Lara Dutta screams very well throughout the movie. And that's all she does. And I felt short-changed because I expected more skin to compensate for her lousy acting which, in contrast, was in full display.

5. Esha Deol puts on too much gook on her/over her eyes. Doesn't suit her. Not much scope for acting and she seems to have made use of this excuse to the fullest.

6. Ajay Devgan had some of the best lines in the movie and acted pretty decently for a stupid character, proving once again that he's certainly a better actor than the rest of the riff-raff.

7. Vishal Malhotra (who played Vishal) acted pretty well when he panicked towards the end. I felt it was pretty believable.

8. Shah Rukh Khan looked uncomfortable doing the item number with Malaika as the title credits rolled by. This song is no patch on the Chaiya-Chaiya number on top of the train. That song was sung with such feeling and the dancing was with such gay abandon it's become a classic.

9. What's with Siberian tigers in Indian jungles? What's with calling the park Orbit national park? What's with the name Krish Thapar (John Abraham)? The Tiger expert tag printed below his name in the report he makes for National Geographic was hillarious as hell.

9. What the hell were Karan Johar and Shah Rukh Khan thinking???

Ismail Merchant died recently, on the same day as Sunil Dutt. A double blow to Indian cinema.

Ismail Merchant's movies have a certain charm which I hope to sample in the coming days if I manage to locate and buy DVDs of a few of his movies.