India's Chance

 

 
  August 29, 2007
 
India's parliament will soon debate the accord that permits the United States to sell nuclear technology to fuel that nation's growing energy appetite. It's a hot debate not only in the West but also in Central Asia where detractors worry about an expanded nuclear role for India at a time when it is trying to build questionable energy ties.

Ken Silverstein
EnergyBiz Insider
Editor-in-Chief

India's economy is expanding at 8 percent a year while its energy needs are growing proportionately. That will necessitate the development of a modern grid and efficiency technologies along with diversified fuel options. It's urgent. Already, power shortages and blackouts plague the country's major cities. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that India's political and economic framework belies risk takers.

In a speech in parliament, India's Power Minister Sushil Kumar said that the energy requirement for 2007 and 2008 was 240,834 million units. But, he said that energy availability was shy of that requirement, at 221,865 million units. The matter is further compounded because its burgeoning economy demands more and more power to fuel it. Right now it is the world's sixth largest energy consumer, although it is expected to become the third biggest by 2030.

In July 2005, President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh signed a pact that lifts a 30-year moratorium on nuclear trade with India. In return, the United States would insist on allowing independent monitors to oversee India's use of the technology, which would likely be purchased from western conglomerates such as AREVA and General Electric.

Nevertheless, critics say that India, which has had nuclear weapons since 1974, never signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. They are furthermore worried about alliances it is forming with such countries as Iran and Syria for the purposes of building its energy supplies. India's extreme leftists, meanwhile, are also against the pact because they say it would give westerners undue say in India's internal affairs. Their coalition with the current prime minister is now in jeopardy.

But India needs to escape from its dependence on oil and coal. The demand for those commodities not only perpetuates price instability, but also endangers the air quality. "The nuclear deal probably will lead India to emit substantially less," says David Victor, adjunct fellow for the Council of Foreign Relations, in congressional testimony.

International Forays

If India is to meet its escalating need for energy, it is imperative that it attract private capital. KPMG, a worldwide consulting group, says that the energy sector there needs $120 billion to $150 billion over the next five years. The nation does not just need fuel diversity. It must have a modern transport infrastructure that includes pipelines and transmission lines.

To be sure, the public sector is firmly entrenched. And, ongoing efforts since the 1990s to privatize aspects of the energy sector have been spotty. The government currently owns about 90 percent of the coal markets there. And, it still subsidizes electricity prices. Investors, understandably, have reservations and that's why reformists in India say that the nation's priorities ought to be more on internal reforms and less on external acquisitions.

Indeed, many of India's policymakers realize that foreign investment can help modernize the nation. It's about creating a sustainable energy future as well as building a fresh infrastructure that can avert the repeated blackouts that many areas now endure. It all fits into the school of thought that advocates more use of internal nuclear energy supplies and the subsequent ratification of the Indo-U.S. pact now being debated.

"The government is making efforts to broaden the supply base both internally and externally," says Arvind Mahajan, national industry director for infrastructure and government at KPMG in India. "It is intended to diversify the fuel basket by increasing shares of natural gas, hydro and even nuclear energy."

Since 2000, one of India's state-owned oil and gas companies has invested about $3.5 billion in several gas projects in such nations as Vietnam, Algeria, Kazakhstan, Indonesia, Venezuela and Libya. Private oil firms, meanwhile, are taking bets in Yemen and Iran as well as a handful of African and South American nations.

But the international forays are a doubled-edged sword. India is to be commended for trying to expand its energy options. But the attempts to forge relations with nations that the United States and other western interests are trying to alienate may backfire. That's particularly true now, when India's top leader is trying to enhance nuclear energy's profile within that nation.

Prime Minister Singh emphasizes that he is committed to the peaceful use of nuclear energy as a long-term power source. If India wants to maintain an 8 percent annual growth rate, it will need to triple its energy supplies. Oil and coal are not just being tapped out but they are also dirty fuel sources. Singh is asking the nation's political factions to support nuclear ties with the United States and what will inevitably involve Europe, as its suppliers also try to gain a foothold there. At present, India has 17 operational state-owned nuclear energy units that comprise 3 percent of its energy mix. There are currently 6 more nuclear units under construction.

"I urge the political parties to appreciate the vital national interest of pursuing a sound energy security strategy,'' Singh said at an energy research institute in the country. "India is on the move and we must be able to address growing energy demands. No government can afford to shirk this responsibility and hope to find favor with the people."

All sides can make a strong economic case when it comes to the expansion of energy sources and international trade ties. The political questions that surround the specific nuclear alliance, however, give lots of people pause. In the end, though, India is desperate to maintain a robust economic performance. The technologies to allow that to happen will be forthcoming. But the global community will demand good faith in return.