Politicians habitually and confidently promise swargasukh 30 years from now. They are secure in the knowledge that people will not remember and so, there is no accountability even if they are around. The promise of nuclear power fits neatly into this framework. The Civil Nuclear Agreement (CNA) is being celebrated as a solution to India?s poverty of power. What is the most optimistic forecast of contribution of nuclear power to the total commercial energy requirement of India in 2038? 10%? That, by itself is a 400% increase from today?s contribution, calculated on installed capacity which is double the actual generation.
The CNA will allow access to the global market for nuclear energy inputs, and in the short term of 2 to 3 years, perhaps ensure ready and sustained availability of fuel for the non-safeguarded reactors in operation and under construction. Those megawatts will meet about half of the power shortfall reported in one state, Maharashtra, last week.
Beyond that, there will be zero additionality of power from nuclear fuel for at least five years. By the time the first ten years of the thirty years are over, the share of nuclear power in the commercial energy basket is likely to remain the same as it is today because the demand is increasing everyday. Fossil fuels?coal, oil & gas?will continue to supply 90%. Where is our sense of balance, sense of priorities?
I have no case if the Prime Minister is struggling to provide a solution for 2098 which takes us to three times thirty years. Since that is not the case, some ?honourable? MPs just made some ?windfall gain? and some political parties will recoup that money from the businessmen who will get engaged in building the nuclear capacity, and make most of the money. We, the voters who live in this great country outside Lutyen?s Bungalow Zone, will continue to live with black-outs. Hopefully, Shashikala from Vidarbha will not have to pawn that little brass lamp! The price she actually pays for kerosene is another story.
There is only one solution to end the poverty of power in our life-time, and to sustain ready availability of power in the life-times of our children and grand-children. That is state-of-the-art exploitation of our coal and lignite.
Consider the real numbers for natural gas i.e. methane, stripped of hype. India?s share of the world?s proven natural gas reserve of 176.2 tcm (trillion cubic metres) is 0.6%; that is 1.1 tcm. Subject to technology and economics of deep waters field development and production, 75% maximum i.e. about 0.8 tcm should be recoverable. Against this, estimates for recoverable potential of CMM (coal mine methane) is 0.7 tcm, CBM (coal-bed methane) 1.1 tcm, and UCG (underground coal gasification) 93, yes 93 tcm. In addition, there are AMM (abandoned mine methane) and abandoned mine UCG potentials. All these potentials exist on land, devoid of risks and costs of offshore exploration and development.
Where do these numbers come from? GSI (Geological Survey of India), based on exploration up to 1200 meters depth, has established hard coal reserve of 287 bt (billion tonnes). Based on the data from wells drilled for oil in the Cambay basin, another 63 bt coal reserve is estimated at depths between 500 and 1500 metres. Plus, the lignite potential is 36 bt. That makes a total of 386 bt. With conventional mining up to 300 meters depth, only 125 bt i.e., about one-third of this reserve is recoverable. As much as 50% of this recoverable coal will be abandoned in the mines as pillars, walls and roofs.
CBM, CMM and AMM are established technologies. It took four years to decide which ministry?Coal or Petroleum?will manage CBM (Petroleum won!). Since then, India?s CBM assets have been showcased in three rounds of onerous globe-trotting, and perhaps the airline schedules are being explored for the fourth round. Nothing is happening on CMM or AMM.
UCG too is an established technology. Visionary veterans of ONGC, beginning with the first chairman, late KD Malaviya pioneered all exploration and production technologies in India except for onshore oil where Assam Railway Trading Company took the initiative some 125 years back. ONGC?s 1992 proposal for UCG pilot project at a cost of Rs 62 crore was shot down by the know-it-all boss in the petroleum ministry who was engrossed in selling off ONGC?s producing fields, including Bombay High, to private businessmen from India and abroad. The project was revived by ONGC after 10 years, without daring to refer to the ministry; the first pilot has been successfully completed in Gujarat and further development is reportedly in progress.
Consider three out of several excellent reasons to act on the UCG option on highest priority. One: this is by far the largest indigenous potential source that can be exploited with established technology. Two: this is the major option (CBM being the other one) to access unmineable coal which is two-thirds of our total reserve. Three: this is clean-coal technology without alienating arable land. There is one overwhelming risk: the assured competence lurking in Delhi?s corridors to find a problem to every solution.
The author is former chairman, ONGC, and chairman, TrIdea Pvt Ltd
