BARC Director K N Vyas appointed Atomic Energy Commission chief

Renowned scientist Kamlesh Nilkanth Vyas has been appointed the secretary of the Department of Atomic Energy and chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, according to an official order issued Tuesday.

The Appointment Committee of the Cabinet has approved his appointment till he attains the age of 64 years, i.e. on May 3, 2021, the order issued by the Personnel Ministry said.

Vyas, who is at present Director of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), has been appointed in place of Shekhar Basu.

Basu was appointed to the post in October 2015 and his tenure was to end in September 2016.


He was, however, given two extension of one year each -- one in 2016 and another last year.

His extended term is till September 19, 2018.


Vyas is a Mechanical Engineering graduate from MS University, Vadodara.
After completion of training in BARC training school in 1979, he joined Fuel Design and Development Section of Reactor Engineering Division of BARC.

Vyas has worked for design and analysis of nuclear reactor fuels, according to his official bio-data.

He was also responsible for design and development of a novel fuel for strategic applications.

Vyas has worked extensively in thermal hydraulics and stress analysis of critical reactor core components.

He has been conferred several awards, which include Indian Nuclear Society Outstanding Service Award 2011, Homi Bhabha Science and Technology Award 2006, DAE Awards in the years 2007, 2008, 2012 and 2013.

Vyas is also a Fellow of the Indian National Academy of Engineers.

-Business Standard

Shooting in the dark

The Bullet Train project is economically unviable, will not lead to a transfer of technology and serve only a minuscule proportion of rail passengers.



Is the Bullet Train a white elephant or will it leap-frog India into a new era of advanced technology? If you consider the question rationally, there is only one possible answer.

Japan introduced its high-speed Shinkansen line between Tokyo and Osaka as long ago as 1964. Its top speed then was 210 km/hr; it’s now 350 km/hr. Since the first Bullet Train made its debut, 10 other countries have developed a high-speed network, the biggest being China’s (89 tracks covering 26,783 km against Japan’s 17 tracks covering 3,041 km). Other countries with high-speed trains include France, Germany, Italy, Spain, South Korea and even Turkey. None of them uses the Shinkansen system — so is Japanese technology really the best? There seems to have been no technical evaluation comparing other available systems, so are we embarking on a project of over Rs one lakh crore on blind faith?

But even assuming that the Shinkansen system is comparable to any other technology on offer, how does it help Indian engineering to take a big leap forward as has been claimed by government sources? There is an interesting comparison here. It is said that some years ago, Japan offered to build the high-speed network for China. After much negotiation, the talks stalled on one point: The refusal of the Japanese to transfer technology, as is generally done in large-scale projects after an agreed period.

Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadanavis’s statement the other day is significant: “Where will the raw materials and labourers for the project come from? Obviously from India! Everything that needs to be used in the project, right from services to provisions, will have a great potential of creating revenue.” There is more of this in the same vein from other politicians. Note, there is no mention anywhere of transfer of technology — and so far, none from any government source. Is that because the Japanese have said they will guarantee safety only if they build the complete system? Presumably, this condition will also apply to bullet train projects which are proposed to connect major metros in the future. So how exactly are we taking a technology jump upward?

If there was no technical evaluation and no transfer of technology agreement, was there at least a viability report? Apparently, yes. What are the details? No one knows because officialdom has refused to share the report even in response to RTI applications. We, however, do have the example of Taiwan which installed the Japanese Shinkansen system. In the early 1990s, a consortium of private companies was formed to install a high-speed train system on a Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT) model. The system became operational in 2007 with an investment of $14.3 billion. By 2014, the rail operator was bankrupt with cumulative losses of $1.5 billion. Because a rail network is for the public good, the Taiwanese government bailed out the consortium by injecting $1 billion of public money and reduced the operator’s share by 60 per cent. In India, the BOT model was not even floated as a trial balloon for the very good reason that no private company would have bid for the project — the failure of the much less capital-intensive Metro project (BOT) is very much on everyone’s mind.

The BJP government in Delhi has embraced (and claimed as its own) many of the UPA government’s ideas like GST. So it’s worthwhile to know that the UPA government had rejected the Bullet Train project as being completely unviable. In fact, the then Finance Secretary Rakesh Mohan had said that he would not approve the project even if Japan gave a grant instead of a loan. That’s probably because projections show that the Mumbai-Ahmedabad train service will need to carry nearly one lakh passengers a day to keep fares at a reasonable level. The current traffic is only about 18,000 per day, which means that either fares will have to be raised well above air fares, or that the system will have to be subsidised in perpetuity.

Much has been made of Japan’s loan being “virtually interest-free”. The Japanese are giving a 50-year loan of Rs 88,000 crore of the total project cost of Rs 1,10,000 crore, the rest coming from the central government and state governments of Gujarat and Maharashtra. If the interest rate offered to India of 0.10 per cent sounds benign, consider this: The interest rate on 10-year Japanese government bonds is 0.04 per cent and other interest rates can even be negative. That should put Japanese benevolence in its place.

The difference in interest rates between India and Japan (our 10-year government bonds yield 6.5 per cent), has another, serious and long-term implication. According to a financial analyst, if we consider average Indian inflation at three per cent, and Japanese at zero per cent, the rupee will depreciate three per cent every year vis-a-vis the Japanese yen. So over 50 years, the sum to be repaid will not be Rs 88,000 crore but could be well over twice that amount. In short, the Bullet Train is a bullet to the head of our future generations.

And apart from fulfilling the prime minister’s dream, what other pressing objective does the Bullet Train project serve? According to Bibek Debroy, who is a railway expert and a member of NITI Aayog (so not in any anti-government camp), 95 per cent of rail users in India do not use even the Rajdhani or Shatabdi trains. So only five per cent of Indians use our present super-fast trains because they find the extra fares beyond them. In short, bullet trains are going to make travel faster for five per cent of the population, which already has the option of air travel.

Let’s look at the big picture. The Bullet Train project is going to cost Rs 1,10,000 crore; in last year’s rail budget, the total outlay for the entire Indian railway system was Rs 1,21,000 crore. The Bullet Train will serve a small percentage of people travelling between two cities; the Indian railway system, with over 13,000 trains running every day, carries more than eight billion passengers per year plus 1,000 million tonnes of freight over the whole country. The cost for the two, as the figures show, is virtually the same.

So take your pick. What does India really need? A big bang bullet for the few, or a large, improved, safer system for all? You really think that question needs an answer?

-Indian Express

ISRO readies replacement satellite after clock failure

The atomic clocks in the new satellite are modified versions of the original clocks provided by an European supplier under a 4-million-euro deal which were found deficient. Three similar clocks used in satellites for the European Galileo system, too, reported similar problems. 
 The Indian Space Research Organisation will launch a new navigation satellite on August 31 following the failure of IRNSS-1A in a seven-satellite constellation due to deficiencies in three atomic clocks that are crucial to providing positional information to users on earth. IRNSS-1H, which will replace IRNSS-1A, will be launched on board ISRO’s workhorse rocket PSLV-C39 and the new satellite “will augment the existing seven satellites of NavIC constellation”, ISRO stated.Earlier this year, ISRO had stated that three rubidium atomic frequency standard (RAFS) clocks on IRNSS 1A, the first of seven IRNSS satellites that was launched on July 1, 2013, had malfunctioned, rendering the satellite ineffective.
ISRO had originally indented for nine satellites in IRNSS (Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System) costing Rs 1,420 crore to service the global positioning data needs of the civilian sector and the Indian defence forces. While seven satellites were to form the navigation Indian constellation or NavIC, two were meant to be replacements.
The atomic clocks in the new satellite are modified versions of the original clocks provided by an European supplier under a 4-million-euro deal which were found deficient. Three similar clocks used in satellites for the European Galileo system, too, reported similar problems.
ISRO has been carrying out modifications of clocks procured from the European firm Spectratime since 2008 to overcome technical issues. Investigations of malfunctioning clocks by the European Space Agency have revealed that a faulty component may be causing short circuits.

One of the primary reasons for the development of the indigenous Indian satellite navigation system like IRNSS despite the existence of global systems like the Global Positioning System of the US, the Russian GLONASS, the European Galileo and the Chinese Beidou is the reliability that it offers when used for defence purposes.

Accurate timekeeping lies at the heart of navigation systems since the determination of a person’s position on earth is subject to the accurate calculation of delays in signal transmission from satellite to earth. Small errors in clocks can skew position data by several hundred kilometres.
On each of the IRNSS satellites there are three atomic clocks – one acting as the primary timekeeper and the other two being backups. The failure of all three clocks on a satellite will render the satellite ineffective in providing positional information.
ISRO started work on the IRNSS programme in 1999 after the Kargil War where Indian defence forces could not use American GPS in the conflict zone to locate their soldiers.

-Indian Express

ISRO says IRNSS-1H launch unsuccessful, heat shields failed to separate

IRNSS-1H launch: The Indian Space Research Organisation today received a setback, when the launch of the much-anticipated IRNSS-1H failed. The launch was scheduled at 7 PM from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre at Sriharikota, and the navigation satellite was launched on the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle C-39.


The Indian Space Research Organisation today received a setback, when the launch of the much-anticipated IRNSS-1H failed. According to ISRO Chief AS Kiran Kumar, the mission was unsuccessful as the heat shields did not separate and therefore the satellite could not launch. “There was no problem in any of the stages. The heat shield did not separate, due to which it was unable to get into orbit,” Kumar said in a press conference. “The satellite got separated internally, but it is enclosed within the heat shield,” he added.
The launch was scheduled at 7 PM from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre at Sriharikota, and the navigation satellite was launched on the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle C-39. The launch was expected to set the  Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS)-1H into a Sub-Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit. The space agency had maintained a 29-hour countdown for the project, which began at 2 pm yesterday afternoon.

What is ISRO IRNSS-1H navigation satellite?

Today’s launch by India’s space agency wass meant to send the eighth rocket of India’s navigation system, weighing 1425 kg and fitted with replacement atomic clocks, into orbit. This launch was important, as three Rubidium Atomic Frequency Standards (RAFS) clocks on the IRNSS-1A had malfunctioned.
This launch was considered critical, as India’s navigation still operates on the US-based Global Positioning System (GPS). The IRNSS-1H would have introduced Navigation with Indian Constellation, or NavIC, that would have provide accurate information services within Indian territory, and upto a distance of 1500 kms around India’s borders.
The NavIC satellite system was supposed to consist of 7 satellites, with two being set later as replacements. The IRNSS-1H launch was crucial, as atomic clocks help maintain Indian Standard Time, which  is set by the National Physical Laboratory. Atomic clocks are known to have an error of one second in a million years. The failure of this launch suggests that the NPL will have to continue to rely on GPS for the maintenance of its available atomic clocks.
The Indian Space Research Organisation today received a setback, when the launch of the much-anticipated IRNSS-1H failed. According to ISRO Chief AS Kiran Kumar, the mission was unsuccessful as the heat shields did not separate and therefore the satellite could not launch. “There was no problem in any of the stages. The heat shield did not separate, due to which it was unable to get into orbit,” Kumar said in a press conference. “The satellite got separated internally, but it is enclosed within the heat shield,” he added.
The launch was scheduled at 7 PM from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre at Sriharikota, and the navigation satellite was launched on the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle C-39. The launch was expected to set the  Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS)-1H into a Sub-Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit. The space agency had maintained a 29-hour countdown for the project, which began at 2 pm yesterday afternoon.

What is ISRO IRNSS-1H navigation satellite?

Today’s launch by India’s space agency wass meant to send the eighth rocket of India’s navigation system, weighing 1425 kg and fitted with replacement atomic clocks, into orbit. This launch was important, as three Rubidium Atomic Frequency Standards (RAFS) clocks on the IRNSS-1A had malfunctioned.
This launch was considered critical, as India’s navigation still operates on the US-based Global Positioning System (GPS). The IRNSS-1H would have introduced Navigation with Indian Constellation, or NavIC, that would have provide accurate information services within Indian territory, and upto a distance of 1500 kms around India’s borders.
The NavIC satellite system was supposed to consist of 7 satellites, with two being set later as replacements. The IRNSS-1H launch was crucial, as atomic clocks help maintain Indian Standard Time, which  is set by the National Physical Laboratory. Atomic clocks are known to have an error of one second in a million years. The failure of this launch suggests that the NPL will have to continue to rely on GPS for the maintenance of its available atomic clocks.
The NavIC system was set up after ISRO’s Telemetry and Command Network (ISTRAC) cell and National Physical Laboratory had signed a Memorandum of Understanding earlier. The NavIC was expected to have standard positional service, for civilian purposes, and restricted service, which was to cater to the defence and ISRO.
-Indian Express

Uranium Imports: A critical dose to step up generation

The performance and success of India’s nuclear power generation hinges on the import of the fuel to a great extent. A steady supply of uranium is good news.

By the end of this calendar year, nearly 3,000 metric tonnes (MT) of nuclear fuel is likely to be shipped into India from three countries — the Russian Federation, Canada and the Republic of Kazakhstan. The uranium shipments expected in 2016 is a record for a single year and would, in quantitative terms, amount to nearly 53 per cent of total nuclear fuel imported into India since the country’s access to the global nuclear fuel market opened up in 2008.

Till now, about 5,559 MT has come into the country from these three nations, alongside France, while 2,937 MT is the anticipated supplies of nuclear fuel in the form of natural uranium ore concentrate and natural uranium oxide pellets during calendar year 2016. In India, there are currently 21 reactors with an installed capacity of 5,780 MWe (mega watt electrical), of which, eight reactors with aggregate capacity of 2,400 MWe are fuelled by indigenous uranium while the remaining 13 with a capacity of 3,380 MWe are under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Safeguards and use imported uranium. The second unit of the Kudankulam nuclear project (1,000 MWe Unit-2) has also attained first criticality (start of controlled self-sustaining nuclear fission chain reaction in the reactor for the first time) on July 10, 2016, which also uses imported fuel.

A steady supply of uranium is good news for the country’s nuclear power sector, something that is expected to push up the performance of Indian nuclear power plants, as well as of the several fuel cycle facilities. The capacity factor — or operational efficiency — of the 21 nuclear power reactors currently running in the country was recorded at 73 per cent in the first three months of the current fiscal (April-June 2016). This includes the operational data for the first unit of the Kudankulam power project.

An improvement in gross nuclear generation in the coming months could be powered by a combination of two factors: international cooperation leading to augmentation of fuel supplies to 13 reactors that qualify for imported fuel, and a commensurate improvement in domestic fuel supplies for the other eight. Under the “separation plan” announced by the government in March 2006, negotiated after the July 2005 nuclear deal with the US, India was required to bring 14 reactors under IAEA Safeguards in a phased manner. Thirteen of these reactors — including RAPS 2 to 6 at Rawatbhata, Rajasthan, KAPS 1 and 2 at Kakrapar, Gujarat, NAPS 1 and 2 at Narora, Uttar Pradesh, TAPS 1 and 2 at Tarapur, Maharashtra, Kudankulam 1 in Tamil Nadu — are already under IAEA safeguards, and eligible to run on imported fuel. They are now operating at close to full capacity, officials of Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL), which runs the country’s nuclear power plants, said. The other reactors — KGS 1 to 4 at Kaiga, Karnataka, MAPS 1 and 2 at Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu, and TAPS 3 and 4 at Tarapur, Maharashtra — continue to use uranium sourced within the country.

Official sources said that the Department of Atomic Energy reckons the annual fuel need for operating the indigenous pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs) at 85 per cent capacity is about 45 tonnes of uranium dioxide for the older 220 MWe units, 100 tonnes for the 540 MWe units and 125 tonnes for the new 700 MWe units. By contrast, the need of low enriched uranium for operating imported light water reactors (LWRs) at 85 per cent capacity factor are six tonnes for the older 160 MWe Tarapur units and 27 tonnes for 1,000 MWe units such as the twin Russian-built VVER-1000 reactor units at Kudankulam.

The total installed capacity is scheduled to go up to 9,980 MWe at the end of the current five-year plan period (March 2017), as seven new reactors are commissioned. These include the imported LWRs of Russian design, four indigenous PHWRs, and one indigenous prototype fast breeder reactor (PFBR).

NPCIL had planned to start work on 16 new reactors with a total capacity of 16,100 MWe during the Twelfth Plan (2012-17). These included eight indigenous PHWRs of 700 MWe each with a total capacity of 5,600 MWe and eight LWRs based on international cooperation — with Russia, France and the US — totaling to a capacity of 10,500 MWe.

JSC TVEL Corporation, Russia

Date of Contract: 11.02.2009

Total Quantity to be procured: 2000 MT of Natural Uranium Oxide Pellets.

Total Quantity received: 1813 MT

Anticipated delivery in 2016: 187 MT

Status: The fuel is being procured through the Annual Supplements to the Contract, which concludes with the import of 187 MT of Pellets.

Date of Contract: 11.02.2009

Quantity to be procured: 58 MT of Enriched Uranium Oxide Pellets..

Total Quantity received: 58.30 MT

Anticipated delivery in 2016: Nil

Status: The Contract concluded with one-time supply of the fuel during 2009.

Date of Contract: 03.03.2015

Quantity to be procured: 42 MT of Enriched Uranium Oxide Pellets.

Total Quantity received: 42.15 MT

Anticipated delivery in 2016: Nil

Status: The Contract concluded with one-time supply of the fuel during 2015

JSC NAC KazatomProm, Kazakhstan

Date of Contract: 12.11.2009

Quantity to be procured: 2100 MT of Natural Uranium Ore Concentrate.

Total Quantity received: 2095.9 MT

Anticipated delivery in 2016:Nil

Status: The Contract concluded during 2014.

Date of Contract: 08.07.2015

Quantity to be procured: The Contract permits procurement of a minimum of 3750 MT and maximum 7000 MT of Natural Uranium Ore Concentrate.

Total Quantity received: 999.807 MT

Anticipated delivery in 2016:1500 MT

Status: The material is to be procured during 2015–2019.

AREVA, France

Date of Contract:17.12.2008

Total Quantity to be procured:300 MT of Natural Uranium Ore Concentrate.

Total Quantity received: 299.88 MT

Anticipated delivery in 2016: Nil

Status: The contract with Areva concluded with a one-time supply of the fuel during 2009.

Cameco, Canada

Date of Contract: 15.04.2015

Total Quantity to be procured: The Contract permits procurement of a minimum of 2750 MT and maximum 5500 MT of Natural Uranium Ore Concentrate

Total Quantity received: 250.74 MT

Anticipated delivery in 2016: 1,250 MT

Status: The nuclear fuel is to be procured during 2015–2020.

(Source: DAE)

-Indian Express

Discover, invent in India

A country that aspires to become an economic superpower must first become a science & technology superpower.

The lack of necessary funds for investment in science guarantees failure; but money alone will not produce the desired results.

David J. Gross

I love India! I love its people, its culture, and its vitality. I have many dear friends and colleagues and so have visited regularly over the last three decades. For years, I have felt that India, with its long tradition of excellent science, great scientists and scientific institutions, and rich cultural history that respects learning and excellence, has the potential to become a scientific power.

Many ingredients for greatness already exist. First, India possesses an immense pool of talented young minds. Many have been attracted abroad, where they have made enormous contributions to science and technology. This overseas community has strong ties to the country of its origin and is an important national resource that could greatly assist in the development of India. Given appropriate opportunities, many would return. Second, the Indian economy is booming, now reaching levels of growth second to none but China.

How can this potential be unleashed? I have worked with colleagues to aid this mission. For the last decade, I have chaired the International Advisory Committee formed to advise the new International Centre for Theoretical Sciences (ICTS), a branch of the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research in Bangalore, founded by my good friend Spenta Wadia. The ICTS, modelled on the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics in Santa Barbara that I led for 15 years, has as its goal to foster excellence in the basic sciences through its programmes, generating interactions and cross-fertilisation between disciplines, and acting as a node for scientific information and values. In June, we inaugurated the campus of the ICTS and welcomed its new director, my ex-student Rajesh Gopakumar.

My experience with the birth of the ICTS strengthened my optimism regarding India’s prospects, but also taught me much about the enormous difficulties in creating excellence in India and the perils of Indian bureaucracy. Last week, I attended the Indian Science Congress, where I had hoped to meet with Prime Minister Narendra Modi, express some of my concerns and recommendations regarding the state of basic science in India. As this meeting did not transpire, I welcome the opportunity to present these here.

Prime Minister Modi challenged his nation to “Make in India”. But in order to “Make in India” and compete with better or cheaper goods from abroad, one must first “Invent in India”; and in order to “Invent in India” one cannot just rely on the underlying science done elsewhere, one must “Discover in India”. I suggest the strategy: Discover, invent, and make in India.

A country that aspires to become an economic superpower must first become a science and technology superpower. China has learnt this lesson well and is on its way to becoming a world leader, both in technology and in basic science. Realising this aspiration requires investment. Despite repeated promises, the percentage of India’s GDP devoted to research and development has remained for 15 years at a paltry 0.9 per cent — minuscule in comparison with developed countries: The US figure is 2.7 per cent, South Korea spends 4.4 per cent. In the last 15 years, Chinese investment in technology, higher education and the basic sciences has doubled. China now spends 2.1 per cent, and this percentage is rapidly increasing.

Without investment, there is no return. In the US, companies spend much on research and development of their products, but have realised that they cannot make truly new products without long-term investments in basic science that are best supported by the government. The recipients of the recently created wealth in technological se ctors of the Indian economy should give back to their country to support excellence in the basic sciences. The lack of necessary funds for investment in science guarantees failure; but money alone will not produce the desired results. Were the R&D budget (relative to the GDP) to double, and were the GDP to double as well over the next decade, the resulting quadrupling of funds will only achieve its goals if there is fundamental reform in the structure of India’s higher education and research institutions.

Indian science is burdened with an inflexible, irrational and outdated bureaucracy. India imposes irrational bureaucratic regulations, such as severe restrictions on travel for young Indian scientists and for foreign collaborators, as well as forced retirement at a relatively early age for excellent, and sorely needed, scientific leaders. The only rationale I can see for such a cumbersome and harmful bureaucracy (applying the same rules to the post office and to centres of scientific research) is the inability of the government to make informed judgements of quality.

This highly politicised system must be radically reformed and modified. Elsewhere, planning for science is largely protected from day-to-day politics. Funding flows to independent agencies (such as the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and the European Research Council), independent of ministries and politicians, where scientists have much input to shape long-term plans for growth and development. Peer review is the norm. This is especially important in the basic sciences, which require long-term and stable funding.

The government and the bureaucracy alone cannot remedy the existing state of affairs. The scientific and educational community must step up. Scientists and educators must demand changes and they must help in shaping these changes. Leading Indian scientists should engage in public discourse, participate in the necessary review and planning processes, create new institutions of research and education, and help raise the level of existing centres. India does not lack brilliant young people who can create the science of the future, but they need to be given appropriate opportunities, visibility and engaged in decision-making. India has three national academies of science, but they play little role in either advising the government or representing the scientific community. The US benefits immensely from the advice it receives from the National Research Council, which produces over 400 reports a year for its departments. The Indian government also needs increased scientific input to address the many urgent problems of India.

Reforming governmental institutions is not simple, and allocating scarce resources for long-term payoffs is difficult. But both are necessary if India is to develop the science and technology necessary for its economic development and to take its rightful place among the scientific leaders of the world.

The writer, a Nobel prize winner in physics, is Chancellor’s Chair Professor of Theoretical Physics, Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara.

-Indian Express

Sustainable development has origins in India, says RSS chief

RSS Chief Mohan Bhagwat and Former Chairman of ISRO K Radhakrishna during the valedictory ceremony of RSS Akhil Bhartiya Shrung Ghosh Shibir”Swaranajali” at Yelhanka in Bengaluru on Sunday. (Source: PTI)

“The values of the world do not speak of a sustainable world. The word ‘sustainable’ has come from Indian culture. It has become a part of the global vocabulary out of necessity, " Bhagwat said.

The concept of sustainable development has origins in Indian culture and did not exist in the value system of the rest of the world, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat said here on Sunday. He was speaking at the valedictory ceremony of the RSS brass band training camp.

“The values of the world do not speak of a sustainable world. The word ‘sustainable’ has come from Indian culture. It has become a part of the global vocabulary out of necessity…Now the world is hoping that India will set an example and show the way…’’ said the RSS chief.

Bhagwat addressed over 2,000 attendees at the four-day brass band camp, the RSS Shrung Ghosh Shibir — Swaranjali 2016.

At the camp, 2,185 RSS members fine-tuned their skills in playing four new instruments — the saxophone, the clarinet, the euphonium and the trumpet called naganga, swarad, gomuka and turya by the RSS, respectively.

The Indian names for the instruments, the RSS chief said, will gradually become a part of the music culture.

In the past, the instruments used by the RSS band were restricted to the side drums (anaka), bass drums (panava), bugle (shankha), flute (vamshi), triangle (tribhuja) and cymbals (jhallari).

In the four-day camp at Bengaluru this year, the RSS band developed compositions based on Carnatic and Hindustani ragas.

The RSS band played compositions like Shivaranjini, based on Shivaranjani raga, at the valedictory on Sunday using the newly inducted instruments.

One of the aims of the RSS in organising the brass band camp is “to enhance the quality of the band set, learn new instruments and compositions and understand the overall implementation of compositions.’’

The focus is also on using the large brass band set up “for inculcating qualities of a swayamsevak and strengthening shakhas,’’ the RSS said.

-Indian Express 

Ex-ISRO chiefs disagreed on many things — except RSS

On Sunday, Radhakrishnan, who served as ISRO chief from November 2009 to December 2014, was the chief guest at an RSS event, Swaranjali, in Bengaluru. 

Former Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) chief G Madhavan Nair and his successor K Radhakrishnan may have had public spats over the ISRO-Devas deal, but both seem to be on the same page when it comes to the RSS.

On Sunday, Radhakrishnan, who served as ISRO chief from November 2009 to December 2014, was the chief guest at an RSS event, Swaranjali, in Bengaluru. Earlier this month, Nair, a regular at RSS events for the last one year, was the chief guest at another RSS event, Vishwa Sangh Shivir, in Indore.

For both, the association with the RSS started post-retirement, and in times of trouble. In 2012, the UPA government had barred Nair, a Padma Vibhushan awardee, and a few other space scientists for their alleged role in the ISRO-Devas controversy.

That same ISRO-Devas case has now come to haunt Radhakrishnan. In October last year, he was questioned by the CBI, which began a probe in May last year, alleging wrongful gain of Rs 578 crore to the Bangalore-based Devas Multimedia which wanted to start satellite-based multimedia services in the country.

Devas had entered into an agreement with ISRO’s marketing arm, Antrix Corporation, in 2005 for lease of 90 per cent of transponder capacity on two satellites that ISRO was yet to launch. The agreement was cancelled by Antrix in 2011, citing security concerns. Devas had contested the decision and taken the matter to an arbitration panel which, in September last year, slapped a fine of about Rs 4,400 crore (USD 672 million) on Antrix for unilaterally terminating the contract. 

Nair is also likely to be questioned by the CBI at a later stage. He was the ISRO chairman when the agreement was finalised, while Radhakrishnan was at its helm when it was cancelled.

Once considered close — Nair is said to have handpicked and groomed Radhakrishnan to become his successor — the two scientists had a public falling out in the wake of the controversy. Radhakrishnan blamed the previous dispensation for getting into an agreement that seemed to favour a private company, while Nair accused Radhakrishnan of personal vendetta and misleading the government.

Last week, former National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon told The Indian Express that action against Nair was “proportionate” to what had been found against him, and dismissed suggestions that subsequent inquiry committees had only found procedural lapses against him. “If you look at what was actually done, it was proportionate to what was found… (the lapses) were a bit more than procedural… I am glad that what we did at that time was to protect the (space) programme… I think we dealt with it well,” Menon said at the Idea Exchange programme.

Menon also said he did not see anything wrong with the CBI inquiry against celebrated scientists. “I think if there was wrongdoing, it deserves an inquiry. There is nothing wrong with it. They (the investigating agency) need to look into it,” Menon said.

On his association with the RSS, Nair said he appreciates the work the Sangh is doing in uniting the country and popularising ancient Indian science. “They are trying to make Indians proud of their past achievements. They are doing a lot of work in uniting the country. I get invited sometimes to speak at their functions. I particularly like to speak to children about science, spread awareness about what we have achieved in science — in ancient times as well as now,” he told The Indian Express. Nair also serves as a patron to Vijnana (read as Vigyan) Bharati, an RSS-backed body to promote science.

Radhakrishnan could not be reached for a comment.

Manmohan Vaidya, All India Prachar Pramukh of the RSS, said both Nair and Radhakrishnan had done great work for the country, and welcomed their association with the RSS. “Those who think of the country’s interest are connected with the RSS. A P J Abdul Kalam also attended RSS events,” Vaidya told The Indian Express.

Vaidya said neither Nair nor Radhakrishnan were swayamsevaks. “The Sampark Vibhag of RSS runs an outreach programme, Sajjan Shakti, in which swayamsevaks meet prominent personalities from various fields. Both these scientists have been invited to deliver lectures,” he said.

Though Radhakrishnan does not hold any position in Vijnana Bharati, its secretary general A Jayakumar said he was “part and parcel” of the organisation. “An ideology of Indianness is flowing through RSS philosophy in the scientific community,” Jayakumar said.

-Indian Express

More than Make in India, need Invent in India: Nobel laureates

MYSURU: Four of the five Nobel Laureates attending the Indian Science Congress here said that India must focus on discovering, inventing and making here and not just making. "I think your Prime Minister Narendra Modi's slogan must change to invent in India from Make in India," American particle physicist and Nobel winner Professor David J Gross said on Monday.

"Making in India is obviously important for the country, but to make in India without dependence on others, you must invent in India, and to invent you must discover.Because it is discovery and inventions that lead to products that can be made," Gross said.

Professor Dan Shechtman, echoing Gross, said there must be a strategic plan. While the need to innovate, discover and invent must be the first goal, there must be a simultaneous effort at enhancing entrepreneurship. "The inventions must be taken from the universities to start-ups," he said.
For this, he said there must be more people who are interested in science. "And for that you must begin teaching science at a very young age," he said.


Fields Medalist Manjul Bhargava, while acknowledging tremendous talent in India, said: "There is not enough fostering or encouragement. A lot of good talent in India just gets into engineering. Engineering is important, but it is science that drives engineering. A lot of Indian institutes have huge vacancies, we must encourage students to take up science and eventually fill these spaces up."

Nobel Laureate John B Gurdon said he was excited to see so many children interested in science."Fifty years ago, when I was in India there were barely a few institu tions that I knew of, today the scenario has changed," he said.


Nobel winner Professor Serge Haroche said the attitude that we can just borrow inventions and make here must go.

They also spoke of the need to enhance investment a better education system. There is a lot to learn from South Korea and China, they said while conceding that problems are different. "In the last 10 years of Indian Science Congress, I've seen all the prime ministers saying that they will increase investment for science. But the graph is very flat and there has been no increase," Gross said.

-Times of India

At IITs, median offers are more modest

The median salary, which an average student gets, was Rs. 8.5 lakh at IIT-B in 2014-15.

 

Contrary to the media narrative on crore-plus offers at the IITs, the median salaries offered to new graduates are far more modest, internal data on placements obtained by The Hindu shows. 

Like most years, the headlines on the 2015-16 placement season at the IITs were captured by the minority of students who got crore-plus offers from companies including Google and Facebook. However, these headlines miss the reality of IIT placement offers, a range of official sources and students said. 

The handful of students who get offers for jobs overseas which tip the payscales over Rs.1 crore — just five per cent of all placements last year at IIT Bombay for instance — skew the average IIT graduate’s starting salary, as do Computer Science graduates, placement officers at several IITs said. The median — which reflects what the average student is offered — is far more modest; Rs. 8.5 lakh at IITB in 2014-15 for instance, according to Rahul Soni, placement manager at IITB. Data for the 2015-16 season was not available as the process is ongoing. 

At IIT Kanpur, the median salary in the Computer Science stream in 2014-15 was Rs. 18 lakh, while the median for aerospace and civil engineering was Rs. 8 lakh, internal documents of IITK’s placement office show. At IIT Madras, the median salary for B.Tech students placed in 2014-15 was Rs. 10 lakh. 

Most of the crore-plus salaries reported by the media are simple conversions into Indian currency of placement offers made in U.S. dollars, placement officials said. Many, however, are keen to point out that this is an unfair metric. 

“Those [crore-plus] salaries are nothing special,” Brijesh Kumar, assistant professor at IIT Roorkee, told The Hindu. “Every engineer in these companies starts with those salaries when they work in California because the cost of living is so high over there. The crore-plus packages that the companies advertise include stock components payable over five years contingent upon the person working there for that many years,” he said. 

Moreover, it is meaningless to convert these salaries to Indian rupees because if the income is in dollars, so are the taxes and expenses, Mr. Kumar said. “All it does is to create unnecessary stress for students and unrealistic expectations for the parents. I feel sorry for my students who are burdened by these unrealistic expectations of the society around them,” he said. 

While most students at the IITs have a realistic idea by the time the placement season comes of what salary they should expect on graduating, some are demoralised by the ‘crore-plus headlines’, students say. “What it does is push you towards taking a job that might not even be in the area you have studied or your passion because you do not want to turn down the big sums,” a student at IITB who had not been placed in the pre-placement season said. “So the computer science guys turn to the tech majors and the rest feel like they should try and catch the investment banks and consulting firms,” he said. “While most students have realistic expectations, often there is pressure from parents who feel that they have to recoup their investment,” Yash Shahi, dual degree Electrical Engineering student at IIT Kanpur who got placed at Intel said. 

Contrary to the media narrative on crore-plus offers at the IITs, the median salaries offered to new graduates are far more modest, internal data on placements obtained by The Hindu shows. 

Like most years, the headlines on the 2015-16 placement season at the IITs were captured by the minority of students who got crore-plus offers from companies including Google and Facebook. However, these headlines miss the reality of IIT placement offers, a range of official sources and students said. 

The handful of students who get offers for jobs overseas which tip the payscales over Rs.1 crore — just five per cent of all placements last year at IIT Bombay for instance — skew the average IIT graduate’s starting salary, as do Computer Science graduates, placement officers at several IITs said. The median — which reflects what the average student is offered — is far more modest; Rs. 8.5 lakh at IITB in 2014-15 for instance, according to Rahul Soni, placement manager at IITB. Data for the 2015-16 season was not available as the process is ongoing.

At IIT Kanpur, the median salary in the Computer Science stream in 2014-15 was Rs. 18 lakh, while the median for aerospace and civil engineering was Rs. 8 lakh, internal documents of IITK’s placement office show. At IIT Madras, the median salary for B.Tech students placed in 2014-15 was Rs. 10 lakh. 

Most of the crore-plus salaries reported by the media are simple conversions into Indian currency of placement offers made in U.S. dollars, placement officials said. Many, however, are keen to point out that this is an unfair metric. “Those [crore-plus] salaries are nothing special,” Brijesh Kumar, assistant professor at IIT Roorkee, told The Hindu. “Every engineer in these companies starts with those salaries when they work in California because the cost of living is so high over there. The crore-plus packages that the companies advertise include stock components payable over five years contingent upon the person working there for that many years,” he said. 

Moreover, it is meaningless to convert these salaries to Indian rupees because if the income is in dollars, so are the taxes and expenses, Mr. Kumar said. “All it does is to create unnecessary stress for students and unrealistic expectations for the parents. I feel sorry for my students who are burdened by these unrealistic expectations of the society around them,” he said. 

While most students at the IITs have a realistic idea by the time the placement season comes of what salary they should expect on graduating, some are demoralised by the ‘crore-plus headlines’, students say. “What it does is push you towards taking a job that might not even be in the area you have studied or your passion because you do not want to turn down the big sums,” a student at IITB who had not been placed in the pre-placement season said. “So the computer science guys turn to the tech majors and the rest feel like they should try and catch the investment banks and consulting firms,” he said. “While most students have realistic expectations, often there is pressure from parents who feel that they have to recoup their investment,” Yash Shahi, dual degree Electrical Engineering student at IIT Kanpur who got placed at Intel said.

 Contrary to the media narrative on crore-plus offers at the IITs, the median salaries offered to new graduates are far more modest, internal data on placements obtained by The Hindu shows. 

Like most years, the headlines on the 2015-16 placement season at the IITs were captured by the minority of students who got crore-plus offers from companies including Google and Facebook. However, these headlines miss the reality of IIT placement offers, a range of official sources and students said. 

The handful of students who get offers for jobs overseas which tip the payscales over Rs.1 crore — just five per cent of all placements last year at IIT Bombay for instance — skew the average IIT graduate’s starting salary, as do Computer Science graduates, placement officers at several IITs said. The median — which reflects what the average student is offered — is far more modest; Rs. 8.5 lakh at IITB in 2014-15 for instance, according to Rahul Soni, placement manager at IITB. Data for the 2015-16 season was not available as the process is ongoing.

At IIT Kanpur, the median salary in the Computer Science stream in 2014-15 was Rs. 18 lakh, while the median for aerospace and civil engineering was Rs. 8 lakh, internal documents of IITK’s placement office show. At IIT Madras, the median salary for B.Tech students placed in 2014-15 was Rs. 10 lakh.

Most of the crore-plus salaries reported by the media are simple conversions into Indian currency of placement offers made in U.S. dollars, placement officials said. Many, however, are keen to point out that this is an unfair metric. “Those [crore-plus] salaries are nothing special,” Brijesh Kumar, assistant professor at IIT Roorkee, told The Hindu. “Every engineer in these companies starts with those salaries when they work in California because the cost of living is so high over there. The crore-plus packages that the companies advertise include stock components payable over five years contingent upon the person working there for that many years,” he said. 

Moreover, it is meaningless to convert these salaries to Indian rupees because if the income is in dollars, so are the taxes and expenses, Mr. Kumar said. “All it does is to create unnecessary stress for students and unrealistic expectations for the parents. I feel sorry for my students who are burdened by these unrealistic expectations of the society around them,” he said. 

While most students at the IITs have a realistic idea by the time the placement season comes of what salary they should expect on graduating, some are demoralised by the ‘crore-plus headlines’, students say. “What it does is push you towards taking a job that might not even be in the area you have studied or your passion because you do not want to turn down the big sums,” a student at IITB who had not been placed in the pre-placement season said. “So the computer science guys turn to the tech majors and the rest feel like they should try and catch the investment banks and consulting firms,” he said. “While most students have realistic expectations, often there is pressure from parents who feel that they have to recoup their investment,” Yash Shahi, dual degree Electrical Engineering student at IIT Kanpur who got placed at Intel said. 

-The Hindu

New Atomic Energy Secy Sekhar Basu takes charge

New Delhi: Sekhar Basu, who headed the Indian Nuclear Submarine Programme, has taken over as the new Atomic Energy Commission Chairman and Atomic Energy Secretary.
Basu, who headed the country’s premier nuclear research institute Bhabha Atomic Research Centre before this assignment, will have 11 months before his superannuation.
After completion of one year of BARC Training School programme in nuclear science and engineering, he joined the Reactor Engineering Division of BARC in 1975. He started his career by designing fuel for Boiling Water Reactor, which showed excellent performance.
Later he took up the responsibility of the development of nuclear submarine propulsion plant and built the land based prototype at Kalpakkam from scratch.
Since 2000, he was also responsible for the design, development, construction and operation of nuclear recycle plants at Tarapur and Kalpakkam, involving reprocessing and nuclear waste management. These plants are performing to international standards. He is pursuing the design of the Integrated Nuclear Recycle Plant, which will take this programme to a higher platform.
As the Chairman of Project Management Board, he has been responsible for the development of Indian Neutrino Observatory at Tamil Nadu and as Principal Co-ordinator, he is pursuing the development of 1 Gev Superconducting Accelerators for the Accelerator Driven System Programme.
His predecessor, Ratan Kumar Sinha, oversaw clearing of major impediments like the addressing the liability issue, clearing thorny issues in execution of Indo-US nuclear deal and signing the deal for Kudankulam units 3 and 4 with Russia.
Sinha, who completed 42 years of service, belonged to the era of nuclear scientists when the country faced the daunting task of building nuclear reactors when Canadians and other nations shunned India leaving projects like the Rajasthan Atomic Power Station (RAPS) mid-way.
Indian scientists not only completed the reactors, but also developed mastery over the Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWR).
-tkbsen

Modi Caught in Nuclear War at BARC

NEW DELHI: As India celebrates its 69th year of Independence, several scientists from the country’s premier nuclear research lab Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) have alleged harassment and victimisation by their supervisors. They have written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, seeking his immediate intervention. Modi is the supreme head of the Department of Atomic Energy, which controls nuclear research and development centres, including BARC in Mumbai.
The Sunday Standard has reviewed the complaints, including a letter from Dr D N Yadav, a scientist in the Nuclear Recycle Group of BARC, to Modi on February 4. In his letter, Yadav cited harassment cases of at least six scientists, alleging that they were subjected to management pressure and retaliation by seniors. The issue ranges from manipulation in annual performance reports to irregularities in execution and operation of plants. Yadav’s over 100-page note to the PM—that includes separate complaints filed by individual scientists with the Director and Supervisors of BARC—raises serious questions over functioning of the premier nuclear research organisation. The scientists’ representations have sought a thorough probe into BARC’s affairs.
“Many scientists have reported against severe victimisation and gross irregularities including in assessment of merit in BARC. I am also enclosing representations made by some of the senior scientists to Director BARC and other higher officials, however they also were simply quelled by similar false memoranda so as to protect the involved officials,” Yadav wrote to Modi.
Interesting is the case of scientist Shashi Kant, who was allegedly harassed by senior officials. His immediate supervisor, B V Shah, admitted in a letter dated December 31, 2014, to BARC chief Sekhar Basu that Kant’s performance reports were manipulated on the direction of senior officials.
Kant, an IIT BHU graduate who joined BARC in 1983, is known for his expertise in nuclear fuel reprocessing. Kant has alleged that he was mentally tortured for being upright and brilliant in his job. Harassment started when he tried to access the performance report copies through RTI. Kant was transferred to Kalpakkam, prompting him to move Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Mumbai bench, which stayed BARC’s decision. In his appeal, Kant produced Shah’s letter, putting the BARC in the dock.
“My assessment (of Shashi Kant) was under strong influence of seniors,” wrote Shah in his letter, adding that Kant continued to get low grading (A3) on the insistence of senior officials.
Kant, whose hearing is scheduled for August 21, has claimed that on the pretext of confidentiality, he was not allowed to publish his work, which was subsequently claimed by superiors and favoured colleagues, and his promotions were delayed.
A scientist has claimed that harassment affected his family life. B N Singh has accused supervisor P K Wattal of carrying on with his tirade against brilliant scientists after availing extensions following his retirement. Singh alleged that Wattal directed the scientists to discharge the effluent to sea with available dilution, which was much higher than the permissible limit. “This action would have led to serious violation of plant technical specifications... if some NGOs come to know through periodical sampling of the sea water... it will be very difficult for BARC to face the consequences late,” Singh wrote, adding that Wattal had procured sub-standard equipments that has not been used till date.
Singh said he was transferred after exposing the irregularities. What is startling from the complaints and documents sent to the PM is the claims made by BARC scientists that senior officials took the advantage of ‘secrecy’ and ‘sensitive nature of work’ to allegedly harass and deny them their dues.
Among the documents sent to Modi is a copy of a letter from scientist Ashutosh Acharya, written to Wattal on November 28, 2013, in which he reveals that many scientists’ career was allegedly nuked by Wattal. “Your actions are not only against me but against many others also. Sometime in May or June 2010, P K Narayan, as Head BETDD, had shown me unassessed ACRs for 2007-08 & 2008-09 of Shashi Kant and Narayan had also mentioned that everyone was amazed with his quantum and quality of work output... there are many such facts about him and others,” Acharya’s letter to Wattal, now with the PMO, stated.
There is also a shocking piece of information the PMO was told through the letters that violates Modi’s directives. Wattal, who allegedly harassed the scientists, was given two extensions of two years each after his retirement. Finally in February 2015, he was rewarded with the Raja Ramanna Fellowship for another five years. Modi had directed government departments to avoid extensions and promote young scientists.
BARC, however, denied harassment of its scientists, in its reply to this newspaper’s queries. It said that BARC has over 4,200 scientists and only three have complained, and generalisation of this matter based on three cases is not appropriate. It did not specifically answer whether a committee was formed to look into their complaints.
“The officers who have made the complaints alleging harassment were not able to substantiate the same when requested to do so. Some of the officers, who could not be promoted solely due to their performance being below the required level of grading, are trying to distract attention by making baseless and irrelevant allegations of harassment and victimisation against the management,” BARC said.
It added that allegations levelled by Yadav are baseless and therefore no action was initiated against any senior officer. BARC said Yadav is in the habit of sending grievances and has done so on social media, to BARC’s vigilance section and to the PM.
“His case has been referred to the Department for further course of action. As regards B N Singh, he had made representation for review of APAR grading for the year 2012-13. It was examined by the competent authority and the competent authority has upgraded his grading,” BARC said.
Interestingly, this admission makes it clear that Singh’s grading was rectified only after the complaint. BARC refused to comment on this newspaper’s query on scientist Shashi Kant, citing that his case was sub judice. It, however, said that the allegations made against Wattal have been examined and found that they are only due to personal vengeance made by above officers who are not satisfied with the APAR gradings awarded to them.
Suicide Saga
■ In January, a PIL was filed in Bombay High Court seeking a probe into suicides and unnatural deaths of scientists. The PIL said, “Scientific community has been plagued by suicides, unexplained deaths and sabotage [that] have gone underreported.”
■ In July 2014, the government told Parliament that nine nuclear scientists committed suicide in 2009-2013 in atomic power stations and other research centres; three suicides were reported from Nuclear Power Corporation during the same period.

-The New Indian Express

The rise and rise of Sundar Pichai

"Super excited about his progress and dedication to the company," says Google co-founder Larry Page.

Google’s announcement on Monday that it would be subsumed within a new parent company called Alphabet had a bonus for people of Indian-origin world over: the company’s head of Products and Engineering, Chennai-born Pichai Sundararajan, was anointed the CEO of the new, “slimmed down” Google.

Underscoring his confidence in the man known as Sundar Pichai (43), Google boss Larry Page said of the restructuring in the company he co-founded with Sergey Brin, “A key part of this is Sundar Pichai.”

Mr. Pichai, who is a graduate of IIT Kharagpur and Stanford University, had “really stepped up since October of last year, when he took on product and engineering responsibility for our Internet businesses,” Mr. Page said in a blog post, adding that he and Mr. Brin were “super excited about his progress and dedication to the company.”

They may well have reason to feel fortunate that Mr. Pichai is the man to head their $66-billion revenue, $16-billion profit, company– by most accounts he combines a deep passion for engineering excellence with a rare managerial quality of attracting the best talent into the teams he works with.

Mr. Pichai started at Google in 2004, where he was known as a “low-key manager” who worked on the Google toolbar and then led the launch of the market-beating Chrome browser in 2008.

Following this his rise through the ranks of Google took on an increasingly meteoric tenor, and soon he became Vice President, then Senior Vice President, and ultimately was charged with supervising all Google apps including Gmail and Google Drive and finally given control of Android itself.

His promotion to Product Chief in October 2014 literally made him Mr. Page’s second-in-command with oversight of day-to-day operations for all of Google's major products including maps, search, and advertising.

Some of Mr. Pichai’s colleagues describe him in the media as a skilled diplomat, including Caesar Sengupta, a Google Vice President who has worked with Mr. Pichai for eight years, and said to Bloomberg News, “I would challenge you to find anyone at Google who doesn’t like Sundar or who thinks Sundar is a jerk.”

Nowhere was Mr. Pichai’s easy blending of techno-diplomatic competence evident than in early 2014, when the fracas between Samsung and Google was reaching fever pitch, at the time over Samsung’s Magazine UX interface for its tablets, which Google felt may have been deliberately underselling Google services such as its Play apps store.

According to reports “Defusing the situation fell to Sundar Pichai, the tactful, tactical new chief of Google’s Android division. Pichai set up a series of meetings with J.K. Shin, CEO of Samsung Mobile Communications, [where] they held ‘frank conversations’ about the companies’ intertwined fates [and a] fragile peace was forged.”

Since then, Samsung has apparently agreed to scale back Magazine UX, and the two corporations have announced a broad patent cross-licensing arrangement to implement which they “now work together more closely on user experience than we ever have before,” according to Mr. Pichai.

Another apparent talent of Google’s new CEO – his thinking seems to be ahead of the curve. Although Mr. Pichai trained in metallurgy and materials science at IIT Kharagpur, and Stanford and did an MBA at Wharton, he was already deeply immersed in the world of electronics.

According to one of his college professors Mr. Pichai “was doing work in the field of electronics at a time when no separate course on electronics existed in our curriculum.”

The Google founders no doubt recognised that Mr. Pichai was a man on an evangelical-type mission for pushing the boundaries of technology.

Mr. Pichai most eloquently outlined this mission when he said, “For me, it matters that we drive technology as an equalising force, as an enabler for everyone around the world. Which is why I do want Google to see, push, and invest more in making sure computing is more accessible, connectivity is more accessible.”

Prime Minister Narendra Modi also congratulated Mr. Pichai on his appointment as Google CEO. 

-The Hindu

Sandip Trivedi takes charge as TIFR director

MUMBAI: Theoretical physicist Sandip Trivedi (52), whose appointment as director of the prestigious Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) was approved by the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) on June 3, assumed office on Wednesday evening. His candidature was rejected by the PMO in March. After the council of management of the institute requested the PMO to reconsider his appointment, the appointments committee of the cabinet (ACC) approved it. Prime Minister Narendra Modi is the ACC's chairman.

A professor from the institute said an announcement was put up on the notice board at 5.15pm on Wednesday. Officiating director E V Sampathkumaran relinquished duties at the same time. Institute officials claimed that Trivedi was reluctant to take charge as director initially, but agreed later. Trivedi's decision came after a meeting with some members of the council of management of the institute last week, a professor said.

"Till last week, we were told that he was unwilling to take charge. We do not know what happened later. The decision was long-pending," said the professor.

Department of Atomic Energy secretary R K Sinha said he was planning to take charge soon. "He was not reluctant but had some ongoing research which he wanted to finish. But I have not gone into the details," said Sinha. Trivedi was unavailable for comment.

Trivedi was appointed by a search committee headed by eminent scientist C N R Rao from the institute's council of management in January. As per the bye-laws of the institute, the director is appointed by invitation after approval from the Government of India, Maharashtra government and trustees.

However, the central government had rejected Trivedi's candidature in the first week of March and had told the institute to release advertisements and invite applications for the post.

He resigned from the post and Sampathkumaran was appointed as officiating director. The centre agreed after the council urged it to reconsider the candidature. -TOI

Solar power; sunny side down

Does the German experience aimed at promoting renewables such as solar and wind to replace fossil fuel capacity and nuclear energy, have any relevance in India’s case?

-Anil Sasi

On March 20, the day a major solar eclipse was predicted, electricity grid managers in Germany weathered three extremely nervous hours — the duration of the eclipse. At 38.5 gigawatts of capacity (1 GW is equal to 1,000MW or mega watt), Germany has nearly half of Europe’s total of 89 gigawatts of solar capacity and accounts for more solar PV installed than any other nation. For a nation that, in theory, has solar capacity that is enough to meet half of its peak demand, a solar eclipse posed a litmus test for grid operators in terms of how they manage the sudden drop in solar output. Especially since the region’s last notable eclipse was way back in 2003, after which Germany’s solar power output has expanded sharply.

The March 20 eclipse, which cut off 65 to 80 per cent of incoming sunlight across parts of Europe, tested the engineers at Germany’s four big electricity network operating companies, who had to make sure that the resultant fluctuation in solar power production would not destabilise the grid. The German grid managed to tide over the challenge by drawing on alternative power sources, including coal, gas, biogas, nuclear and pumped storage hydroelectric energy, alongside a commensurate cut in demand from industry including four aluminum plants.

GERMANY’S ENERGIEWENDE EXPERIENCE

Does the German experience with ‘Energiewende’, its flagship programme aimed at promoting renewables such as solar and wind to replace fossil fuel capacity and nuclear energy, have any relevance in India’s case? Two weeks back, the NDA government announced plans to raise the country’s solar power generation capacity addition target five times to 100 GW by 2022, which will entail an investment of around Rs 6 lakh crore.

The revised target, up from 20 GW earlier, will principally comprise 40 GW (solar) rooftop and 60 GW through large and medium scale grid connected solar power projects. To put the target in perspective, a solar capacity of 100 GW is about 40 per cent of the country’s current installed capacity. While going solar is, in some ways, a growing fad among government seeking to make an emphatic green statement, there might be some relevant concerns as well.

Going back to Germany’s case, there are fundamental question marks that countries with large solar generation base are faced with. Germany’s residential electricity cost is about $0.34/kWh, one of the highest globally. An estimated $0.07/kWh reportedly goes directly to subsidising renewables, which is higher than the wholesale electricity price in Europe. In India, the focus on solar power has been largely limited to the last seven years. In 2009, the the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) was launched with a target for grid-connected solar projects set at 20,000 MW by 2022.

In the last two-three years, the sector has seen renewed activity, with the installed solar capacity increasing rapidly from just 18 MW to about 3,800 MW during 2010-15. Encouragingly, the price of solar energy has come down significantly from around Rs 17.90 per unit in 2010 to under Rs 7 per unit, thereby reducing the need of viability grant funding or VGF per MW of solar power. With technology advancement and market competition, this green power sources is expected to achieve grid parity by 2017-18. It is in this context that the Cabinet gave its approval for the setting up of over 2,000 MW of grid-connected solar photo voltaic power projects on a Build, Own and Operate (BOO) basis with VGF funding under the second phase of the JNNSM.

COST BREAK-UP

The fine print of the project shows that the government has estimated the cost of a solar project at a ballpark estimate of Rs 6 cr/MW — including VGF at Rs 1cr/MW for the open category and Rs 1.31 crore/MW for the Domestic Content Requirement or DCR category (where domestic manufacturing is mandatory). A pre-defined tariff of Rs 5.43 per kWh has been provided for projects under the scheme for the first year, with an escalation of 5 paisa per kWh each year till the tariff reaches the level of Rs 6.43 per kWh. This would take 21 years and the tariff, thereafter, would remain capped at Rs 6.43 per kWh. The levelized tariff would be

Rs 5.79 per kWh.

Out of 2,000 MW, 250 MW will be developed with mandatory condition of solar PV cells and modules made in India. This will be called the DCR category and remaining 1,750 MW will be in open category.

The total investment in setting up 100 GW of solar capacity is estimated at around Rs 6,00,000 cr, excluding the cost of transmission, which would be in the range of Rs 1.5 cr/MW for land-based (non-rooftop) solar plants to be connected with the main grid. It is not clear out of 100GW, how much capacity will be mandated through the DCR category.

A breakdown of the numbers, though, poses somes questions. For instance, the land required for 60,000MW of solar plants at about 5 acres per MW comes to a whopping 3 lakh acres. Add to this the cost of inter-state and intra-state transmission at Rs 1.5 crore per MW comes to Rs 90,000 crore. Since the solar plants will be located in barren and remote areas away from load centres such as Kutch, Barmer, Jaisalmer and Ladakh, and voltage compensation devices such as reactors and static VAR compensators would also be required, the cost of transmission escalate further and the wheeling cost would be even higher because the energy produced by a solar plant in a year is about 25 per cent that of a thermal plant of the same capacity and 50 per cent of a hydro plant of same capacity.

STANDBY CHARGES and GRID SECURITY

Then there is the issue of standby charges for thermal plants, precisely because the actual output of a solar plant is not so smooth. Solar power varies over the day depending on time of the day, location and weather, and needs conventional power as back up until viable mass energy storage devices are invented. So, the electricity distribution companies or discoms needs to pay the standby charges of coal-based generation.

If one were to add the transmission charges and losses, and standby charges to the levelised solar generation cost of Rs 5.79, experts contend that the landed cost would go up to about Rs 9.00 per unit, excluding the cost of capital subsidy and tax benefits. Now the impact of the 100 GW of solar power plan on the financial health of the debt-ridden discoms could be catastrophic, and question marks remain on how the domestic consumers pay these higher electricity prices.

There is also the issue of grid security. In order to deal with the variability of renewable generation, forecasts are crucial for resource adequacy during operation and grid security. In order to absorb 100 GW of solar power in a day, the output of conventional generation would have to be varied in tandem to match the 100 GW, failing which other grid security could be endangered. This, most industry players contend, is a daunting task. All developed countries in the world including China have Automatic Generation Controls, something that India lacks. That makes the challenge of operating the grid even more daunting.

MANUFACTURING IMPETUS AND EMPLOYMENT

Germany may top in terms of solar capacity, but the Chinese solar plants are, by far, the cheapest in the world and the Chinese are the biggest manufacturer of PV panels. Going by the current trend, industry estimates peg that 80 per cent of the Rs 6 lakh crore solar business

may be bagged by China. So, despite the ‘Make in India’ push, more jobs will be created in China that in India from our solar push.

-Indian Express