Why does India need a Russian loan for the construction of Kudankulam NPPs?

51
Today, Russia and India have completed the signing of a full package of documents for the construction of the final (third) stage of the Kudankulam nuclear power plant (southern India). CEO of a state corporation Rosatom Alexey Likhachev confirms the fact that Russian specialists will build the 5 and 6 units for the Indian nuclear power plant. Perhaps the most interesting thing is that Russia will provide India with a loan for the construction of the two mentioned units.

Why does India need a Russian loan for the construction of Kudankulam NPPs?


For the first time that Russia and India are signing a framework agreement on the 5-6-th power units of the Kudankulam NPP became known at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, held in the northern capital this summer. Now Russian and Indian experts have signed the entire package of necessary documents.

There are questions about why India needed to take a loan from Russia, given that the Indian economy has shown impressive growth in recent years - on average, about 8% per year?

Rosatom reports that it continues to implement projects for the construction of nuclear power plants in other foreign countries. Among them are Turkey, Bulgaria, Hungary, Finland, Iran and Bangladesh. The total portfolio of Rosatom's overseas orders is 133 billion US dollars.
  • https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/АЭС_Куданкулам
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

51 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +8
    18 September 2017
    Politics is a delicate matter. Perhaps they will never tell us why.
    The principle "You are to me - I am to you."
    And on the other hand, our reactor and our fuel are the long-term stable income of our enterprises, plus the accumulation of experience of our specialists in the nuclear industry.
    1. +1
      18 September 2017
      The problem is that our country takes all spent nuclear fuel to itself, but the United States does not.
      1. +19
        18 September 2017
        Quote: Megatron
        The problem is that our country takes all spent nuclear fuel to itself, but the United States does not.

        This is not a problem - this is just a special feature of Rosatom. Nobody does this anymore, but it is very beneficial for the buyer and makes all other offers noticeably less competitive.

        On the other hand, spent fuel should become the fuel for new fast neutron reactors in the future. In fact, almost free.
      2. +2
        18 September 2017
        I don’t see a problem: who knows what good can be extracted from spent fuel in 50 years? And after 100? After all, waste is not only raw material for promising fuel, nuclear science does not stand still ...
        Not so long ago, gasoline was massively destroyed as unnecessary waste from the production of a kerosene product for lighting.
        1. +1
          18 September 2017
          Quote: bagr69
          I don’t see a problem: who knows what good can be extracted from spent fuel in 50 years? And after 100? After all, waste is not only raw material for promising fuel, nuclear science does not stand still ...

          Is it a tremendous means to store spent nuclear fuel for 50 years? 100 years? It's just fantastic. First of all, no one will sell such technologies, and work in this direction will lead to a result in a couple of decades. There is no point in storing and extracting a lot of useful things from the spent nuclear fuel .
          Now Russia has developed a new rector with the production of almost 95% of nuclear fuel, but this is a huge investment and vast experience that there are 2-3 countries in the world.
          1. 0
            18 September 2017
            Huge funds - how much? Is there an estimate or reasonable calculations (not from forums of "couch experts" like you and me)?
            Fiction say - are you a nuclear physicist or are you related to nuclear energy?
            You need to have technology, say, why did you get the idea that Russia does not have such technologies?
            1. 0
              19 September 2017
              Quote: bagr69
              Huge funds - how much? Is there an estimate or reasonable calculations (not from forums of "couch experts" like you and me)?

              Well, unlike some sofa experts, I’m at least a little interested in the topic:
              Irradiated nuclear fuel, unlike fresh fuel, has significant radioactivity due to the content of a large number of fission products (for WWER reactors about 300 Ci in each fuel rod) and tends to self-heat in air to high temperatures (just recovered to about 000 ° C) and after extraction from the reactor core is maintained for 300-2 years in the holding pool (WWER) or on the periphery of the reactor core (BN-5 reactor). After reducing the residual energy release of the fuel, it is sent for storage, disposal or reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel.

              In total, there are two pools at the NPP, one is a cooling pool, and the second is storage. I think that you can easily calculate the investment only in the construction of this pool and safely add 30% to the engineering and technological features of the project another 20 percent. This is only the first stage, further is the processing of thermal bulkheads. During the construction of the MAYAK plant more soil was dug than the entire Moscow metro! Nobody has ever given a real figure; this is a military secret.
              It is only primary costs, so to speak, processing and vitrification go on again about special storage.
              Quote: bagr69
              You need to have technology, say, why did you get the idea that Russia does not have such technologies?

              You do not follow the topic of the conversation well, such technologies exist in Russia.
              1. 0
                19 September 2017
                Wikipedia learned to read and quote, well done wink
                It remains to learn to read something more serious, for example, the resource "Scientific Electronic Library".
                1. 0
                  19 September 2017
                  Quote: bagr69
                  It remains to learn to read something more serious, for example, the resource "Scientific Electronic Library"

                  Oh, how can we develop a debate on quantum mechanics and discuss the Heisenberg uncertainty principle?
      3. +2
        18 September 2017
        It is not taken for free and for this money a system for its disposal has been developed, which no one else has ...
      4. 0
        18 September 2017
        Quote: Megatron
        The problem is that our country takes all spent nuclear fuel to itself, but the United States does not.

        spent fuel can be cleaned and get fuel suitable for nuclear power plants, as either 25% or 50% “burns out” in the reactor.
      5. 0
        18 September 2017
        This is not a problem at all. We know how to process all this well, benefiting
    2. Maz
      0
      18 September 2017
      Apparently the loan will be taken on terms that differ significantly from IMF loans. And on favorable terms for the Brix countries
    3. 0
      19 September 2017
      There are questions about why India needed to take a loan from Russia, given that the Indian economy has shown impressive growth in recent years - on average, about 8% per year?

      It’s clear about loading our enterprises ...
      But again, India in terms of GDP in the world ranking is in 7th place, Russia - in 11th. Or are we still richer than the Hindus, or again some tricky schemes, maybe retreating ...
  2. +9
    18 September 2017
    and what is bad? to give a loan so that they would pay us with this money and then they would add interest)))
    1. +5
      18 September 2017
      The main thing is to return. And it will turn out like in the famous movie: "There were still interest"
    2. 0
      18 September 2017
      There is still the main thing that the main s / b in rubles and give in dollars with interest ...
  3. +2
    18 September 2017
    Why why ? Then ... We give a loan to Belarus to pay off debt to whom, correctly,in front of Russia .... on the principle of privatization of profits and nationalization of losses ... recourse
  4. +2
    18 September 2017
    Nuclear power plants in Turkey, Hungary and so on, also with Russian money ....
    1. +7
      18 September 2017
      All of Europe should be striped, for military equipment ..... and nothing.
      The lender is always in a position to dictate terms ...... to borrowers .....
      1. +1
        18 September 2017
        And how much does Europe owe the United States for military equipment? ... and for which one ...
        1. +11
          18 September 2017
          How much should? For life! She left her sovereignty as a guarantee, laughing
          1. +4
            18 September 2017
            Do you have any numbers or just blah blah?
      2. 0
        18 September 2017
        Europe or the United States forgave someone even a penny?
        For example, France has been waiting for more than 100 years for Russia to repay the debt it had taken under Tsar Gorokh and the norms were not broken off, they got everything up to the penny + accumulated interest.
        Now look at Russian international financial policy and how many hundreds of billions of green candy wrappers were just thrown away ... and not for any preferences or other shadow benefits of Russian companies, but just like that. They managed to forgive a debt to one African country, immediately give another debt for which they bought our equipment, and then forgive this debt. No words only emotions .
  5. +1
    18 September 2017
    For a minute, our specialists have rich experience. A credit history is something that goes beyond understanding)))))
    1. +6
      18 September 2017
      We have a good head of the collection department:
  6. +2
    18 September 2017
    In general, the word investor has become something like a fetish.
  7. +10
    18 September 2017
    It is possible that they did not ask, but we insisted. It is better to lend a couple of billion to the Indians than to back the striped ones. Less will be left to buy enemy paper.
  8. +5
    18 September 2017
    To answer this question, one must understand the internal financial policy of the state.
    GDP growth is just an indicator.
    But it consists of increasing the money supply and the production of goods, services, etc.
    So.
    According to the paradigm that has been established in the world (the curators of the IMF and the US Fin Reserve), the amount of money of its own currency and the available freely convertible currency should be equal to each other.
    This is the first.
    Second.
    Investing own funds in own production will steadily lead to inflation (this is an axiom of the modern capitalist world and its economy).
    Then, when production is created, it is necessary to extinguish those investments that were made.
    There are no enterprises capable of producing equipment for nuclear power plants in India, there are no manufacturers of raw materials.
    Better let the Russians build at their own expense. We will also pay them interest. Well, this is better than they will disperse us inflation.
    It is very short and approximate.

    And we.
    Instead of investing in our own, we climb into someone else's.
    It is for these reasons.
    Inflation.
    1. +2
      18 September 2017
      Those. you say that any profit is acceleration of inflation? Do I understand correctly that it is all about labor productivity? advance ATP
      1. 0
        18 September 2017
        Quote: Dimontius
        Those. you say that any profit is acceleration of inflation?

        Allow me to insert my 5 cents. Acceleration of inflation is obtained when there is a lot of money in the economy (after making a profit). This in turn leads to the fact that commodity prices rise (the population has become richer), this leads to inflation (actually this is inflation) ..
    2. 0
      18 September 2017
      At least one person who understands!
      I’ll add, there’s not much money to invest in our own economy, you need them (money) to DEVELOP LETTERALLY !!!! and this is a problem.
  9. +2
    18 September 2017
    Rather, Rosatom’s portfolio of 133 billion non-extendable Russia credit dollars fool
  10. +1
    18 September 2017
    Apparently India is not going to repay this loan to Russia, cooperating more and more with the USA, and Kiriyenko has been harming Russia for a long time, as it can ....
    1. 0
      18 September 2017
      Quote: Msta
      Kiriyenko has long harmed Russia, how can ....

      Making money in the budget ???
      1. +1
        18 September 2017
        Where and what did he earn ?! He spent a lot of money from the budget of the Russian Federation on the construction of a nuclear power plant on credit in Turkey, now it seems in Finland in India, but is it doubtful whether Russia will get profit from this ?!
  11. +2
    18 September 2017
    Hindus hope for a freebie (then write off their debts) Medvedev generously forgives everyone (Vietnam - 30 billion), 1. Cuba - $ 31,7 billion
    2. Iraq - $ 21,5 billion
    3. African countries - more than $ 20 billion
    4. Mongolia - $ 11,1 billion
    5. Afghanistan - $ 11 billion
    6. North Korea - $ 10 billion
  12. +2
    18 September 2017
    Well, why?
    What a naive childish question?)))
    Russia forgives everyone its debts, so the Indians wanted to get a nuclear power plant for free.
    So get ready for the news that Generous Russia has forgiven the loan of poor India)))
  13. +6
    18 September 2017
    Rosatom has signed contracts worth more than 100 yards of bucks. Just do not say this to the Ukrainians - their medical service is not ready for such an influx of victims.
    As for the loan, then if Rosatom has free money, then why not earn interest on it? Moreover, Rosatom has a full production cycle in Russia and its costs will be in rubles. If the loan is not repaid, then the constructed facilities will be in the property of Rosatom itself, and it is his golden dream to sell electricity to foreign countries themselves. He promotes such schemes in both Turkey and Egypt. With an NPP resource of 70 years, its cost price pays for itself in 10-16 years. Then only profit from business diversification!
    1. +1
      18 September 2017
      You don’t own the question, why then write a lie?
      He takes the money from the Rosatom in the national welfare fund, he does not have his free money for such projects, this is the first.
      Second, the NPP pays off in 20 - 30 years, well, google laziness or what?
      1. +3
        18 September 2017
        The agreement on the construction of Akkuy was signed by Moscow and Ankara back in 2010, says Professor Igor Ostretsov, doctor of technical sciences, chief specialist of OKB Gidropress. - The commissioning of the first unit was planned for 2020, now these dates are likely to be shifted. The question is: why is the state corporation Rosatom so easily giving loans to countries in which it implements its nuclear projects?

        agreement on Akkuyu NPP is implemented without financial obligations of the Turkish side, Ankara does not bear any financial risks for the project


        In total, Turkey, Egypt, Bangladesh and Finland have already received more than $ 100 billion. This money is withdrawn from the budget of the Russian Federation, where it would probably be more useful. By the way, loans were provided at only 3% per annum - Russian borrowers can only dream of such interest ...

        The former Deputy Minister for Atomic Energy, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor Bulat Nigmatulin agrees with the opinion of Professor Ostretsov:

        - Indeed, Russian export projects for the construction of nuclear plants abroad are being promoted through loans. Moreover, Russia issues them on unfavorable conditions, with high risks of non-return. The basic intergovernmental agreement between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Turkey specifies a “build-own-operate” financing scheme, he comments.

        However, the fact is that according to this scheme, no one in the world, including Mother Russia, has ever worked with nuclear power plants. Apparently, this scheme was born in the intricate labyrinths of Rosatom. But what if it's just a trivial withdrawal of money from the budget?

        “A detailed analysis of the documents on which the Akkuyu project is based leaves no doubt that Russia took all possible additional costs up to billions of dollars on the foreign exchange scale of risks and the implementation of the project,” says Professor Nigmatulin.

        Who is responsible for the risks?

        As a result, the Akkuyu project, as it exists today, raises big questions.

        “The conditions for the sale of electricity at Akkuyu NPP are enslaving,” says Professor Nigmatulin. - The risks to the safety of a nuclear power plant are simply monstrous, the operating conditions are contradictory.

        In fact, the agreement on Akkuyu NPP is carried out without the financial obligations of the Turkish side, Ankara does not bear any financial risks for the project. All work on the construction and operation of nuclear power plants, technology transfer, decommissioning, disposal of radioactive waste (radioactive waste) and spent nuclear fuel (irradiated nuclear fuel) will have to be paid for from the Russian budget.
  14. 0
    18 September 2017
    A way to introduce money into the real economy from funds. Competitive advantage. So far, only regenerate is made of spent fuel. Those. unburned uranium is returned to the cycle. With a global uranium deficit, this is important.
    1. 0
      18 September 2017
      Second, the NPP pays off in 20 - 30 years, well, google laziness or what?


      But this does not mean at all that the investor has not received operator profit since the launch, right? We don’t know on what terms the loan went, maybe Rosatom is sitting there as an operator ...
      And why do you say that Rosatom has contracts for tens and tens of billions of dollars sitting without money? Do you have any detailed information? If you share, it will be interesting to study this issue.
  15. +2
    18 September 2017
    The IPE report on the financial and economic section of the agreement noted the following risks:

    “The agreement on Akkuyu NPP is carried out without financial obligations of the Republic of Turkey. Financing of the project is carried out exclusively at the expense of the project company.

    It is highly likely that the Russian budget will cover all the costs of building a nuclear power plant ($ 20 billion in 2012 prices). At the same time, more than half of the financing ($ 10 billion) will be received by Turkish companies, attracted as counterparties under a contract with a project company.

    There is a high risk of freezing budget funds spent on construction due to delayed construction of nuclear power plants, suspension of operation of units according to the instructions of Turkish supervisory authorities, demonstrations by the local population against the construction of nuclear power plants, unavailability of networks and other factors.


    There are no obligations of the Turkish side to construct power lines and substations for the selection of capacities. There are no data on guaranteed power sales. NPP near the resort area of ​​Antalya.

    Large electricity consumers with a basic load schedule are not identified.

    Citizens of the Republic of Turkey are trained free of charge and are widely involved in the operation of nuclear power plants. The cost of the project includes the creation of a full-scale simulator at the NPP site, usually this is done under separate contracts for an additional fee.

    Fuel supplies to nuclear power plants, including the cost of delivery, physical protection, and so on, are fully paid by the project company, but the company does not have its own funds, so you will have to use the funds of the Russian budget.

    In the adopted refund scheme, the price of electricity ($ 0,1235 per kWh) is fixed for at least 25 years. This does not take into account inflation, rising prices, changes in exchange rates, other financial changes and shocks.

    The project company provides the Turkish Energy Company (Tetash) with information on the monthly amount of electricity generated by all units of the NPPs throughout the entire period of the Agreement on the Purchase of Electricity (EPS), that is, for at least 18 years. In the case of a smaller volume of production (compared with the volume stipulated by the EIT), the project company must buy electricity in the open market and sell it to Tetash.

    In the event of the bankruptcy of the project company, the Russian side appoints a successor to the project company, which should have all the necessary competencies and financial capabilities at the expense of the Russian budget.

    Upon the expiration of the validity period of the EIT, the project company is obligated to transfer to the Turkish side 20% of the net profit during the entire life of the NPP. So the Turkish side estimated the cost of land for nuclear power plants in the total cost of nuclear power plants.

    The project company is responsible for decommissioning and recycling.

    The scope of work on the decommissioning of nuclear power plants is not specified in the agreement. The Turkish side will require the creation of a "green lawn", since the nuclear power plant is located next to the resort area of ​​Antalya. In this case, the cost of decommissioning the station becomes commensurate with the cost of building the station itself.

    It is highly likely that the project company will not receive savings. As a result, all expenses will fall on the Russian budget.

    The agreement does not contain an article on force majeure circumstances; there is no written provision on the impossibility of nationalizing the project company. "
    1. +2
      18 September 2017
      In the section on security agreements, the following risks exist:

      "The features of the contract agreement make Akkuyu NPP unique because the station is under the jurisdiction of the Turkish side and the NPP itself is Russian.

      All liabilities for insuring the risks of operating nuclear power plants are undertaken by the design company, which is the operating organization. In accordance with international conventions, liability for nuclear damage rests solely with the operating organization. However, the project company cannot cover this damage, so it will also have to be covered from the Russian budget.

      The Turkish side is only responsible for the allocation of land for nuclear power plants and guarantees access to such land by contractors, agents, suppliers, acting on behalf and with the consent of the project company. It follows that the project company is responsible for the reliability of all NPP personnel, including Turkish personnel.

      Physical protection of nuclear power plants is included in the zone of responsibility of the project company, which is contrary to international law. Responsibility should be borne by Turkey, in the territory of which the nuclear facility is built and operated.

      Special protection is provided at Akkuyu NPP; NPP personnel have a certificate of access to classified documents. All employees are checked by Turkish special services in accordance with Turkish laws.

      According to Russian laws, the passage of aircraft over nuclear plants is prohibited. Such a ban is not spelled out in the agreement, as well as the conditions for the protection of nuclear power plants by air defense systems.

      All problems with the local population should be decided by the design company. In this case, the Turkish side evades responsibility in this matter. "
      1. +2
        18 September 2017
        The following risks exist in the management section of the agreement:

        "The provision of the agreement relating to the corporate governance of the project company is discriminatory in relation to Russia: the Turkish side does not invest in the construction of funds, but receives control over property that does not belong to it, referring to the protection of Turkish national security and economic interests."

        The following risks are noted in the section on crediting the construction of nuclear power plants of the agreement:

        “The project company is a joint-stock company in which at least 51% should belong to the Russian side, and the remaining 49% to foreign investors. In this case, foreign investors should credit 49% of the construction, but this is not stipulated by the agreement.

        The scheme of returning funds to the Russian budget is not spelled out.

        Interest-free lending to the project company with Russian budget money has not yet been encountered in the practice of international investment contracts. At the same time, Russia itself borrows financial resources on the foreign market at 6,8-6,9% per annum

        The refund of Russia’s funds is in question because of the likely limitation of the growth in the cost of electricity in Turkey for a long period and jumps in the dollar to world currencies (Turkish lira is in the high-risk zone).
        1. +2
          18 September 2017
          The geopolitical component of the agreement also has risks:

          The Akkuyu NPP Agreement makes Russia dependent on Turkey, and Turkey’s policies are becoming more and more unpredictable. The signing of the NPP agreement has also provoked a sharp negative reaction from the Government of Cyprus and Greek discontent.

          The Akkuyu NPP agreement undermines the basis for Russia signing international contracts for the construction of nuclear power plants with other countries, since it shows that Russia can take unreasonable benefits while promoting the construction of nuclear power plants.

          Foreign energy companies do not build nuclear power plants according to the “build-own-operate” scheme with a fixed cost of selling electricity in dollars, set 25 years in advance.

          Conclusion: "The agreement is detrimental to the political and economic interests of Russia, diplomatic preparation is necessary to terminate the agreement. In accordance with Article 18, paragraph 2 of this agreement, it can be terminated at any time by sending a notice one year before the date of termination
          1. 0
            19 September 2017
            It's nice to read the critique in essence. It would be great to see the same justified answer to it from those who are promoting the project.
  16. 0
    18 September 2017
    For the fact that in Russia there is an old tradition of forgiving debts! So they use it!
  17. 0
    19 September 2017
    There are questions about why India needed to take a loan from Russia, given that the Indian economy has shown impressive growth in recent years - on average, about 8% per year?

    ... they insure, here they build on credit ...
  18. 0
    19 September 2017
    Quote: Gransasso
    The Akkuyu NPP agreement undermines the basis for Russia signing international contracts for the construction of nuclear power plants with other countries, since it shows that Russia can take unreasonable benefits while promoting the construction of nuclear power plants.


    That's what they lined up for the construction of Russian nuclear power plants.
    Everything else blah blah blah.
    Rosatom builds turnkey nuclear equipment from Russian equipment by Russian specialists. Then, for 7 years, owns it. Turkey undertakes to buy electricity from this nuclear power plant at a fixed price in dollars over this entire period. As a result, in 7 years the loan with interest will be repaid. Then the Turks pass into the ownership of the nuclear power plant and set their internal price according to their e / e market.
    P.S. Attempts by the Turks to get into trouble and begin to bend their fingers are easily countered by the cessation of the supply of fuel elements.
    The market is such a thing, walk on it, look for TVELs from other sellers. You will find someone like the bankrupt Westinghouse, whistle. By the way, note. Westinghouse shares are owned by Rosatom.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"