NUCLEAR-POWHRED AGRO-lNPUST&IAl COMPLEX

681 Pages·2006·14.41 MB·English

A1CS--1
GOVERNMENT OF IN
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMj
NUCLEAR-POWHRED AGRO-lNPUST&IAl COMPLEX
BHABHA ATOMIC RES5A.RCH
BOMBAY. U^D;A
NUCLEAR-POWERED AGRO-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
Report
of
the Working Group
June 1970
BHABHA ATOMIC RESEARCH CENTRE
Government of India
Chhatrapali Shivaji Maharaj Marg
Bombay-1
Notice
This report contain? information which is subject
to revision or correction and hence should
not be quoted without permission
R E P O RT
ON THE
NUCLEAR-POWERED AGRO-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
K. T. Thomas, Chairman. Working Group
M. P. S. Ramani, Convenor, Working Group
Godse, V. B. Kapur, P. L. Kumra, M. S. Nayar, M. G.
Shah, CM. Sunder Rajan, N. S. Verma, R. K.
JUNE 1970
FOREWORD
HomiM. Sethra. Director
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre
and
Member for Research and Development
Atomic Energy Commission
1 am most happy to write this foreword on the possibility of
setting «»7 » ^ciear-powered agro-industrial complex.
India has advanced considerably since the commissioning of
the Apsara reactor in 1956. The Research and Development Program-
me has been so developed that it could support the large scale
Introduction of nuclear power in the country.
India's nuclear programme is at a crucial stage aa it is related
to the general planning.for power. Sets of 200 MWe are the large*t
sizes considered and planned. However, in the advanced countries
generating sets in the 500 to 1,000 MWe range are quite common.
Nuclear power being a capital intensive industry, to achieve low cost
power, the economy of scale up has to be introduced. One of the
major impediments in the introduction of large nuclear power stations
in India is the limitations on ths sise of the regional grids; and the
energy centre concept envisaged in this report by-passes this psre-
j condition and proposes to achieve the benefits of scale up by installing
\ power intensive industries around the power plant. This seems to be the
I
! only way of reducing power costs consistent with the conditions prevail-
••"]
1 ing in die country. However, for the success of this concept parallel steps
1 have to be taken to improve and augment the existing industrial capacity as
well as the necessary infra-structure like roads* railway*, etc.,
so that full benefits of such a complex would accrue to the country.
The report, I consider, will have served its purpose if it
has impressed upon our policy makers, the importance of the agro-
industrial complex and the role of optimal use of power and water
in our national economy.
Though two specific locations have been considered for de-
tailed evaluation, the concept of the agro-industrial complex is by no
means limited to these two locations only. Any region which meets
with the general condition mentioned in the report is a potential agro*
industrial complex.
The help and co-operation of Commissioner J. T. Ramey,
USAEC, and through him the valuable exchange of information that
was possible with the staff of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and
the scientific representative of the USAEC in India deserve special
appreciation.
In conclusion, I would like to thank all who worked so hard in
preparing this study especially the Chairman of the Working Group
Shri K. T, Thomas.
A CKKOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to express my thanks to Dr. Vikram A. Sarabhal, Chairman,
Atomic Energy- Commission, and Mr. H. N. Sethna, Director, Bhabha
Atomic Research Centre, for their kind interest in the progress of the
work, valuable help and guidance.
Grateful thanks and indebtedness are due to the contributors of this
report listed in the beginning, for their genuine contribution for its prepara-
tion and their sustained interest throughout the period of the study. Thanks
are also due to the members and consultants of the working group as listed
in Appendix 1-1.
Commissioner J. T. Ramey and members of staff of USAEC, those
of the Agro-Industrial Study Group and others connected with it at the
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA, and also the scientific representative
of the USAEC in India, deserve special thanks for their interest and mutual
exchange of information.
Further, the other concerned staff of Waste Treatment Division, BARC,
the staff of the Library & Technical Information Section, BARC, and in parti-
cular Dr. V. A. Kaznath, Scientific Information Officer, deserve special
mention of thanks and indebtedness for their many efforts for making it possi-
ble to bring out this report in time.
K. T. Thomas
Page
I. THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX 1
1. Introduction 1
2. The Agricultural Situation in India 2
2.1. Food Production 2
2. 2 Use of Fertilisers in India 10
2. 3. Hydrology and Irrigation 14
3. Impact of Nuclear Energy 19
3. 1. Development of Power 19
3.2 Nuclear Power 22
?. 3. Relevance of Nuclear Technology
to the Indian Situation 25
3. 3. 1. Large power consuming industries 2?
3 3.1.1 Nitrogeneous fertilisers 27
3. 3. 1 I t-hospaatic fertilisers 3?
3 3. 1 3. Aluminium 39
3. 3. 1. 4. Caustic-chlorine 45
3-3 2. Energy for irrigation 55
3. 3. 2 1 Underground water 55
3. 3. 2. 2. Fresh water from the sea 57
3. 3. 2 3. Agriculture 60
3. 3 3. Marine chemicals 60
3, 3. 3.1 Common salt 61
3.3.32. Potash 66
3. 3. 3. 3. Bromine 68
4. The Agro-Industrial Complex 68
-ii-
II. INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
1. Fertilisers 73
1.1. Processes and Raw Materials 74
1.1 1. Nitrogenous fertilisers 75
1.1.2. Phosphatic fertilisers 86
1.2. Economic Analysis 90
1.2.1. Input data 90
1.2.2. Results 94
1.?;. 3. Discussion 133
2. Aluminium 149
2,1. Process for the znanufacture of aluminium 150
Z.2. Economic Analysis 151
'i.. 2.1. Input data : investment costs 151
L. 2. 2. Results 153
3. Caustic - Chlorine 161
3.1. Processes l6l
3.2. Economic Analysis 163
3. 2.1. Input data 163
3.2.?. Results 165
4. Marine Chemicals 172
4.1. Processes 174
4. 2. Economic Analysis 176
4.2.1. Input data 176
4. Z. 2. Results 179
HI. AGRICULTURE
187
1. Introduction jg
7
2. Irrigation Economics •. " 199
2.1. Irrigation Development I99
2.1.1. Tubewells I99
2.1.2. Desalination and agriculture 201
-iii-
Page
2.2. Economic Analysis 202
2.2. I. Water cost and agricultural profit* 202
2,2.2. Crops selected for the study , 203
2*2, 3. Agricultural data used for the study 206
2.2.3.1. Expenses . 206
2.2. 3.2. Returns 211
2.2, 4. Results of the analysis 212
2.2. 4.1. Irrigation costs 213
2. 2.4. 2. Agricultural income and profits 213
IV. THE KUTCH-SAURASKTRA PROJECT
1. Introduction 235
2. Selection of suitable locale 235
2.1. Jamnagar District 237
2.1. 1. Soil conditions in the locales
considered 241
2.1.2. Change of cropping pattern in
Jamnagar district 242
2.1. 3. Irrigation facilities in Jamnagar
district 243
2. 2. Kutch District 243
3. Project Evaluation 254
3. 1. Dual Purpose Plant 254
3.2. Fertiliser Plants 256
3.3. Aluminium lant 258
3.4. Caustic Soda-Chlorine Plant 259
3.5. Marine Chemicals Plant 260
3. 6, Agricultural Farm 260
3. 6.1. Crop rotation selected 260
3.6.2. Water management as the basic lor
the design of the farm 261
3.6.3. Design of the farm 266
4. Project Economics 275
4.1. Industrial Block 276
4.2. >.gricultural Farm 278
4.2.1. Capital investment for agriculture 2?8
5. Discussion 282
-iv-
V. THE WESTERN UTTAR PRADESH PROJECT 285
1. Introduction 285
1.1. Introduction 285
1.2. Economic condition in Uttar Pradesh 287
1. 3. Present Irrigation Facilities in Uttar Pradesh 288
1.4. Relevance of Agro-Industrial Concept
to Uttar rradesh 289
2. Selection of Locale for the Complex . , 289
2.1. Physiology of the Three Divisions 290
2.2. Hydrology of the Three Divisions 292
2. 3. Present Status of Ground Water Exploitation
in the Three Divisions 294
3. The Agro-Industrial Scheme 296
3.1. The Nuclear Power Plant 298
3.2. The Fertiliser Plants 298
3. 3. Aluminium Plant 300
3.4. The Agricultural Scheme 301
3.4.1. Irrigation 302
3.4.2. Cropping pattern 30?
3.4. 3. Fertiliser requirements of the
area covered 313
4. Project Economics 314
4.1. The Industrial Block 314
4.2. The Agricultural Project 318
4.2.1. Cost of transmission and
distribution of power 318
4.2.2. Cost of irrigation 319
4.2.3. Farm balance sheets 319
4.2,4. Economics of the overall
agricultural scheme 329
5. Discussion 342