I have seen only extreme views from both sides. I know some people who work in Indian nuclear establishment and I am in US. I think both sides are trying to think good for India (except may be Manmohan-Sonia and Bush-Rice). It is a known fact that only 15% of the energy need can be addressed by nuclear energy, it was stated long ago by a US based NRI energy expert. He stated that by simply improving the distribution netwrok the 15% energy gain can be achieved. The pollution from conventional energy source is a problem and a serious one, for India. That does not mean as claimed by Mr.Bush that nuclear energy is clean. Why then the french ship was prevented from being scrapped in Indian shore due to fear of radio active waste? How is India going to manage the waste? I have not seen a single statement on that. US itself is suffering for dumping the nuclear waste in the ground. India is no match in technology to developed countries like US or western Europe. Forget about thorium technology India cannot even handle Uranium technology. Most of the indeginous designs are based on archaic russian or french designs. Many people from BARC (bhaba atomic research center) quit.
