| Author | Message | ||
     Teluguhero Junior Artist Username: Teluguhero Post Number: 83 Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 24.129.108.25 Rating: N/A |
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-the-disadvantages-of-solar- power.htm What are the Disadvantages of Solar Power? In theory, solar power should be one of the most promising alternative energy sources around. The process has a virtually perpetual source (the sun), creates no dangerous exhaust and would not leave a lasting carbon footprint on the Earth. But there are a number of disadvantages of solar power which have kept it from joining ethanol and hydrogen as viable alternative fuels for commercial vehicles and power plants. One of the main disadvantages of solar power is consistency and reliability. Solar-powered devices rely on the steady delivery of special atoms called photons to keep the electricity generating process going. As soon as the sun disappears behind thick clouds or falls below the horizon at night, the photons stop striking the solar panels and the power drops instantly. Some solar power can be stored in large battery arrays, but this arrangement would be impractical for motor vehicles and insufficient for major power stations. Solar power would only be viable with current technology as long as the sun's photon atoms can strike a solar panel directly. If there is no sun, there is simply no power. Some disadvantages of solar power are economic in nature. At present, solar panels designed to generate electricity are fairly expensive to produce. Since a single solar panel can only generate a relatively small amount of electricity, an expensive and bulky array of solar panels would be needed to provide a sufficient level of electricity for homes or vehicles. These solar panels also have to be adjusted throughout the day in order to maintain a direct angle with the sun. Indirect sunlight is only marginally better than no sunlight at all, so a mechanical orientation system would also need to be implemented to turn all of the solar panels. An entire field filled with mirrors could focus the sun's energy on a power generator, but maintenance of such a system would be prohibitively expensive. Other disadvantages of solar power are technical. The materials used to create a solar panel are constantly exposed to other things besides photon atoms. The constant bombardment of ultraviolet(UV) rays and other solar radiation often causes the panels themselves to deteriorate, much like any other material left exposed to the sun for extended periods of time. If current solar panels were used to provide electricity for private homes, there might be an entirely new industry dedicated to the maintenance and replacement of failed panels. Perhaps one of the most noticeable disadvantages of solar power is the sheer volume of solar panels needed to generate very little energy. A solar-powered vehicle, for example, might solve many of the world's energy problems, but currently these vehicles are clearly not commercially viable. In order to generate enough electrical power to the vehicle's motor, virtually every square inch of the exterior must be covered in solar panels. Even then, the sole driver is often wedged into a small compartment with little more than a steering wheel and an electric meter. Commercial passenger vehicles would require significantly more electrical power, and a better battery system would have to be developed for any driving on cloudy days or at night. Overall, the current disadvantages of solar power appear to outweigh the advantages on a large scale, but solar power has proven itself to be a viable alternative to chemical batteries or fossil fuels for smaller applications. | ||
| Teluguhero Junior Artist Username: Teluguhero Post Number: 82 Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 24.129.108.25 Rating: N/A |
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Booklets/Development/devnin e.html NUCLEAR POWER ADVANTAGES Limited Environmental Impacts Comparative approach To assist energy planners, the IAEA has over the years carried out comparative assessments of the alternative energy sources. These assessments cover a broad range of technical, economic, environmental and health aspects (see Annex I - the DECADES Project). Extensive databases and analytical tools allow full energy chain analyses so that elements beyond the direct power generation stage can be examined. The comparative assessments permit an examination of nuclear power that is not in isolation. Studies of fossil fuels, nuclear power and renewable energy sources show that there are a wide variety of significant issues and impacts linked to energy options. Environmental impacts Emissions to the environment have been the principal focus of energy impact studies. Other significant impacts such as land disturbance and population displacement together with their economic and social implications are less emphasized. Major impacts such as depletion of natural resources and large fuel and transport requirements that influence a wide range of areas including occupational and public safety as well as national transport systems are generally ignored. The multitude of factors for consideration are shown in the following compilation of potential environmental impacts: Fossil fuels Global climate change Air quality degradation (coal, oil) Lake acidification and forest damage (coal, oil) Toxic waste contamination (coal ash and slag, abatement residues) Groundwater contamination Marine and coastal pollution (oil) Land disturbance Large fuel and transport requirements Resource depletion Hydroelectric Population displacement Land loss and change in use Ecosystem changes and health effects Loss of biodiversity Dam failure Decommissioning Renewables (solar, wind, geothermal, biomass) Air quality degradation (geothermal, biomass) Extensive land use Ecosystem changes Fabrication impact (solar photovoltaic cells) Noise pollution (wind) Nuclear (full energy chain) Severe reactor accident release Waste repository release Fossil fuels can have significant damaging impacts locally, regionally and globally. Hydroelectric, while relatively kind to the atmosphere, can be much less considerate to the earth and its inhabitants both locally and regionally. Renewables are not without their impact, although they are more local in nature. Nuclear power under normal operation is benign to the atmosphere and to the earth and its inhabitants locally, regionally and globally. As discussed below, owing principally to the small fuel requirements there are limited environmental impacts for the full energy chain from mining to waste disposal and decommissioning. A significant environmental impact arises only from potential abnormal events. Energy density comparisons (fuel and land requirements) The quantity of fuel used to produce a given amount of energy - the energy density - determines in a large measure the magnitude of environmental impacts as it influences the fuel extraction activities, transport requirements, and the quantities of environmental releases and waste. The extraordinary high energy density of nuclear fuel relative to fossil fuels is an advantageous physical characteristic. One kilogram (kg) of firewood can generate 1 kilowatt-hour (kW·h) of electricity. The values for the other solid fossil fuels and for nuclear power are: 1 kg coal: 3 kW·h 1 kg oil: 4 kW·h 1 kg uranium: 50 000 kW·h (3 500 000 kW·h with reprocessing) Consequently, a 1000 MW(e) plant requires the following number of tonnes (t) of fuel annually: 2 600 000 t coal: 2000 train cars (1300 t each) 2 000 000 t oil: 10 supertankers 30 t uranium: reactor core (10 cubic metres) The energy density of fossil and of nuclear fuel allows relatively small power plant areas of some several square kilometers (km²). The low energy density of renewables, measured by land requirements per unit of energy produced, is demonstrated by the large land areas required for a 1000 MW(e) system with values determined by local requirements and climate conditions (solar and wind availability factors ranging from 20 to 40%): Fossil and nuclear sites: 1–4 km² Solar thermal or photovoltaic (PV) parks: 20–50 km² (a small city) Wind fields: 50–150 km² Biomass plantations: 4000–6000 km² (a province) Environmental pollutants Owing to the vast fuel requirements, the quantity of toxic pollutants and waste generated from fossil fuel plants dwarfs the quantities from other energy options. In general, the pollution depends on the impurity level of the fuel, with natural gas cleaner than oil and oil cleaner than coal. A 1000 MW(e) coal plant without abatement technology produces annually an average of some 44 000 tonnes of sulphur oxides and 22 000 tonnes of nitrous oxides that are dispersed into the atmosphere. Additionally, there are 320 000 tonnes of ash containing 400 tonnes of heavy metals - arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, lead, mercury, nickel and vanadium - quantities which ignore energy chain activities such as mining and transportation. Fossil fuel plants using modern abatement technology can decrease noxious gas releases as much as ten-fold, but significant quantities of solid waste can be produced in the process. Depending on the sulphur content, solid waste quantities from sulphur abatement procedures for a 1000 MW(e) plant are annually as much as 500 000 tonnes from coal, more than 300 000 tonnes from oil and some 200 000 tonnes from natural gas sweetening procedures [Fig.: Waste Generated Annually in Fuel Preparation and Plant Operation]. The waste, which contains small quantities of toxic substances, is commonly stored in ponds or used for landfill and other purposes. Regulatory bodies are increasingly categorizing such waste as hazardous. A 1000 MW(e) nuclear power plant does not release noxious gases or other pollutants and produces annually only some 30 tonnes of discharged high level radioactive spent fuel along with 800 tonnes of low and intermediate level radioactive waste. Significant reductions in the volume of low level waste to be managed can be made through compaction. In the USA, low level solid waste from nuclear power plants has been reduced ten-fold over the past decade to 30 cubic metres annually of compacted waste per plant - a total of some 3000 cubic metres from all operating plants. For perspective, industrial operations in the USA are estimated to produce annually more than 50 000 000 cubic metres of solid toxic waste. Although the amount of radioactive waste is small, future nuclear power designs and fuel cycles can be modified to even further decrease the quantities generated. Innovative actinide burning reactors might also in the future transmute long lived radioactive elements into short lived elements. Greenhouse gas emissions Efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions require attention to be given to the full energy chain emissions as significant fuel extraction, transport, manufacturing and construction activities can be involved. Full chain analyses require the identification of all emission sources [Fig.: Full Energy Chain CO2 Equivalent Emission Factors]. Burning natural gas which has a low carbon content produces less CO2; than burning coal or oil. But leakages during extraction and pipeline transport, which are more than 5% in some areas, can offset much of this advantage since the escaping methane is a more effective greenhouse gas. In terms of equivalent grams of carbon per kilowatt-hour, some natural gas chains could have emissions similar to coal energy chains. Full chain hydroelectric assessments generally show comparatively low greenhouse emissions despite large construction activities. However, if methane gas released from decomposition of inundated organic material at the bottom of some water reservoirs is included, emissions could approach natural gas values. Nuclear power and wind are on the low side of full chain emissions, while solar photovoltaic releases are higher owing to various greenhouse gases released during silicon chip manufacturing. Although in many situations biomass is on the low side of emissions, the full chain analyses can be extremely complex and currently provide uncertain results as they involve non-energy byproducts as well as growth and harvesting time periods. A single 1000 MW(e) coal plant emits around 6 000 000 tonnes annually of CO2. There is no economically viable technology to abate or segregate the large quantities emitted. Segregation and storage underground are theoretically possible, but technologies are only in the very early stages of study. Some may require high energy input and environmental impacts have not been assessed. Countries with significant nuclear power and hydroelectric capacity have markedly lower CO2 emissions per unit of energy produced than countries with high fossil fuel shares [Fig.: CO2 Per Unit of Energy]. France over the past 30 years has, through a rapid expansion in nuclear power, lowered its CO2 emissions by more than 80% (see Annex II). In contrast, countries that have rejected or sharply curtailed nuclear power programmes have increased greenhouse gas emissions by turning to fossil fuels. Globally, the use of nuclear power and hydroelectric as an alternative to fossil fuels over the past several decades has helped restrain CO2 emissions. Today, nuclear power and hydroelectric each avoid annually some 8% of global CO2 emissions from energy production [Fig.: Global CO2 Avoided Annually]. Comparisons of various CO2 emission reduction possibilities reported in the 1996 IPCC Technical Paper 1, Technologies, Policies and Measures for Mitigating Climate Change, demonstrate the large mitigation potential of nuclear. Human Disruption Index A general indicator of the impact on the global environment attributed to today's energy activities is the Human Disruption Index (HDI) (see Table 3). It is essentially a ratio of human generated additions to the natural baseline situation for energy related environmental factors such as CO2, SO2, NOx, cadmium, lead, mercury, toxic particles, oil to oceans and methane stock. It includes energy chain impacts such as manufacturing that demonstrate the influence of impacts beyond the production stage. TABLE 3 HUMAN DISRUPTION INDEX (ENERGY SUPPLY INPUT) ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- Flow Item Natural Baseline Flow Human Disruption Index Major Causes ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- Lead 25 000 (t/a) 15 Fuel burning associated processesa Oil oceans 500 000 (t/a) 10 Oil processing and wastes Cadium 1 000 (t/a) 8 Assocaited processesa SO2 50 million (t/a) 1.4 Fuel burning Methane stock 0.8 ppm 1.1 Agricultural activities Mercury 25 000 (t/a) 0.7 Assocaited processesa Nitrous oxides 10 million (t/a) 0.4 Agricultural activities Particle 500 million (t/a) 0.25 Fuel burning; land activities CO2 280 ppm 0.25 Fuel burning ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- a - Associated processes include metals processing, manufacturing and refuse burning. HDI values of 10 for oil into oceans, 15 for lead and 0.7 for mercury correspond to human generated movements of 5 million tonnes of oil annually into the oceans and also almost 400 000 tonnes of lead and 20 000 tonnes of mercury into the environment. In the context of a large natural inventory of radioactive material in the earth and a significant continuous release of natural radon gas to the atmosphere, additions from nuclear power activities have a negligible impact on the natural radioactive baseline situation. | ||
| Maverick Side Hero Username: Maverick Post Number: 3227 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 192.146.101.24 Rating: N/A |
Tammudu..good catch.. aa rachabanda scientist post choosava...nuclear energey vs solar energy lo chiru ni tecchi monkey annadu..i said are u referring to sr ntr..and i also said dont discuss this nuclear deal unless u know it completely.. daniki ayana reply "vaksuddi ekkuva ayite pilli goddi miguluddi.......... "..ponile toda kottadu ani oorukunna...asala aa post lo valid points ee levu..edo unnattu kummu kummu ante erri pushpalu kaka inkemanali? | ||
| Ntr_fan Side Hero Username: Ntr_fan Post Number: 7096 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 68.19.94.222 Rating: N/A |
annai ninna nenu.."konchem vadandi " ane word use chesinanduke..personal ki potunnavu..discussing rakapothe intlo kurcho annaru.. mari meeru.erri pushpalu ani vadocha? nenu particular ga okallani analedu ani dlm lu vaddandi..aa post lo evarini annaro andariki ardhamayyindi..malli evarini annanu ani nannu adagakandi..meeku telusu. | ||
| True_indian Junior Artist Username: True_indian Post Number: 637 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 75.181.71.216 Rating: N/A |
maku US lo enda undadu mama plus bush gadiki enda ante kopam | ||
| Maverick Side Hero Username: Maverick Post Number: 3226 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 192.146.101.24 Rating: N/A |
raccha banda scientist..And inko racchabanda listener..ade eppudu edo avutoo untadu..vacchi kummu mama kummu ani post veyyatam..edi INDIA lo Sun 365 days untundi ane mahattara point ki manam wah wah ani discuss cheyyalanta...Sounded reasonable and logical anta...ekkadiki vellina erri pushpalu tappav annatu...chass | ||
| Bazooka Side Hero Username: Bazooka Post Number: 4135 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 216.221.240.130 Rating: N/A |
Johnny Walker tagesi nadisetodu ani Jai Chiranjeeva | ||
| True_indian Junior Artist Username: True_indian Post Number: 635 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 75.181.71.216 Rating: N/A |
neku single stars padaledu enti kummu mama kummu  | ||
| Okatelugodu Comedian Username: Okatelugodu Post Number: 1158 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 199.43.32.86 Rating: N/A |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7188835.stm | ||
| Okatelugodu Comedian Username: Okatelugodu Post Number: 1157 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 199.43.32.86 Rating: N/A |
India tarapuna US, NSG lo pitch chesina...memu matram uranium ammam ani aussies statement icharu anukunta. Don't know if they will change their stance in future. | ||
| Elcaminocapastrino Side Hero Username: Elcaminocapastrino Post Number: 5191 Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 204.95.150.205 Rating: N/A |
racist gada....vaadi knowledhe mottham ilaa Gajji spread cheyyataniki use chesthuntadu dhaaniki EE kontha mandhi ulfa supporters vaadu emi chepthunnado kooda inaru...kummu mama kummu antaaru.... eppudo vaadi refrigerator lo 5 or 6 OTHER people skeletons dhorukuthai... adhi matuku definitely going to happen....vaadiki antha hatred undhi... | ||
| Ideal_brain Junior Artist Username: Ideal_brain Post Number: 37 Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 192.147.58.6 Rating: N/A |
US lo ippudu ippudu nam ke vaste ga use chestunnaru. I read somewhere that Bloomberg is proposing to have the Panels on building in NY City and as a result the stocks of solar industry went up. The amount of energy you can get from the solar is extremely less and i would say better stand in the Sun to get the Vitamin D(seems to help in minimizing chances of cancer) than for the Energy. | ||
| Cylonesubbarao Side Hero Username: Cylonesubbarao Post Number: 6668 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 170.61.20.242 Rating: N/A |
Inthaki Skywalker ante meaning emiti? You must be the change you wish to see in the world  | ||
| Cylonesubbarao Side Hero Username: Cylonesubbarao Post Number: 6666 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 170.61.20.242 Rating: N/A |
Nee Jaane Jigar friend!  You must be the change you wish to see in the world | ||
| Idle_yzag Side Hero Username: Idle_yzag Post Number: 3480 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 198.80.153.5 Rating: N/A |
EarthWalker | ||
| Elcaminocapastrino Side Hero Username: Elcaminocapastrino Post Number: 5188 Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 204.95.150.205 Rating: N/A |
evadu raasadu idhi???  | ||
| Goonda Hero Username: Goonda Post Number: 10611 Registered: 02-2007 Posted From: 199.82.243.71 Rating: N/A |
ee DB lo koddi mandi bhavadeeyulu, solar energy edo karchu pettakunda free ga vastundhi, US kantey manamey mundu US cheyyali endukantey samvasarantram manaku enda vuntundhi lanti dialogues vesaru. I guess they dont even know how much solar energy is generated world wide, for that matter in super powers US/GB/Germany/France. edo oka vishayanni khandichali ani tappitey akkada matter leni post vesaru. | ||
| Ideal_brain Junior Artist Username: Ideal_brain Post Number: 36 Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 192.147.58.6 Rating: N/A |
Solar Energy is very expensive and eventhough it is a cleaner energy it is not profitable enough at this point. Once there is a breakthrough or else the energy gets to a point it becomes reasonable to use solar energy it is useless to even discuss it. | ||
| Goonda Hero Username: Goonda Post Number: 10608 Registered: 02-2007 Posted From: 199.82.243.71 Rating: N/A |
If solar power is useful why didnt US went for it? its very very expensive to make silicon panels and its not yet proven technology like nuclear. Just for discussion sake i am giving some details here. France is no.1 in world in terms of power generation using nuclear technology. 80% of france Electricity is generated by Nuclear technology and they also have idea about how to dispose off nuclear waste. If we sign this nuclear deal, we would get all sufficient help from countries like france, german & australia( world No.1 in uranium resources). | ||
| Kadapanagfan Side Hero Username: Kadapanagfan Post Number: 4465 Registered: 12-2006 Posted From: 13.8.125.10 Rating: N/A |
idi corrcetey nuclear dela vishyam lo....yemanna artham mayyi chastey ga support or not support seyyadaniki.......  | ||
| Idle_yzag Side Hero Username: Idle_yzag Post Number: 3463 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 198.80.153.5 Rating: N/A |
OT yendhuku annitiki guddiga support chesthav? edo veyali anatu vesthav post | ||
| Maverick Side Hero Username: Maverick Post Number: 3223 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 192.146.101.24 Rating: |
enti reasonable/logical...India has sun 365 days and hence we should switch to solar instead of nuclear.. Is the india only country having sun 365 days? nuclear deal complete issue free ani anatledu..every source of energy has its own issues..teliste ninna ram k kurrodu kottinattu valid poitns to tavali..ninna ayana post choosi..aruvu tecchukoni ee roju post veyyadam..nuvvu kummu kummu anatam..malla sounded reasonable anta.  | ||
| Maverick Side Hero Username: Maverick Post Number: 3222 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 192.146.101.24 Rating: N/A |
India is a tropical country and we have ample solar capability......we have sun almost all round the year......why cant we use it...........why only use nuclear power.............we boast as the back office of the world and the brightest guys in IT, why can not we develop alternative energy resources.....other than nuclear power. If nuclear energy is so usefull....why did not the us build a couple of them even when there were power cuts in california in the summer......can you please answer these questions...... List out his points.. India has sun all 365 days..so we have to go for solar power instead of nuclear power..and then IT ki daniki link.. migatadi anta chiru meeda edupu..CBN ki support.. Nuvvu kummu kummu antoo sollu..ee valid point gurunchi discuss cheyyali.. | ||
| Maverick Side Hero Username: Maverick Post Number: 3221 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 192.146.101.24 Rating: |
Yes..teliyani dani gurunchi matladanu..naaku teliyaa poina abdul kalam ki telsu kada..he will not blidnly say deal is good..more over the govt didnt support him presidential terms.. enti skywalker cheppina valid points..India lo 365 days Sun untundi ana...adoka point..daniki nee support..Naaku telsi alaska lo tappa sun lekunda assalu undadu..IT jobs ki Nuclear/Solar power generation ki link..danamma mana vallu chesedi tokkalo IT service daniki edo peekasam annatu solar energy gurunchi aalochinchalita.. adi neeku valid point.. | ||
| Onlytruth Hero Username: Onlytruth Post Number: 13456 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 67.159.44.63 Rating: N/A |
Mav ,neeku deal gurinchi ABCD lu teliyavu..kalaam emannaadu ? arun shourie emmaannaado chepthunnav anthe....atleast skywalker quoted few points & reasons and mainly he targetted link's blind suppport to the deal... Skywalker ki telisindhi kuda neeku telvadhi, atanni vimarsisthunnav... nannu anu oppukuntaa, endukante ee issue lo nenu kuda nee laage bebbebbe | ||
| Onlytruth Hero Username: Onlytruth Post Number: 13455 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 67.159.44.63 Rating: |
do you know the deal? >>>>>> naaku teliyadhu ane ga , BJP emantondhi (not acceptable in present form)ani cheppaanu...naaku telisthe naa opinione cheppe vanni... >>>> sky ki telsa? did he discuss about those issues? nuvvu kummu kummu annav? >>>>> ataniki telisina issues discuss cesadu , sounded reasonable..and logical..nee theory nee points cheppu..if sounded reasonable u will also be encouraged by people... Inthaki neeku telusaa deal gurinchi ?  | ||
| Maverick Side Hero Username: Maverick Post Number: 3220 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 192.146.101.24 Rating: |
what issues ? do you know the deal? sky ki telsa? did he discuss about those issues? nuvvu kummu kummu annav? asalu enti issues..what are pros and cons of the deal cheppada? monkey referring chiru kanipinchagane stars guddatam..what i said is don't discuss unless u have the complete text of the deal or u know it | ||
| Maverick Side Hero Username: Maverick Post Number: 3219 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 192.146.101.24 Rating: N/A |
Racchabanda scientist edo annaduga nuclear energy enduku solar energey chalu manaki ani..nuvvu kummu kummu annav ga | ||
| Onlytruth Hero Username: Onlytruth Post Number: 13454 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 67.159.44.63 Rating: N/A |
morning Sky vesina post ki nuvvu stars yendhuku vesav mare? adu edo sollu post ki >>>>>> sky vesindhi kuda adhe..konni issues vunnayi present form of the deal tho ani | ||
| Idle_yzag Side Hero Username: Idle_yzag Post Number: 3457 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 198.80.153.5 Rating: |
morning Sky vesina post ki nuvvu stars yendhuku vesav mare? adu edo sollu post ki | ||
| Onlytruth Hero Username: Onlytruth Post Number: 13453 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 67.159.44.63 Rating: N/A |
asalu nuke deal ye voddhu ani evadu anatledhu even tdp OR BJP The main opposition party BJP which laid the groundwork for the deal criticized the deal saying that the deal in its present form was unacceptable to BJP and wanted the deal renegotiated | ||
| Idle_yzag Side Hero Username: Idle_yzag Post Number: 3456 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 198.80.153.5 Rating: N/A |
Nope On the other hand congi condemned Arun shouri false stmt and AS is good in making this falthoo stmts... same what he did on present president which kept BJP in corner everyone knows AS credibility, so no one bothered | ||
| Cylonesubbarao Side Hero Username: Cylonesubbarao Post Number: 6650 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 170.61.20.242 Rating: N/A |
 You must be the change you wish to see in the world | ||
| Maverick Side Hero Username: Maverick Post Number: 3216 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 192.146.101.24 Rating: |
What is Kalam's stand on N Deal..I am sure he is for it. All the google results say that he is for it, except one where arun shourie of bjp says that he changed his stance after discussing with him it seems..I don't think kalam will make hasty announcements with out reading the deal. Moreover the UPA govt is against for his second term as the president,still he supported the Nuclear deal just for the sake of the country.. Is there any statement from him recently(last couple of days) on his stance?. http://www.thehindu.com/2008/05/12/stories/2008051254561400. htm http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Signing-nuclear-deal-wi ll-benefit-India-Kalam/327839/ |
