'He is really intelligent. If he tried, he would have got it' or 'Well, I know how to do it, I know what to do, I would have done it if I wanted to, but I don't want to because it is too silly'- I have heard these comments so often that the next person who says it better have lightning quick reflexes to save their health, from me. I have heard it so often that when people say this, I don't hear these words any more, instead what I get is 'I am an under achiever, I was all potential and talent, but I wasted it and never really got anywhere with the opportunities I got and I am upset that others used the opportunity and are doing better than me'.
I too have used that lame excuse to convince myself I was doing fine, a long time ago in my school days when I refused to study Biology. But then I realised I was merely being pathetic and envious and dropped the defensive approach. Let them be and this has helped because I do not feel envy or the urge to defend my choices and make the comment that must not be made, what this means is that I know what I am doing and why I am doing it.
I hear a lot of people say 'If I get a chance, I will leave India and go to Singapore'. Let me see, middle class India which numbers more than a 150million atleast wants to go to law abiding Singapore that has currently 3.8 million citizens and 1.2 million expats. Perhaps everything that is wrong with India is in its geography and not in the consumerism, perpetual last minute rush, apathy, callousness, general contempt for rules that seems all pervading. To have the right to complain, we must have done something on our own to rise above the petty contempt with which we view ourselves and if we are to be respected, we must first change ourselves and then respect ourselves for that.
(Singapore is whole of 710sq.km and India is 3.2million sq.km and even if we give power to the states, I for one cannot figure what to do about districts like Kurnool and Anantapur with population of almost 4million and spread over an aread of 19000sq.km and )
We complain about potholes on the road and lack of pedestrian space, but how many of us actually walk on the right side of the road or wait for the signal to cross the road or resist the urge to spit casually in the open? How many of us know to drive properly and take a right turn without violating atleast a dozen rules? A 10min drive will let us see hundreds of people chatting away on the mobile phones, on bikes, cars and pedestrians too texting and on a call or on their mp3 players oblivious to the traffic around them.
Whenever I say I am planning to join the civil service, the reply that everyone comes up with is 'Don't you know what happened to Raju Narayanaswamy?' Yes, but I also know about these
http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?277990
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article3269591.ece
http://www.frontlineonnet.com/stories/20120504290808800.htm
and if good civil servants are something difficult to digest, then give me examples of their greed and corruption.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-05-28/india/29594799_1_steel-mill-lockers-raipur
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/enforcement-directorate-ias-couple-madhya-pradesh/1/158422.html
We stick to stereotypes, view what is ours and what we are and what made us with contempt and blame it on others and our environment whereas we are squeaky clean. How do we make things better? In this situation, the answer is very simple but we will never get round to doing it since it involves taking action and we are all only enthusiastic about lectures and inspirational words, but never in putting into action Mahatma Gandhi's words 'Be the change you want to see in the world'.
Friday, April 20, 2012
Powerful Matters
There has been immense debate raging over nuclear power plants in the world over the last few years with fears over their safety having intensified after the Fukushima-Da Ichi plant disaster in March of 2011 and large sections of activists, general population and nuclear sceptics protesting to close down existing plants and to shelve plans to construct more of them.
The usual arguments against nuclear power plants are-
1) Safety- The reactor that spewed radio activity in Japan was constructed in the 60s and most of us were not even born yet. The latest model reactors have modern safety features and in India, these are in comparatively seismically safe zones and have adequate safety features to prevent a Fukushima type failure of back-up coolant pumping mechanism (a)
2)Spend fuel- Usually, spend fuel requires to be stored in isolated areas and the practice has been to store them underground in specially constructed bunkers or caves. India has adopted a closed nuclear fuel cycle which creates 50times more energy (b) (c) than all other systems and reuses large amounts of the spend fuel.
3)Lack of precautionary drills and awareness among people in the surrounding area and threat to environment- this is the only reasonable argument that I have heard from among the heap of protests that is holding back nuclear energy in India.
It is not a matter of doubt that we face sever power crisis in our country and our growth (whether this growth benefits only the rich and powerful who then pacify the middle class and the intention of signing contracts with pernicious clauses is altogether another issue) is directly dependent on availability of power. Every sphere of human activity is now dependent on power and its shortage severely restricts our individual capabilities. Nuclear energy is considered the best option to meet this requirement but uninformed protestors and a lot of 'environmentalists' or 'green citizens' recommend renewable energy sources like wind, solar, tidal energy and biomass(will we be asked to switch to firewood soon since it is also biomass?). I would like to point out a few misconceptions with respect to these renewable energy sources.
Wind Energy- this is highly location specific and require large patches of land and in a country that has a population density of over 400 people a square kilometer, a model pioneered by scarcely populated Scandinavian countries is little more than a misfit. Even then, let us assume we find enough land, there is an issue called capacity factor (d). I regularly see articles that talk about the installed capacity of wind energy in India but how much of their capacity can be utilised? Capacity factor for wind mills is just 20-40% and that is when all conditions are favourable. From my personal experience of having done a project on renewable energy and spend considerable time studying actual systems, what we get is less than 10% in most areas (e). What this means is that if a wind farm has a capacity of 100MW, it can at best produce 10MW.
Solar- It is as obvious as daylight that sun does not shine for 24 hours a day and the best capacity factor for solar photovoltaic (SPV) cells is at 19% (f) . In short, both solar and wind mills cannot be relied for consistent power outputs (anyone who has studied renewable energy basics should know this) and we cannot wait for the wind to blow or sunny days to complete our tasks. There is also the misconception that placing huge solar panel arrays in the Thar desert will easily solve all our issues. Only those with no clear understanding of the workings of SPV technology will say so- dust, high temperature fluctuations and corrosion will reduce efficiency over time and destroy the SPV array before costs can be recovered (again from my personal experience, just normal dust from the landscape will cause huge fall in power output).
(There is a scope to question the capacity factor of nuclear plants and other sources of energy. The capacity factor for nuclear energy is infact 90% (g) and for thermal plants it is more than 60% (h) which is far better than that of renewable energy)
Tidal Energy- highly location specific and installed capacity is just around 500MW all around the world. This can be developed to meet power requirements of coastal areas.
In placing our nation's development in such a technology, we need to exercise extreme caution and this means we have to ensure adequate fuel supply for these plants, we need to ensure the safety of the people in the vicinity, take them into confidence and make them part of this endeavour since their livelihoods might be at risk from the normal operation of the plant (water being used up and hot water being released back) and are also at immediate risk from any accidents. The survival and livelihoods of the people must never face any threats and there should be detailed procedures, mock drills, awareness programs to prepare for worst case scenarios and minor accidents along with adequate steps to protect the environment.
Nuclear energy is one of the paths we must traverse to attain carbon free energy production and this is the only source of stable, uninterrupted, large scale power we have before us right now and the so called alternatives do not meet our needs- neither in terms of actual production or reliability. There are technical issues with all sources of power, but when a luminary like Dr.A.P.J.Abdul Kalam whose credentials need no mention here supports nuclear power, we must not simply dismiss it lightly.
The future for solar and wind energy will mostly lie in localised production with houses having their own mini power plants with SPV cells or wind mills or both to meet part of their domestic demand thereby reducing the load on centralised production. Centralised power produced through nuclear plants and other existing plants shall become the source of power for heavy usage including industry, large and commercial buildings and railway transport. The politics and business of power plants have always been an issue in India with previous experiences with Enron having turned sour and developed powers trying to use 3rd world nations as the hunting ground for new markets. It should be the safety of the people and their welfare that must guide such a project and the solution to meeting our energy demand through clean, reliable fuels lie in ensuring these are implemented by keeping at heart the interests of the people and not be scuttled the misplaced fears of the a few or in the selfish interests of monopolies while depriving the downtrodden in this nation.
The usual arguments against nuclear power plants are-
1) Safety- The reactor that spewed radio activity in Japan was constructed in the 60s and most of us were not even born yet. The latest model reactors have modern safety features and in India, these are in comparatively seismically safe zones and have adequate safety features to prevent a Fukushima type failure of back-up coolant pumping mechanism (a)
2)Spend fuel- Usually, spend fuel requires to be stored in isolated areas and the practice has been to store them underground in specially constructed bunkers or caves. India has adopted a closed nuclear fuel cycle which creates 50times more energy (b) (c) than all other systems and reuses large amounts of the spend fuel.
3)Lack of precautionary drills and awareness among people in the surrounding area and threat to environment- this is the only reasonable argument that I have heard from among the heap of protests that is holding back nuclear energy in India.
It is not a matter of doubt that we face sever power crisis in our country and our growth (whether this growth benefits only the rich and powerful who then pacify the middle class and the intention of signing contracts with pernicious clauses is altogether another issue) is directly dependent on availability of power. Every sphere of human activity is now dependent on power and its shortage severely restricts our individual capabilities. Nuclear energy is considered the best option to meet this requirement but uninformed protestors and a lot of 'environmentalists' or 'green citizens' recommend renewable energy sources like wind, solar, tidal energy and biomass(will we be asked to switch to firewood soon since it is also biomass?). I would like to point out a few misconceptions with respect to these renewable energy sources.
Wind Energy- this is highly location specific and require large patches of land and in a country that has a population density of over 400 people a square kilometer, a model pioneered by scarcely populated Scandinavian countries is little more than a misfit. Even then, let us assume we find enough land, there is an issue called capacity factor (d). I regularly see articles that talk about the installed capacity of wind energy in India but how much of their capacity can be utilised? Capacity factor for wind mills is just 20-40% and that is when all conditions are favourable. From my personal experience of having done a project on renewable energy and spend considerable time studying actual systems, what we get is less than 10% in most areas (e). What this means is that if a wind farm has a capacity of 100MW, it can at best produce 10MW.
Solar- It is as obvious as daylight that sun does not shine for 24 hours a day and the best capacity factor for solar photovoltaic (SPV) cells is at 19% (f) . In short, both solar and wind mills cannot be relied for consistent power outputs (anyone who has studied renewable energy basics should know this) and we cannot wait for the wind to blow or sunny days to complete our tasks. There is also the misconception that placing huge solar panel arrays in the Thar desert will easily solve all our issues. Only those with no clear understanding of the workings of SPV technology will say so- dust, high temperature fluctuations and corrosion will reduce efficiency over time and destroy the SPV array before costs can be recovered (again from my personal experience, just normal dust from the landscape will cause huge fall in power output).
(There is a scope to question the capacity factor of nuclear plants and other sources of energy. The capacity factor for nuclear energy is infact 90% (g) and for thermal plants it is more than 60% (h) which is far better than that of renewable energy)
Tidal Energy- highly location specific and installed capacity is just around 500MW all around the world. This can be developed to meet power requirements of coastal areas.
In placing our nation's development in such a technology, we need to exercise extreme caution and this means we have to ensure adequate fuel supply for these plants, we need to ensure the safety of the people in the vicinity, take them into confidence and make them part of this endeavour since their livelihoods might be at risk from the normal operation of the plant (water being used up and hot water being released back) and are also at immediate risk from any accidents. The survival and livelihoods of the people must never face any threats and there should be detailed procedures, mock drills, awareness programs to prepare for worst case scenarios and minor accidents along with adequate steps to protect the environment.
Nuclear energy is one of the paths we must traverse to attain carbon free energy production and this is the only source of stable, uninterrupted, large scale power we have before us right now and the so called alternatives do not meet our needs- neither in terms of actual production or reliability. There are technical issues with all sources of power, but when a luminary like Dr.A.P.J.Abdul Kalam whose credentials need no mention here supports nuclear power, we must not simply dismiss it lightly.
The future for solar and wind energy will mostly lie in localised production with houses having their own mini power plants with SPV cells or wind mills or both to meet part of their domestic demand thereby reducing the load on centralised production. Centralised power produced through nuclear plants and other existing plants shall become the source of power for heavy usage including industry, large and commercial buildings and railway transport. The politics and business of power plants have always been an issue in India with previous experiences with Enron having turned sour and developed powers trying to use 3rd world nations as the hunting ground for new markets. It should be the safety of the people and their welfare that must guide such a project and the solution to meeting our energy demand through clean, reliable fuels lie in ensuring these are implemented by keeping at heart the interests of the people and not be scuttled the misplaced fears of the a few or in the selfish interests of monopolies while depriving the downtrodden in this nation.
Monday, April 9, 2012
Nehru's Socialism and New India
Every economics, modern history book and article I read on India has a reference to Nehruvian socialism and its evils and the 'Hindu rate of growth'. I do not agree that Nehruvian socialism and protectionism was bad and has only harmed India and I do not really understand the truth behind the phrase because for 18 centuries India was the leading economy of the world and it was largely made of Hindus (Period of Guptas was called the Golden age of India). I am not trying to glorify a religion or spew forth propaganda but merely pointing at how short our memory is and how misnomers are the norm. One could say that Mughal period was one of Indian renaissance, I would hardly call it that because all the structures mughals built were palaces and graves for themselves like absolute rulers still do and they encouraged arts and crafts for their own pleasure(a) and mughal empire was city-centric with very little connection to the people with the king being a distant reality as his connection with most of the people was merely collecting revenues.
I would like to point out the benefits of socialism that was established by Nehru by looking at the reasons for India's recent growth-
1) Large number of educated individuals- this was the result of the strong base for education that was set-up which resulted in increase in literacy and also created a large number of professionals
2) Indian enterprises- Although protectionism did fuel corruption, inefficiency and easy going attitude it did allow the nation to create some wealth in public sector and also a few in the private sector. Although the ones in private sector had a tough struggle, Infosys, Patni, TCS etc were founded in the pre- reform India.
We are also a secular democracy which has reasonable stability when compared with almost all other nations that were freed from colonial rule and a perfunctory glance across the border would suffice to convince even the biggest cynics of India that we have been lucky and that is due to-
1) Secular Democracy- We are not a struggling democracy (atleast we established democracy and now are attempting to root out old malaises) or an autocratic nation. In spite of issues, we do have an elected government
2) Judiciary- Our judiciary has been the protector of our rights even when government has been trying its utmost to curtail them and has delivered landmark verdicts on tax laws to property disputes
We are not a banana republic or an autocracy or anti-secular nation simply because we chose to protect and cement the ideals on which our country was founded and close the nation so that these foundations will not be washed away by the tides created by cold war and other conflicts that was raging the world over, before they can solidify. If we had left our nation open for foreign investments immediately, we would have seen a continuation of economic exploitation and slavery that was the hallmark of colonial rule.
There has to be questions asked of modern rate of growth too as we find that 47% of households do not have toilets and 30% of the population that numbers 36crore people are defined as poor under a ridiculous poverty line. We have an enormous middle class that are patronised by the current spurt of growth who have a stake in maintaining the status quo(a number greater than the population of US), we have a large number of poor who are used for human labour- statements like labourers are not available in construction industry and their wages have gone up due to MGNREGA clearly show this exploitive attitude since MGNREGA doesn't even provide minimum wages in most places- and a small section of rich and powerful who decide what happens in this country.
Whether or not situation has improved is a pertinent question and so this must be answered before derogatory use of 'Nehruvian' socialism and 'Hindu rate of growth' since such remarks forget the fact that our current growth is making the rich richer and has made a middle class that buffer the rich from the poor and is making the poor poorer. This growth is benefiting some section of society and hence cannot be considered to be in the interest of the nation and rather than focussing on numbers alone, we must find a balance between greater aspirations of the rich and middle class and the survival needs of the poor. We might have something fruitful to learn from old ridiculed policies, not their entire implementations but some of its intentions and ideals.
Nehruvian socialism should have been seen as the means to get to a stable position, a time during which India consolidated its position on a strong foundation, strengthened our nation's unity and shored up our defences but it became the absolute end and saw it as our duty and purpose to establish a socialist paternal state driving even the thought of what should have been the real goals out of the picture.
(a) - Public Administration in India, S.R.Maheshwari, Ch.2, The Mughal Administration
I would like to point out the benefits of socialism that was established by Nehru by looking at the reasons for India's recent growth-
1) Large number of educated individuals- this was the result of the strong base for education that was set-up which resulted in increase in literacy and also created a large number of professionals
2) Indian enterprises- Although protectionism did fuel corruption, inefficiency and easy going attitude it did allow the nation to create some wealth in public sector and also a few in the private sector. Although the ones in private sector had a tough struggle, Infosys, Patni, TCS etc were founded in the pre- reform India.
We are also a secular democracy which has reasonable stability when compared with almost all other nations that were freed from colonial rule and a perfunctory glance across the border would suffice to convince even the biggest cynics of India that we have been lucky and that is due to-
1) Secular Democracy- We are not a struggling democracy (atleast we established democracy and now are attempting to root out old malaises) or an autocratic nation. In spite of issues, we do have an elected government
2) Judiciary- Our judiciary has been the protector of our rights even when government has been trying its utmost to curtail them and has delivered landmark verdicts on tax laws to property disputes
We are not a banana republic or an autocracy or anti-secular nation simply because we chose to protect and cement the ideals on which our country was founded and close the nation so that these foundations will not be washed away by the tides created by cold war and other conflicts that was raging the world over, before they can solidify. If we had left our nation open for foreign investments immediately, we would have seen a continuation of economic exploitation and slavery that was the hallmark of colonial rule.
There has to be questions asked of modern rate of growth too as we find that 47% of households do not have toilets and 30% of the population that numbers 36crore people are defined as poor under a ridiculous poverty line. We have an enormous middle class that are patronised by the current spurt of growth who have a stake in maintaining the status quo(a number greater than the population of US), we have a large number of poor who are used for human labour- statements like labourers are not available in construction industry and their wages have gone up due to MGNREGA clearly show this exploitive attitude since MGNREGA doesn't even provide minimum wages in most places- and a small section of rich and powerful who decide what happens in this country.
Whether or not situation has improved is a pertinent question and so this must be answered before derogatory use of 'Nehruvian' socialism and 'Hindu rate of growth' since such remarks forget the fact that our current growth is making the rich richer and has made a middle class that buffer the rich from the poor and is making the poor poorer. This growth is benefiting some section of society and hence cannot be considered to be in the interest of the nation and rather than focussing on numbers alone, we must find a balance between greater aspirations of the rich and middle class and the survival needs of the poor. We might have something fruitful to learn from old ridiculed policies, not their entire implementations but some of its intentions and ideals.
Nehruvian socialism should have been seen as the means to get to a stable position, a time during which India consolidated its position on a strong foundation, strengthened our nation's unity and shored up our defences but it became the absolute end and saw it as our duty and purpose to establish a socialist paternal state driving even the thought of what should have been the real goals out of the picture.
(a) - Public Administration in India, S.R.Maheshwari, Ch.2, The Mughal Administration
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)