India Nuclear Power Goal: DAE Aur Ministry of Power Ke Jhagde Mein Fasa 100 GW Ka Target!

ENERGY
Whalesbook Logo
AuthorRiya Kapoor|Published at:
India Nuclear Power Goal: DAE Aur Ministry of Power Ke Jhagde Mein Fasa 100 GW Ka Target!
Overview

Yaar, India ka jo **100 GW** nuclear power ka bada target hai na **2047** tak, woh ab seriously risk mein lag raha hai. Asal mein, Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) aur Ministry of Power ke beech ek zabardast administrative dispute chal raha hai, jiske wajah se saari plans gadbad ho gayi hain aur private investors bhi confused hain.

Instant Stock Alerts on WhatsApp

Used by 10,000+ active investors

1

Add Stocks

Select the stocks you want to track in real time.

2

Get Alerts on WhatsApp

Receive instant updates directly to WhatsApp.

  • Quarterly Results
  • Concall Announcements
  • New Orders & Big Deals
  • Capex Announcements
  • Bulk Deals
  • And much more

Ab yeh jhagda hai kya? Scene yeh hai ki India mein naye nuclear projects, especially jo imported technologies use karenge jaise light water reactors (LWRs) ya pressurized water reactors (PWRs), unki oversight Ministry of Power ke paas jaani chahiye. Jo India ki apni pressurized heavy water reactor (PHWR) technology hai, jisme DAE kaafi expert hai, woh DAE ke paas hi rahegi. Lekin yeh jo overlapping authority hai na, yeh historical problems laati hai jisse decisions late hote hain aur projects ruk jaate hain.

Is sab ka asar seedha India ke 100 GW nuclear power ke target par pad raha hai 2047 tak. Yeh target achieve karne ke liye private sector se bahut saara paisa lagana padega. Agar regulatory uncertainty bani rahi, toh investors dar jayenge, projects approve hone mein der hogi aur capital ka cost bhi badh jayega. SHANTI Act ka maksad toh sector ko streamline karna tha, par ab lagta hai ulta ho gaya hai. Agar yeh current projects jo 2031-32 tak ready hone the, unmein bhi der hui toh 2047 ka goal mushkil hai.

Duniya bhar mein nuclear sector mein private investment badh rahi hai, but wahan strong, independent regulatory bodies hain. India ka yeh internal jhagda thoda alag hai. SHANTI Act ne Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) ko statutory power toh di hai, par yeh ministerial tussle uski independence ko affect kar sakta hai. Global markets ko predictable policies chahiye, jo abhi India mein nahi dikh rahi.

Ek aur badi chinta yeh hai ki DAE ka nuclear supply chain par itna control hai, research se lekar waste management tak. Isse conflict of interest ka risk hai, jise Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) ne 2012 mein bhi point out kiya tha. Ab yeh naya dispute DAE aur Ministry of Power ke beech, agar control bat gaya toh duplicated efforts aur unclear accountability ho sakti hai. Jaise Ministry of Power ke under NTPC jaise public sector entities private developers ke saath kaam karna chahti hain, unke liye bhi yeh situation confusing hai. Ek coordinated approach missing lag raha hai.

Analysts ka kehna hai ki yeh jurisdiction dispute solve karna bahut zaroori hai taaki India apne nuclear energy ambitions poore kar sake. Highest level par decisions hone chahiye taaki investors ko clarity mile. AERB ki powers badh gayi hain, par uski independence maintain karni padegi. Public sector aur private players ka smooth integration ek stable, transparent regulatory environment par depend karta hai. Nahi toh 100 GW ka target aur clean energy transition dono hi late ho sakte hain.

Get stock alerts instantly on WhatsApp

Quarterly results, bulk deals, concall updates and major announcements delivered in real time.

Disclaimer:This content is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute investment, financial, or trading advice, nor a recommendation to buy or sell any securities. Readers should consult a SEBI-registered advisor before making investment decisions, as markets involve risk and past performance does not guarantee future results. The publisher and authors accept no liability for any losses. Some content may be AI-generated and may contain errors; accuracy and completeness are not guaranteed. Views expressed do not reflect the publication’s editorial stance.