Repetition and Reality: Ditto Pronouncements on Nuclear Energy in Union Budgets and the Adani Factor
The Union Finance Minister, Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman, presented the Union Budget for the financial year 2026–27, incorporating a substantial allocation for nuclear energy projects. Having closely observed her budget presentations over the past nine years, one cannot but acknowledge her remarkable consistency and determination. Her distinctive practice of reiterating the same policy initiatives across successive budgets is particularly noteworthy.
As detailed in the official budget documents, in her most recent presentation the Finance Minister announced an ambitious plan to achieve 100 gigawatts (GW) of nuclear power generation capacity by 2047. The government has resolved to establish a dedicated Nuclear Energy Mission, with a specific focus on the research and development of small modular reactors (SMRs), supported by an allocation of ₹20,000 crore. Furthermore, the budget envisages the commissioning of at least five indigenously developed small nuclear power plants by 2033.
Evidence of the Finance Minister’s steadfast commitment can be readily observed by examining the budget documents for the financial years 2025–26 and 2024–25, where identical announcements are reiterated with minimal, if any, modification. The principal development during this period has been the amendment of the Atomic Energy Act, 1962, and the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, to facilitate private sector participation in nuclear power generation—measures initially proposed in earlier budgets. Consequently, the Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India (SHANTI) Act, 2025, has been enacted into law.
Prior to these legislative changes, government representatives had engaged with prominent private entities, including those associated with General Electric and Adani Power, to encourage their participation in the construction of small modular reactors. However, these companies showed limited interest, primarily due to the deterrent effect of the existing civil liability framework governing nuclear accidents, which had long discouraged private capital from entering the sector. The enactment of the SHANTI Act has now removed this major obstacle—though critics argue that it effectively grants greater protection, or “peace,” to suppliers by significantly constraining liability exposure.
International experience with small modular reactors offers a sobering counterpoint. Although governments often promote these smaller nuclear facilities as superior alternatives to conventional large-scale plants, empirical studies indicate that such claims are largely unsubstantiated. Independent research consistently shows that modular reactors tend to be more expensive per unit of electricity generated and produce larger volumes of radioactive waste compared to traditional nuclear power plants.
A pertinent example is the project involving six small reactors, each with a capacity of 77 MW, planned in Idaho, United States, which was subsequently abandoned due to severe cost escalation. Similarly, the Vogtle nuclear power plant in Georgia—a 2,200 MW facility under construction—has witnessed construction costs per megawatt exceeding initial estimates by approximately 250 per cent. Numerous small reactors built in the United States have also been decommissioned prematurely because of economic unviability. It is evident that the sharp escalation in construction costs associated with small modular reactors will inevitably translate into significantly higher electricity tariffs.
With regard to radioactive waste management, modular reactor designs offer no meaningful advantage over conventional models, as demonstrated by rigorous analyses conducted by nuclear energy experts Professor M. V. Ramana and Dr. Xia Mian. They observe:
“The total amount of plutonium produced in such plant models is much higher than that in light water reactors. Most importantly, the plutonium concentration in spent fuel is about six to seven times higher than that in light water reactors.”
In addition, the fundamental concerns inherent to nuclear energy—namely grave safety risks, potential links to nuclear proliferation, and the enduring challenge of managing long-lived radioactive waste—remain unaddressed in the context of small modular reactor deployment.
Despite these well-documented challenges, the Government of India continues to pursue policies aimed at enabling large-scale capital investment in the nuclear energy sector, including substantial private sector participation. The underlying rationale is evident: influential global actors have long advocated the revitalisation of a nuclear industry that has remained largely stagnant for decades. A deeper understanding of this stagnation, and the accompanying calls for a so-called “nuclear renaissance,” can be found in the World Nuclear Industry Status Report. The introduction of the SHANTI Act in Parliament, along with the debates surrounding it, is best understood as part of this broader international policy trajectory.
