India is proposing a major change to its nuclear liability law, aiming to remove a key obstacle that’s kept American companies like General Electric and Westinghouse out of the market.
The goal? Limit accident-related liabilities for equipment suppliers, making India’s nuclear sector more investor-friendly—and safer, at least financially.
So, What’s Actually Changing?
At the heart of this proposal is the 2010 Civil Nuclear Liability for Damage Act, which currently holds equipment suppliers indefinitely liable for nuclear accidents—no matter the cost, no matter the time.
Under the proposed amendments:
- The unlimited liability clause will be removed.
- Suppliers’ compensation will be capped at the contract value.
- Liability will also be limited to a defined time frame.
- Operators will still face liability caps:
- $175 million for large reactors.
- $58 million for smaller ones.
Also Read: India’s GDP Growth at 6.4%: What the Global Trade War Means for Your Job and Future
What Does This Mean for the Average Person?
In simple terms: more power, more jobs, more trade—but also more corporate protection. This move is meant to fast-track nuclear expansion and bring in big players. For everyday consumers, it could mean more stable electricity and cleaner energy. But critics might say it shifts too much responsibility away from corporations and toward taxpayers in the event of a disaster.
If the Bhopal gas tragedy taught us anything, it’s that disasters cost more than dollars—but laws still price them anyway.
Why Now? The Big Picture
India wants to multiply its nuclear energy capacity by 12 times—from the current ~7.5 GW to a whopping 100 GW by 2047. That’s essential for meeting the country’s net-zero emission targets and ballooning energy demand.
And there’s more. The government is also eyeing a $500 billion U.S.-India trade deal by 2030, up from $191 billion in 2024. But to make nuclear trade work, American firms want liability risks minimized—unlike French and Russian companies whose governments often shield them.
So in a way, this is less about reactors and more about relationships.
Also Read: Port Fees Meant to Hurt China Could Hit Americans Harder
The 1984 Bhopal Legacy Still Echoes
The original nuclear liability law was born from trauma. After Union Carbide’s deadly gas leak killed thousands in 1984, the company settled for just $470 million. India didn’t want history to repeat itself—hence the strict liability clauses in 2010.
But critics now argue those rules have done the opposite: they scared off global suppliers and stalled progress. It’s a delicate balance—public safety vs. private participation.
What’s Next?
The proposal is expected to hit Parliament during the July monsoon session. If passed, it could unlock billions in private investment. Companies like Reliance, Tata, Adani, and Vedanta may each pour in over $5.14 billion into nuclear projects.
That’s not just energy—it’s serious money, serious infrastructure, and potentially serious influence.
Final Thoughts
This reform could reshape India’s nuclear future. It’s a high-stakes move: rewrite a law rooted in tragedy to power a cleaner tomorrow. But as always, the devil is in the fine print—and in who bears the cost when things go wrong.
As India shifts toward nuclear energy, one thing’s clear: liability can’t be infinite, but neither can accountability vanish.
