Rosatom on Tuesday has addressed concerns raised in Bangladeshi media regarding cost discrepancies between the Rooppur and Kudankulam nuclear power plants.

The company emphasized that project costs are confidential and direct comparisons are flawed.

"Comparing Rooppur's initial units to Kudankulam's later ones ignores key differences," a Rosatom spokesperson stated."Kudankulam already had extensive infrastructure in place, while Rooppur required building from the ground up."

Contractual variations also play a role, said the spokesperson, pointing out that Rooppur's contract is comprehensive, encompassing construction and commissioning, whereas India's covers only engineering and procurement.

Construction and commissioning costs at Kudankulam, borne by India, aren't reflected in the Rosatom deal, the spokesperson added.

Rosatom urged for a more informed understanding of the projects, emphasizing that simplistic cost comparisons can be misleading.

Key differences in site conditions, weather, and infrastructure availability exist between India and Bangladesh, significantly impacting construction costs.

India's Kudankulam site, situated on rock, required less extensive soil stabilization compared to Rooppur, which is built on a riverbank. This necessitates labor-intensive groundwork in Bangladesh, said the press statement.

Further, said the statement, as Bangladesh's first nuclear power plant, Rooppur required extensive preliminary studies and infrastructure development, unlike Kudankulam's later units which benefited from existing groundwork.

Logistics and transport infrastructure, established during Kudankulam's initial phase, are still under development at Rooppur, adding to project complexity and cost.

These factors highlight the unique challenges faced by the Rooppur project, making direct cost comparisons with Kudankulam misleading.

Training for blue-collar workers and engineers, incorporated into the initial phase of India's nuclear power plant, is included in Bangladesh's current contract, contributing to the cost difference, the statement added.

India also benefits from increased localization of equipment production and design, lowering project costs by eliminating long-distance transportation expenses and shifting some equipment supply responsibility from Russia to India.

While equipment costs are comparable between the two projects, variations in construction and installation costs are the primary drivers of the contract price difference.

____