Is nuclear the way to go? - Re-opening the debate

By J R Ruaya

Energy and Chemistry Consultant

Recently, the Department of Energy is considering undertaking a comprehensive study on the feasibility of delving into nuclear power generation, upon the recommendation of a United Nations-sanctioned body. This is a clear signal that this government is at least dusting off the nuclear files which have been in limbo since 1986, when the newly-installed government of Corazon C. Aquino shelved the operation of the 620 MW Bataan nuclear power plant in Morong. Energy Secretary Angelo Reyes said the eight-person delegation from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had recommended the conduct of a thorough feasibility study before deciding whether or not to go into nuclear power generation. The core group who wll conduct the two-year study is composed of key experts from the DOE, National Power Corp. and the Philippine Nuclear Research Institute of the Department of Science and Technology. The IAEA group came to the Philippines in January to visit the mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) in Morong and help the government in deciding whether or not to pursue nuclear power generation. The IAEA team would merely make a recommendation on what could be the best options for the government—whether to rehabilitate and refire the BNPP, to convert it to a plant that used another type of fuel, or to just scrap it altogether.

At about the same time during the Philippine Energy Summit held 28-30 January at the SMX Convention center at the Mall of Asia, Dr. Jose O. Juliano of the National Academy of Science and Technology and a long-time advocate of nuclear power, argued for a fresh look at the nuclear option as part of the country's long-term strategy for energy security.

He cited several advantages of nuclear power such as low pollution emissions, small land requirements in contrast to those of hydro and geothermal which require hundreds of hectares of land often in watersheds and protected areas, small fuel and waste volumes which are meticulously managed, and the existence of a proven intermediary storage.

He pointed out that nuclear power is a non-producer of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas allegedly reponsible for global warming, and other airborne pollutants such as particulates, nitrogen oxides and sulfur-bearing gases which are products of coal and fossil fuel burning.

At the same time, he pointed out its inherent disadvantages in which he singled out the problem of nuclear waste disposal. He noted that there is no final repository in operation, high toxicity of processed fuel which need to be isolated for a long time (decades). He added that this could be a potential burden for future generations.

In terms of economics, Juliano cited its advantages which include: NPPs are cheap to operate, has stable and predictable costs, long life time, secure fuel supply (this is debatable) and low external costs. On the flip side, nuclear power needs a high upfront capital cost, can be difficult to finance, costs can be sensitive to interest rates, long lead times, long payback periods and there are regulatory risks to contend with.

In the mid-eighties, there was a marked stagnation of nuclear power development brought about by a confluence of factors, as Juliano noted. The factors he cited include energy efficiency improvements, economic restructuring, drop in electricity demand, excess generating capacity, oil price collapse, advent of highly efficient, cheap gas turbine technology, electricity market liberalization and privatization in many countries, and regulatory intervention after the Three Mile Island incident.

But today is quite different, Juliano argues. Nuclear is already a proven technology that provides clean electricity at predictable and competitive costs, has 12,000 years of accumulated reactor experience, stringent safety standards are in place, and the nuclear industry itself accepts full responsibility for its waste.

Environmentalists and anti-nuclear activists would quickly pounce upon nuclear's environmental hazards of its nuclear waste and safety records. But, argues the nuclear proponents, environmental contamination due to nuclear plants is far negligible compared to say the massive oil spill by Exxon Valdez and to our own Guimaras oil spill. In terms of safety records, one can only point to the hundreds of coal mine deaths and injuries in China and even the United States which dwarf by orders of magnitude the number of casualties in the nuclear industry.

Here in the Philippines, there are other issues that one needs to contend with. The Bataan Nuclear power plant, argues the opponents, sits near an active geologic fault, and a tectonic movement could release devastation radioactive material from the plant. On the other side of the coin, Japan, which uses about 20 % power from nuclear is as tectonically-active, if not more, than the Philippines. Such an issue has not become a rallying point to Japanese nuclear activists. Emotionally, the Japanese would have the strongest argument against nuclear power, having tasted its deadly side during World War II at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

A government agency also pointed out that with the mothballing of the Bataan plant, our trained local talent required to run a nuclear power plant has gone on to greener pastures or morphed into something else. It would take years before a critical mass of talent can be assembled if one is to pursue again the nuclear option.

The Ramos administration, after smarting from the massive brownouts in the early '90s, actually included the nuclear option in its agenda, and targeted year 2022 for the opening of a new nuclear facility. The program took into account ther economic scenario then, and included the development of a pool of nuclear talent.

The twin proposals above effectively opened up an invitation to a fresh look on the nuclear option. Beyond passion and emotional baggages from the Bataan plant, one needs a dispassionate and unencumbered platform from which to view the issues involved.

Let us just make sure that the window we are opening leads to a brighter future and not opening a Pandora's box.