Looming power crisis (The BNPP option?)

The Department of Energy and the private sector understandably are concerned about possible power shortages unless new base loads are added to the power generation capacity.

The GDP growth which has been among the highest in the region requires that more power generating capacity must be installed at an even faster rate. Power availability is a major requirement for economic growth.

While we are able to attract more investments despite having one of the highest power costs in the region, inadequate capacity will practically turn off even the most serious of investors.

Current power shortages in Mindanao result in rotating brownouts, while pressures are already being felt in the major islands in Negros, and Panay plus some other key potentially industrial areas.

The Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP)

Given the looming power crisis facing a projected high economic growth, certain groups are pushing for the activation of the mothballed BNPP which has been idle for about 30 years. Let us consider the claimed possible advantages of operating the 600 MW plant:

A) A nuclear power plant does not produce the greenhouse gases that cause global warming.

B) It will produce power cheaper than the current conventional thermal plants and the coal fired power plants.

C) The cost of BNPP has been paid for and therefore already considered “sunk cost”.

D) Refurbishing the nuclear plant is a private sector initiative that will not require government spending.

Let us now pose some relevant issues about the possible operations of BNPP:

A) It is true that a nuclear power plant will not emit harmful gases that fossil plants do.

B) “Cheaper power cost” might not be as cheap when we consider cost provisions that must be made for very strict safety regulatory requirements, for accident preparedness, for nuclear waste disposal, and ultimate cost of decommissioning when the time comes. These are not direct operating costs – but have to be built in the power costing.

C) While it may be true that the government will not pay for the billions of pesos needed to refurbish the mothballed plant, ultimately the consumers will have to pay for the power charge which may not be as cheap as initially estimated.

Risk and safety considerations

What are the issues we need to consider in having the 30-year-old mothballed nuclear plant operate?

A) The issue is NOT technical nor is it about the capabilities of Filipino engineers to operate it. Filipino engineers can run it.

B) There is a tendency to underestimate the risks of catastrophic events until they happen – earthquakes, typhoons, floods, even terrorism.

C) Disposal of nuclear wastes is a major risk. Even the US nuclear power plants are facing problems of storage and processing of nuclear wastes.

National capacity to deal with nuclear accident disaster

Consider how we could have dealt with the following nuclear accidents, if something similar happened here.

A) The “Three Mile Island Accident” in the US in 1979.

A large percentage of the population around the plant had to be relocated. The plant remains shut down. No new nuclear plant has been allowed in the US since 1979.

B) The Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Russia in 1986 may be too massive for comparison, but nevertheless is a warning about the “impossible” happening. Health hazards due to radioactive contaminations still abound thousand of kilometers away from the accident site.

C) The First Nuclear Power Plant in Shihmen in Taiwan has been leaking radioactive water for three years (PDI, Aug. 13, 2013)

D) The Fukushima Nuclear Plant catastrophe of 2011. Until now the problem of leaking radioactive water has not been solved. A large area of several square kilometers around the plants remain off limits while contaminated top soil is being dug up and transferred to safe storage areas. The cleanup of the plant and the surrounding community is estimated to take 40 years and cost $11 billion. Meantime, residents of a large contaminated area cannot return to their homes. (Business World, Aug. 8, 2013)

Other Related Nuclear Issues

A) It has been reported recently that several nuclear power plants in Korea have been shut down and there is an ongoing national debate about nuclear power plants.

B) Similar debates about nuclear power plants have been reported in Taiwan.

C) Germany has decided that there will be no more nuclear power plants for power generation.

Options without BNPP

The Department of Energy annually makes moving five-year plans to address anticipated power needs.

Addressing immediate needs

A) If there are still “mothballed” fossil fuel plants that can be refurbished in one or two years – they should be operated to deal with peak loads in the meantime.

B) “Cleaner” coal are available that would allow for new coal fired power plants to be installed with less harmful impact on global warming.

C) Optimize the use of geothermal and hydro plants by improving preventive maintenance.

D) More power plants using natural gas can be installed.

E) For smaller islands and urban areas far from the power grid – develop small power plants using “waste to energy” technology, and similar small capacity technology plants.

Addressing long term needs

A) Harness wind power as many proponents have already started. Many countries have already increased generating capacity utilizing wind power.

B) Solar power has been installed in countries with less sunny days available annually than our country. This should be encouraged.

C) Biomass can be profitably used by some industrial enterprise for self-sufficiency.

D) The future of fuel cells must be pursued with government supported research

Conclusions

The whole world is now re-examining the claimed benefits of “clean energy” through nuclear power plants. The presumed cheaper generation costs are subject to review when taking into consideration provisions for very tight safety regulations, provisions for potential accident related costs and disposal of nuclear wastes.

Considering the recent series of events involving nuclear accidents in the region, particularly the Fukushima catastrophe that continues to hound the world, spending billions of pesos to refurbish and operate BNPP may not be appropriate at this time.

The Risk evaluation and Safety considerations dictate that lives of Filipinos cannot be compromised for some additional power capacity.

We barely have the resources to cope with disasters like floods, typhoons, earthquakes, much less a nuclear accident. The Bohol earthquake of Oct. 15, 2013 is a “wake up call “ about fault lines in Luzon.

It would me a major catastrophe if the “impossible” set of events happens when a nuclear plant accident coincides with a major earthquake or a super typhoon or floods around the location of the power plant.

It is time for all of us to think of the risks and consequences of an “impossible event” which has happened in other countries.

Are we ready for it?

(Filemon T. Berba Jr. is president of the Philippine Foundation for Science and Technology. He is a graduate of Electrical Engineering from UP and an MBA from the Wharton School. He was formerly president of Globe Telecom, Integrated Microelectronics, Inc , Philippine Electric Corp., Manila Water Co. , Westinghouse Asia Controls Corp.)