aldric de ocampo,
Opinion: Too much looking back, not enough moving forward
Photo credit: Cyñl Tecsón
When we hear the term nuclear power, admittedly, what first comes to our minds is the danger of radiation, as in the Fukushima Nuclear Accident and the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster. The prospect of entire cities abandoned, high death tolls, horrific radiation sickness such as cancer and mutations is very real and very scary. This is why most would give a hard pass to the idea of nuclear energy here in the Philippines and/or the activation of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) despite its benefits.
The main opposition to the activation of BNPP claim the following:
1. The BNPP is not safe to activate due to:
a. its proximity to an active volcano
b. its position on top of an active fault line
c. its location's vulnerability to tsunamis and storm surges
d. its structural and design flaws
e. its lack of sufficient safeguards to protect the local populace from the effects of a meltdown
f. its lack of a proper system to dispose of nuclear waste
2. The constitution prohibits the utilization of nuclear power.
3. The cost of operating a nuclear plant does not make it more efficient than conventional fossil fuels.
4. The BNPP is an edifice complex of the Marcos regime and it is merely foreign loans poured into a project that was never meant to be used, just to present the illusion of progress as a means of propaganda.
There is no doubt about the possible harmful outcomes of a nuclear accident, and it is for this reason safeguards and regulations exist. In the words of Benjamin "Uncle Ben" Parker, “With great power, comes great responsibility.” This phrase does not merely refer to figurative power, but also applies to nuclear.
When looking at the BNPP’s safety, one should note that throughout its construction, it was supervised by the Philippine Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC). Even before construction, it was cleared twice of safety issues by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
While the BNPP is built on volcanic byproducts, it is not built on or near an active volcano. It is built 13.2 kilometers from Mount Natib and 22.39 kilometers from Mount Mariveles.
It is estimated that Natib last erupted 18,000 years ago and Mariveles 4,000 years ago. Though PHIVOLCS categorizes these as “Potentially Active” volcanoes, the chances of an eruption in the near future is slim. Even if against all odds, one of them erupts, it is unlikely to have an impact on the BNPP.
As for the BNPP’s “dangerous location,” the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS) has certified that there are no fault lines under the power plant, active or otherwise. It should also be noted that PHIVOLCS found the ground under the BNPP to be exceptionally sturdy.
Even if an earthquake manages to reach the BNPP, it was designed to withstand a seismic load of 0.4g. In addition, even if such an earthquake hits, there are systems to automatically shut down the plant and avert a meltdown or release radioactive material into the environment.
Was that not the case for the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (FDNPP) in Japan, when a 9.0 magnitude earthquake occurred close to it?
The plant automatically shut down after the earthquake, yes. Soon after though, it was devastated by a tsunami, which led to three nuclear meltdowns and the release of radioactive contamination.
It would also be wrong to compare the two power plants for several reasons.
First and foremost, the FDNPP was built in the 1950s, so it had an outdated system compared to the BNPP.
Second, recall the 9.0 magnitude earthquake that hit the FDNPP. The strongest earthquake to hit the Philippines ever recorded was an 8.0 magnitude Mindanao shake in the 19th century.
Third, the earthquake was not what caused the meltdown in the FDNPP, but the subsequent tsunami. If a quake hits the Philippines in Bataan, the BNPP will automatically shut down. As for the tsunami? The wave that hit the FDNPP was, at its peak, 14 meters. The BNPP, on the other hand, is situated 18 meters above sea level.
In addition to those previously mentioned, the BNPP was specially designed to withstand such a situation.
In 1978, an earthquake-tsunami combo hit western Mindanao. President Marcos questioned Westinghouse Corporation, the government contractor building the BNPP, and the National Power Corporation (Napocor) regarding the BNPP’s vulnerability to such an occurrence. They maintained that such issues were addressed when the BNPP’s original location was moved from Bagac, Bataan to the much higher Morong, Bataan.
If the FDNPP is no point for comparison, how about the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (CNPP)?
In April 1986, the Chernobyl disaster occurred in Ukraine, which was then part of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The CNPP experienced a reactor meltdown caused by a breach in the observance of proper procedure and protocol while conducting a test. Because of this, a great amount of people died of ailments caused by radiation exposure such as cancer.
Now, it would be wrong to compare the BNPP to the CNPP because the latter was engineered to produce weapons-grade plutonium aside from electric power; unlike the BNPP which was solely created to meet the country’s energy demands and decrease dependence on imported fuel. The difference here is that structurally, the CNPP had no dome, which contributed to the sudden release of radiation in the explosion, while the BNPP is safely contained.
So what nuclear plants can you really compare the BNPP to?
Possible choices are South Korea's Kori Nuclear Power Plant, Brazil's Angra Nuclear Power Plant, and Slovenia's Krško Nuclear Power Plant. All were built around the same time, by Westinghouse, using the same pressurized water reactor technology. Any defects in the BNPP, if any, would also have likely manifested in the other plants.
All plants were also highly profitable, and by now, have made back their original investment. Aside from a few minor incidents that resulted in no serious harm, these plants have been safe for their entire tour of use.
Also, in 1979, after the Three Mile Island incident in Pennsylvania, United States of America, then President Marcos ordered that the BNPP’s construction be halted and a safety assessment be conducted to ensure that such an event would not happen in the plant.
This assessment was spearheaded by Minister of Justice Ricardo Concepción Puno under the Puno Commission which recommended that, in light of the incident, additional safety measures be added. Shortly after plans were amended to meet the recommendations and to update the construction schedule, construction of the BNPP resumed.
By this assessment, the plant is safe. Its nuclear waste? Even safer.
There are protocols in place to contain nuclear waste in concrete structures underground with no risk of contamination to outside elements. There are even protocols in place to recover said waste. Why? Scientists are now looking into the possibility of using power plant waste as a new form of nuclear fuel. If successful, that means the waste underground is not the end of the process, and there would be even more power generated from its recovery.
While on the topic, there are false claims that say the BNPP should not be used because it is unconstitutional to use nuclear technology.
Indeed, the 1987 Constitution does prohibit the use of nuclear technology in the creation of weapons of mass destruction. Article II, Section 8 says: “The Philippines, consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory.” Other than this line, however, there is no other mention of nuclear technology’s unconstitutionality.
Besides, it would be impossible to completely ban the use of nuclear technology or anything that produces radiation. Medical advancements would be severely hampered: X-rays? Radioactive. Cancer treatment? Radioactive. In fact, smartphones, a common device that this very article may be read from, emits radiation. Even just stepping out of one’s house already leads to solar radiation exposure.
Although many people are scared to have nuclear power plants due to safety concerns, we cannot deny the fact that nuclear power is advantageous in many more ways.
According to Energy Informative, nuclear energy is cost-competitive. Generating electricity in nuclear reactors is cheaper than non-renewable energy sources such as oil, gas, and coal. Nuclear power plants also provide a stable base load of energy that can work synergistic with renewable energy sources such as wind and solar.
Nuclear power’s environmental effects are relatively light compared to other energy harnessing methods as well, so it is beneficial in terms of climate crisis to replace them.
Though it is not renewable, nuclear energy can still be potentially sustainable by use of breeder and fusion reactors. Nuclear fusion, if we learn to control it, can practically produce unlimited energy for consumption.
Lastly, it has high energy density. The amount of energy released in a nuclear fission reaction is estimated to be 10 million times greater than the amount released in burning a fossil fuel atom. As a result, the amount of fuel required in a nuclear power plant is smaller compared to other types of power plants.
Despite these many instances of the BNPP’s merits, there is still the political claim that it is a product of the Marcos regime.
Not to downplay its atrocities, but so what? The plant followed proper procedures, and it is still, at the end of the day, capable of reaping benefits to do immense good. Remember, it was not built using Ferdinand Marcos’ money, but the money of the people; thus, the plant should be used for the people.
The threat of energy shortage has been very real in the Philippines for several decades. In the summer months, and even in some cases the rest of the year, there are rotating brownouts due to the shortage of energy.
With one or two nuclear plants in peak operating capacity, this shortage would be alleviated and the strain on traditional plants would be lessened. Indeed, it would also be cheaper for households across the nation.
The relief has been sitting in Morong, Bataan all along for almost four decades. The longer it sits there, the deeper it gets into the proverbial “mud” and the harder it will be to pull it out. While we still have the opportunity, we should seize it now. After all, better late than never. //by Cedric Creer, Aldric De Ocampo, and Gabe Ulanday
0 comments: