|
On the
heels of the rise in oil prices last year, governments
worldwide scrambled for alternative fuel sources. But
the recent international report, confirming that
carbon-dioxide emission from fossil fuel causes climate
change, turned the search to fever pitch, not only for
alternative, but also for cleaner energy sources.
Thus,
biofuels like ethanol, and renewable sources, such as
wind and solar, became in vogue. Nuclear power,
likewise, is experiencing a renaissance being a cleaner
source of power than fossil fuel.
Global
trend
Nuclear
power is now among the popular options to cut carbon
emissions because it virtually emits no greenhouse
gases. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
said that nuclear power produces only 2 grams to 6 grams
of carbon per kilowatt-hour. This is about the same as
wind or solar power, and less than 1 percent of the
amount produced by coal, oil or even natural gas.
Late
last month, British Prime Minister Tony Blair was quoted
by the BBC as telling the members of parliament: “If we
want to have secure energy supplies and reduce
carbon-dioxide emissions, we have got to put the issue
of nuclear power on the agenda.”
At the
same time, a UK Energy White Paper said that there is a
“preliminary view” for more nuclear plants because many
of UK’s nuclear and coal-fired power stations are due to
close within the next 20 years. UK has 19 nuclear
plants.
In the
US, President Bush said in May last year, amid the
soaring price of oil in the US to $3 a gallon, that the
US “must aggressively move forward” in the expansion of
nuclear power, The Los Angeles Times said.
Bush
made his pitch in terms of economic and national
security, and described nuclear power as a safe,
environmentally clean alternative to reliance on natural
gas and coal to generate electricity. US has 103 nuclear
reactors.
Construction of nuclear-power generating facilities in
the US has been on hold since the 1970s after the March
28, 1979 nuclear accident at Three Mile Island in
Pennsylvania. The accident, however, did not release
radioactivity to the environment and no one was injured
or contaminated.
For
China, its nuclear power plant-construction binge is
inspired more by its fast-growing economy, which
requires more energy.
The
Washington Post reported last month that Beijing, which
already has 10 nuclear plants, announced its plans to
spend $50 billion to build 32 nuclear plants by 2020. It
was also said that the country will build 300 more by
the middle of the century—not much less than the
generating power of all the nuclear plants in the world
today.
The IAEA
web site says that there are 437 nuclear power plants in
operation in 30 countries with a total net installed
capacity of 370.708 GW(e), supplying 16 percent of all
electricity generated in the world. At the same time, 30
nuclear power plants are under construction in 14
countries.
Among
the Philippines’ closest neighbors, Taiwan has six
nuclear power reactors in operation, with two under
construction; Vietnam is planning to construct two
nuclear power plants, while Indonesia is planning for
four.
Philippine energy options
The
Philippines did its share in the search for alternative
fuel sources and in its pursuit for energy independence
and adequate energy supply. This saw the birth of the
Biofuels Act in January 2007.
The law
mandates a minimum 1-percent blend of biodiesel into all
diesel engine fuels within three months from the
effectivity of the Act in February 2007, and that at
least 5-percent bioethanol for the annual total volume
of gasoline fuel sold in the country within two years.
With this came the intense activity in the production of
coco methyl-ester, also known as coco-diesel, and in the
research on Jatropha oil and in ethanol sources.
The
government is also pushing for the harnessing of
renewable energy sources, with a bill in Congress for
its consideration.
To
broaden its energy mix, the government is also
considering nuclear energy as an “option” to meet its
increasing energy demand. The country’s nuclear
“revisit” came 20 years after the Bataan Nuclear Power
Plant (BNPP)—which was then 90-percent complete and
awaiting operation—was mothballed in 1986 amid strong
opposition.
In July
last year, the Philippine government, through the
Department of Science and Technology (DOST), said that
nuclear energy is included in the long-term
energy-development program of the Arroyo administration,
together with coal, geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and
natural gas.
At the
Asean Summit in
Cebu City
in January, President Arroyo herself said the Asean
leaders stressed on the need for member-nations to
improve energy-use efficiency, and diversify energy
supply through the development of alternative energy
sources, such as biofuels and “civilian nuclear power.”
Early
this month, the DOST, through the Philippine Nuclear
Research Institute (PNRI), announced in a forum the
government is assessing its capability in using nuclear
energy as part of a mix of energy sources. It said that
a site to build a nuclear power plant is being scouted,
but the focus of its work now is building the human
resource needed to man a nuclear power plant.
Assessing capability
PNRI
director Alumanda de la Rosa and Science Undersecretary
Graciano Yumul stressed in the forum that—with the
assessment still being made and with the development of
human resource—the administration is yet to make its
decision on when to construct a nuclear power plant. No
timetable has been set for it.
Yumul
explained that it is dangerous to set up a nuclear power
program if the manpower to man it is not yet in place.
“Putting up a nuclear plant is easy. Buying a nuclear
fuel is easy. But maintaining, making sure that the
plant is safe, is something that our experts should
ensure. DOST is preparing for that. That is why even if
the government still has no definite policy in going
nuclear, the DOST is looking toward that eventuality by
training our experts,” he said partly in Filipino.
De la
Rosa told BusinessMirror at the sidelines of the forum
that it will need 10 to 15 years preparation to put up a
nuclear power plant. This will involve requirements like
the preparation for the site, human resource
development, choosing of the type of nuclear power plant
and public education and information.
Energy
Secretary Raphael P.M. Lotilla also clarified later that
under the 25-year development plan of the Ramos
administration nuclear power will be considered for the
period after 2022.
Will
nuclear solve the country’s energy problem?
“The
answer is a big no,” Yumul said, adding that the
government is considering an energy mix that will
include nuclear power.
Lotilla
also told reporters at the sidelines of a
seminar-workshop on nuclear power on Wednesday organized
by the National Academy of Science and Technology that
while preparing for a nuclear option, the government
must not be distracted from implementing its short- and
medium-term energy options from indigenous and renewable
sources “because these are the ones that we will be able
to implement.”
“What if
the technology development for renewables, for example,
allow the cost of power to go down significantly, it may
make nuclear option academic,” he said.
Stressing the need to develop human resources, Lotilla
told the seminar-workshop: “The decision [to construct a
nuclear power plant] may not necessarily fall into our
[Arroyo administration] hands, but we will not be
faulted for not having prepared the country for making
that decision at the appropriate time.”
Philippine Nuclear Power Steering Committee
In her
presentation, titled “Powering the future: Nuclear Power
for Sustainable Development in the Philippines,” de la
Rosa said that the Philippine government revisited the
use of nuclear energy during the Ramos administration.
It came when the country experienced severe power
interruptions in the early 1990s.
President Ramos created the multi-agency Nuclear Power
Steering Committee (NPSC) in 1995 under Executive Order
243. It is chaired by the Department of Energy (DOE) and
cochaired by the DOST.
Among
the NPSC’s recommendations in 1998 was the formulation
of the Philippine Energy Plan, as revised for the
planning period 1998 to 2035, which provides a window
for the nuclear-energy option between 2021 and 2025.
De la
Rosa said that the NPSC recommended that nuclear energy
“will remain as an option” that the government may take
in meeting the increasing energy demand in the future,
unless other alternative energy systems would come
within the framework of availability/sustainability,
affordability and environment-compatibility of the
energy supply.
The
committee also recommended to start building public
understanding and appreciation of nuclear energy,
undertake an extensive human resource development on
nuclear science and technology, and work on radioactive
waste management.
Focus:
Human resource development
After
being sidelined since 1998, under the Estrada
administration until last year, the government has not
acted upon the recommendations of the NPSC.
When
asked if the Arroyo administration is adopting the NPSC
recommendations, de la Rosa said, “We are into an
assessment phase. We are to assess the different factors
before we decide to go nuclear.”
“Part of
this assessment is to look at whether we have the human
resources to carry out a nuclear power program. This is
a major consideration and we should work toward coming
out with human resource development (HRD) program,” de
la Rosa said.
She
explained that since the mothballing of the BNPP, no new
manpower was trained in nuclear power technology and
most of those trained have retired or have gone abroad.
“The attrition has depleted the pool of trained
manpower.”
The
current coordinating body on nuclear energy is also
chaired by the DOE and cochaired by the DOST.
Manpower
requirement
De la
Rosa said that a regulatory body for nuclear power plant
will require about 150 experts, the same number is also
needed for research and development, and 230 to 500
manpower for utility.
However,
she told BusinessMirror in a separate interview that the
current total of 235 to 240 staff of PNRI—from 300
because of the government program of rationalization of
personnel—only 35 to 40 are regulatory experts.
And
since there is no nuclear plant to work on, the PNRI is
now focused on nonnuclear power applications, such as in
the fields of health (the use of radioactive materials
in nuclear medicine and radiological therapy), industry
(nucleonic control systems like that which determines
the thickness of cigarette paper used), in research
organizations and in universities.
She said
if the government is opting to use nuclear energy, the
human resource development would involve the retraining
of the staff in nuclear energy and the hiring of new
people to meet the number of manpower required. The
training could be done through scholarships or
on-the-job training [OJT] in nuclear power plants
abroad.
“These
experts are still with us, especially those in the
radiation protection, where we have our strength until
now. But in other aspects, like in new types of nuclear
plants now, which is the heart of nuclear power, we need
to have people to go on graduate studies or OJT,” she
said.
“Our
work force of 35 to 40 [regulatory experts] is just
enough for our current nonnuclear work. If we to go
nuclear, we have to double or triple that experts say.”
She said
new personnel can be hired from the new graduates or
others who have good foundation in engineering and basic
sciences. The University of the Philippines, which
stopped offering a masters program in nuclear
engineering when the operation of BNPP was stopped, may
offer subjects in nuclear engineering in its engineering
course.
De la
Rosa stressed that HRD in nuclear energy is one of the
biggest problems even in developed countries. “Their
concern is that with this renewed interest in nuke
power, where shall we get the human resources to
undertake the renewed interest in nuclear power? It’s
worldwide but we have to do something.”
She told
BusinessMirror that the DOST has started this year in
accelerating its human resource development program,
including in nuclear science and technology. The PNRI
has availed itself of this program for a scholarship of
five of its personnel on nuclear technology.
“We
believe in the capacity of the Filipino scientists and
engineers to handle an advanced technology like nuclear
power given the appropriate training, motivation and
support,” de la Rosa said.
How long
should the manpower be trained in preparation for the
construction of a nuclear power plant?
De la
Rosa said that training and retraining of manpower can
be made within four to five years at the same time as
selecting a site for a nuclear plant is also being
pursued.
BNPP is
a ‘Mercedes -Benz’
De la
Rosa said the BNPP in Morong,
Bataan, is not among the 10 sites in the country considered by the
NPSC to put up a nuclear power plant.
Some say
that it is not safe because it is near Mount Pinatubo,
and because of the people’s opposition to the power
plant in the mid-1980s.
But some
experts, consider BNPP a “Mercedes-Benz,” de la Rosa
said, because its structure was built to withstand
earthquakes, as shown by its not having been damaged by
the Pinatubo eruption. She said that a team of experts
have to check the structure of the power plant to
determine if it is suitable to use.
Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology
director Renato Solidum told the forum that there is no
active fault line in the area. He stressed that if there
is a fault line, “the only hazard [to a nuclear power
plant] is ground shaking which could be prevented by
engineering design.”
Japanese
nuclear energy expert Sueo Machi supported the idea of
considering the BNPP as a possible site and have it
checked for its viability. He told BusinessMirror that
the Philippine government could even save money for
preparing a site because there is already a ready site,
the BNPP.
He said
that
Japan has 55 nuclear power plants and despite the
earthquakes that visited the country, no nuclear
accident has occurred because of the robust design of
the nuclear reactors
Former
Energy secretary Geronimo Velasco—under whose term the
BNPP was constructed—supported the viability of BNPP,
saying that one could not construct a nuclear power
plant without the approval of the IAEA.
Among
the factors that are being considered in choosing a site
for a nuclear power plant are its remoteness, sparse
population, availability of cooling water, geology and
seismicity, sociological and political considerations. |
