Nuclear energy bandwagon

Business World Online

Posted on 08:53 PM, October 20, 2010

The View From Taft -- By Andrea L. Santiago

The governments of Japan, China, India, South Korea, Thailand, and Vietnam have confirmed their commitment to use nuclear energy. The renewed interest in nuclear energy has come about because of the growing concern over energy pollutants. Climate change has become one of this century’s most important global issues, so government leaders and energy experts have a compelling need to arrest carbon emissions by targeting two major sources -- electricity generation and vehicle mobilization.

In the recent World Energy Congress held in Montreal, Canada, presidents of leading energy companies shared how they have addressed the polluting effects of oil, gas, and coal. They also voiced their commitment to invest more heavily in research efforts to produce environmentally friendly fuel. Already, the World Energy Council reports that modern coal plants emit 40% less carbon dioxide than the average coal plant. Moreover, efforts are being undertaken to go beyond capture and storage. For instance, the SK Energy Institute of Technology in Korea has found the technology to convert CO2 to polymer.

The deliberate effort to address the ill effects of carbon dioxide emission is laudable. After all, the world will continue to use fossil fuels as the primary source of energy. Meanwhile, there is a global conscious effort to invest in renewable energy.

The Philippines itself is globally ranked sixth in terms of renewable energy generation. After all, we are the second largest producer of geothermal power. However, the current supply of energy is insufficient to meet today’s demand, let alone tomorrow’s. While the country has been fortunate with the shift from the energy-intensive manufacturing sector to the BPO-driven service sector, the supply-demand balance continues to tip. Thus, there is a need to consider investment in power generation capacity.

The external pressure to contribute to the arrest of carbon emissions and the internal pressure to invest particularly on base load power have led the Philippine government to consider nuclear energy. While the initial investment cost is high, nuclear energy emits little or no emission and has low maintenance costs. Thus, do we rehabilitate the controversial 620 MW Bataan Nuclear Power Plant mothballed by the late President Cory Aquino, or do we construct a new facility?

Among the main concerns of nuclear power are nuclear fuel supply, radioactive waste management, infrastructure security, and, more importantly, public opinion. I leave the technical aspects to the experts, who can produce data to show that nuclear energy is safe and its waste can be contained. This is especially true for self-contained nuclear power facilities of about 25 MW that can be shipped in and out of the country. But how does one manage the anxieties of Filipinos? Are the anxieties valid?

Possibly the closest source of uranium is Australia and this should address nuclear fuel supply. Yet Australia does not have a single commercial nuclear power plant. Instead, it is dependent on carbon-producing coal and natural gas. To address the pressures of the global environmental crisis, the Australian government has opted to invest in other forms of renewable energy.

The main argument against nuclear power is safety. The government has to assure the citizenry that not only will the facility be safe from leakage, but also that self-interested individuals or groups will not be able to use the radioactive material, sabotage the operations or blow up the nuclear facility in exchange for meeting whatever demands they may have. If government cannot guarantee this, then citizens will protest, and this will delay the construction of nuclear power plants that are exorbitant to build. Perhaps this is why uranium-rich Australia does not even contemplate using its own resource despite pressures to reduce dependence on CO2 emitting alternatives.

In a public forum sponsored by the ECCP and the Shell group of companies, Rep. Henedina Abad relayed that there is a current request for $100 million to study the nuclear power source option. She acknowledges that some countries are investing in nuclear energy, but this alone should not compel us to go the way of nuclear. If indeed there are technical and economic merits to this energy source, perhaps a large portion of the requested funds should go to gaining acceptability. Then again, technical reports alone will not assuage fears. The people must be convinced that the government, known for its poor implementation, can guarantee safety. That, unfortunately, is the bigger battle. If the funding for the study is approved, will it be public money well spent?

Dr. Santiago is an associate professor at the Business Management Department of De La Salle University, where she teaches Corporate Social Responsiveness, Leadership in Organization, Family Business Management, and Human Resource Management. Email: ma.andrea.santiago@dlsu.edu.ph.

The views expressed above are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the official position of De La Salle University, its faculty, and its administrators.