Posted on August 31, 2016
THE
DEPARTMENT of Energy (DoE) is forming a team that will look into the viability
of nuclear energy for the Philippines, focusing on a plan to revive the
mothballed Bataan nuclear power plant at a cost of around $1 billion, its top
official said on Tuesday.
Energy Secretary Alfonso G. Cusi
said a “nuclear policy body” will be created to check the soundness of the
plant, construction of which began in the ’70s but was never completed and put
to any use.
“That is being studied, and in fact we’re going to inspect that on Thursday,” he said in a press briefing on the sidelines of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation (IFNEC) conference at the Diamond Hotel in Manila.
He said initial cost estimates for reviving the Bataan plant and bringing it into commercial operation were at $1 billion.
Mr. Cusi said a separate discussion with nuclear experts was set on Wednesday to “determine [the plant’s] present status.”
The conference, which will discuss the prospects of nuclear power in the Asia-Pacific region in mostly closed-door meetings, began on Tuesday and ends on Thursday.
“I am not against it,” he said, when asked about his stand on nuclear energy for the Philippines. “I am open to it. I even said that at the Senate. As the Energy secretary, it is my duty to study all options to ensure a secured power supply in the coming generation.”
He said the conference is among the steps the DoE was taking as part of its information campaign and to get “a certain consensus” from more than 50 Philippine participants.
He also said a team would be created similar to one formed in a previous attempt to study a nuclear plan. Aside from the DoE, the team will have as members representatives from the National Power Corp. and the Philippine Nuclear Research Institute, he added.
“We are going to revive... and fortify it, to include more stakeholders,” Mr. Cusi said.
Maria Zeneida A. Collinson, Philippine ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary, who was one of those who helped the country’s hosting of the conference, said the opposition to the Bataan nuke plan in the past was more “a question of ethics” and not about the technology.
“But let us not make the mistake in the Philippines of being so afraid of something that is actually useful and beneficial to us, handed properly, cautiously and studied thoroughly,” she said.
The Philippines had a nuclear program when Ferdinand E. Marcos was president in the ’70s. The Bataan plant began construction in 1976, but was stopped after the Three Mile Island accident in the US in 1979. A safety inquiry later disclosed a string of anomalies, including its location which is said to be near a geological fault line.
An attempt to study a nuclear plan was cut short during the term of Energy Secretary Jose Rene D. Almendras after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident happened in Japan on March 11, 2011.
Ms. Collinson said the Fukushima plant was flawed because one of its seven reactors was built deep down in the ground, without contemplating a tsunami happening.
“If they had built that particular reactor above ground, it would have stood as a symbol of what a nuclear plant could withstand,” she said.
She said after the Fukushima incident, Japan shut down its nuclear power plants as a knee-jerk reaction. Four years later, the Japanese government with the consent of the people decided to reopen the plants, excluding Fukushima, she said.
“Japan probably has more catastrophes than the Philippines, similarly in the ring of fire,” she said.
‘SOVEREIGN DECISION’
Asked about the viability of nuclear energy for the Philippines, Mikhail Chudakov, who heads IAEA’s department of nuclear energy, said his organization is not in a position to push a country’s creation of a nuclear power plant.
“This is a sovereign decision of each country,” he said. “Nuclear power is a very important decision and the country should be prepared for this.”
Alex R. Burkart, co-chair of IFNEC’s infrastructure development working group, said the choice of what energy mix a country uses is a “sovereign decision.”
“We’re not here at IFNEC to influence what your choice is. We have countries that have chosen not to use it. We have a number of countries that have chosen to use it and we have countries that have chosen to expand their choice of it,” he said.
IAEA is the world’s central intergovernmental forum for scientific and technical cooperation in the nuclear field. IFNEC is a forum for cooperation in the safe and peaceful use of nuclear energy.
Asked whether a law is needed for a nuclear plan for the country, Senator Aquilino L. Pimentel III said the “big amount” of $1 billion quoted by Mr. Cusi to commercially operate the Bataan plant would need legislation.
“We will have to pass this kind of a law,” Mr. Pimentel said, referring to the DoE’s nuclear energy policy.
Mr. Cusi said the plan would be presented to President Rodrigo R. Duterte when finished. He also said that nuclear, as part of the proposed energy mix under the Philippine Energy Plan for 2016 to 2030, would be among sources to boost the country’s baseload power. Under the law, the DoE is required to present an energy plan on the 15th of September of each year.
“That is being studied, and in fact we’re going to inspect that on Thursday,” he said in a press briefing on the sidelines of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation (IFNEC) conference at the Diamond Hotel in Manila.
He said initial cost estimates for reviving the Bataan plant and bringing it into commercial operation were at $1 billion.
Mr. Cusi said a separate discussion with nuclear experts was set on Wednesday to “determine [the plant’s] present status.”
The conference, which will discuss the prospects of nuclear power in the Asia-Pacific region in mostly closed-door meetings, began on Tuesday and ends on Thursday.
“I am not against it,” he said, when asked about his stand on nuclear energy for the Philippines. “I am open to it. I even said that at the Senate. As the Energy secretary, it is my duty to study all options to ensure a secured power supply in the coming generation.”
He said the conference is among the steps the DoE was taking as part of its information campaign and to get “a certain consensus” from more than 50 Philippine participants.
He also said a team would be created similar to one formed in a previous attempt to study a nuclear plan. Aside from the DoE, the team will have as members representatives from the National Power Corp. and the Philippine Nuclear Research Institute, he added.
“We are going to revive... and fortify it, to include more stakeholders,” Mr. Cusi said.
Maria Zeneida A. Collinson, Philippine ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary, who was one of those who helped the country’s hosting of the conference, said the opposition to the Bataan nuke plan in the past was more “a question of ethics” and not about the technology.
“But let us not make the mistake in the Philippines of being so afraid of something that is actually useful and beneficial to us, handed properly, cautiously and studied thoroughly,” she said.
The Philippines had a nuclear program when Ferdinand E. Marcos was president in the ’70s. The Bataan plant began construction in 1976, but was stopped after the Three Mile Island accident in the US in 1979. A safety inquiry later disclosed a string of anomalies, including its location which is said to be near a geological fault line.
An attempt to study a nuclear plan was cut short during the term of Energy Secretary Jose Rene D. Almendras after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident happened in Japan on March 11, 2011.
Ms. Collinson said the Fukushima plant was flawed because one of its seven reactors was built deep down in the ground, without contemplating a tsunami happening.
“If they had built that particular reactor above ground, it would have stood as a symbol of what a nuclear plant could withstand,” she said.
She said after the Fukushima incident, Japan shut down its nuclear power plants as a knee-jerk reaction. Four years later, the Japanese government with the consent of the people decided to reopen the plants, excluding Fukushima, she said.
“Japan probably has more catastrophes than the Philippines, similarly in the ring of fire,” she said.
‘SOVEREIGN DECISION’
Asked about the viability of nuclear energy for the Philippines, Mikhail Chudakov, who heads IAEA’s department of nuclear energy, said his organization is not in a position to push a country’s creation of a nuclear power plant.
“This is a sovereign decision of each country,” he said. “Nuclear power is a very important decision and the country should be prepared for this.”
Alex R. Burkart, co-chair of IFNEC’s infrastructure development working group, said the choice of what energy mix a country uses is a “sovereign decision.”
“We’re not here at IFNEC to influence what your choice is. We have countries that have chosen not to use it. We have a number of countries that have chosen to use it and we have countries that have chosen to expand their choice of it,” he said.
IAEA is the world’s central intergovernmental forum for scientific and technical cooperation in the nuclear field. IFNEC is a forum for cooperation in the safe and peaceful use of nuclear energy.
Asked whether a law is needed for a nuclear plan for the country, Senator Aquilino L. Pimentel III said the “big amount” of $1 billion quoted by Mr. Cusi to commercially operate the Bataan plant would need legislation.
“We will have to pass this kind of a law,” Mr. Pimentel said, referring to the DoE’s nuclear energy policy.
Mr. Cusi said the plan would be presented to President Rodrigo R. Duterte when finished. He also said that nuclear, as part of the proposed energy mix under the Philippine Energy Plan for 2016 to 2030, would be among sources to boost the country’s baseload power. Under the law, the DoE is required to present an energy plan on the 15th of September of each year.
No comments:
Post a Comment