Recently in Nuclear Energy Category

By Alexander Villafania INQUIRER.NET

MANILA, Philippines – The campaign season is in full swing and so some of the public executives are in hot pursuit of getting voters' attention. This means many topics up for discussion are left unfinished, one of which is on nuclear power that was once hot topic among legislators especially with attempts to reactivate the mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP).

Quietly, while everyone is busy with electioneering, a team of researchers from the Senate Economic Planning Office (SEPO) released their policy brief on the country's nuclear power capabilities.

The policy brief entitled “Powering the Future: Are We Ready for Nuclear Energy” identifies the Philippines' current power resources and requirements, comparative power status with other countries, as well as the local and national regulations that the Philippines has to discuss and enforce before coming up with nuclear policies.

The policy brief was prepared by Harry Pasimio, Jr. and Peter Turingan and finished last September. A downloadable version is found in the official website of the Philippine Senate.

The brief uses reports from local and international reports as well.

It identified that the Philippines' current power demand is pegged at about 9,700 megawatts for the entire country and continues to grow as the population grows.

By 2017, peak power demand would reach at least 13,000 megawatts.

Nearly 50 percent of this power is produced oil and coal based power plants. Another 21 percent is hydroelectric, 17 percent is from natural gas and 12 percent is from geothermal.

However, even with about 30 percent of power produced is coming from renewable energy, the majority of the plants are using fossil fuel, which produces 4,078 metric tons of carbon dioxide per gigawatt-hour.

Carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, is associated with the negative effects of climate change. The Philippine government has also been working to reduce carbon emissions.

The increased power demand and plans to reduce ozone-depleting greenhouse gases are pushing options to look into cost-effective and environment-friendly power sources. Nuclear power thus became a major point of contention from legislators, scientists and environmentalists.

In particular was the proposal by Congressman Mark Cojuangco to revive the BNPP, which drew criticism from some scientists who said that the interpretation of certain scientific results were skewed by Cojuangco to justify the dilapidated plant's reactivation.

Given these situations, the policy brief made one conclusion: that the realization of the country's nuclear plans would take years to complete unless the government implements many measures to ensure that nuclear power is safely established, distributed, disposed and regulated.

“Current efforts in both Houses of Congress to fast track the rehabilitation and operation of the BNPP are akin to putting the cart before the horse. Before the government can operate the BNPP or any other NPP for that matter, it must first undertake the preliminary business of getting its nuclear power program back on track by updating the scientific/technical, legislative, and regulatory frameworks that will guide the development of the country’s nuclear power industry.”

The points raised by the SEPO policy brief already points to a problem that legislators must first act on before rushing into having nuclear power. Hopefully, these points will be remembered by the next set of legislators after next year's elections.

By Alex Villafania INQUIRER.net DESPITE failed attempts in the past to utilize nuclear power in the Philippines, it may still have a future and could prove useful, safe and cost-effective, according to proponents. During a presentation on June 8, executives from the Department of Science and Technology- Philippine Nuclear Research Institute (PNRI) touted the potential of nuclear power, as stated in the Philippine Energy Plan created in the late 1990s. PNRI Director Alumanda De la Rosa said in her report that nuclear technology is one of the energy sources that can be considered for implementation for 2022 to 2025, a three-year window wherein an alternative fuel source can be used for the country’s power requirements. Apart from nuclear power, other alternatives considered were solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, tidal and wind power. “We’re still reviewing all of the options, the advantages of each technology and their disadvantages. So far nuclear power has some good potential. Worldwide, nuclear power and at times hydroelectric power save eight percent in greenhouse emissions annually,” De la Rosa said. Environmental concerns One advantage of nuclear power is that it produces very little carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide elements, or those generally called “greenhouse gases” that destroy the ozone layer. Greenhouse gases are blamed for the increase in global temperature as these trap heat in the atmosphere. These gases are produced largely by burning of fossil fuels but coal-fired and gas-powered plants also contribute to the production of greenhouse gases. De la Rosa said that nearly all of the countries that currently use nuclear energy as power source are compelled to protect the environment by shifting from power plants using fossil fuels to nuclear power. “There are also environmental motivations to using nuclear power because they emit so little greenhouse gases. However, there are also fears about disposing them so we’re currently making studies as to these aspects in using nuclear technology,” De la Rosa said. Philippine plans De la Rosa said the Philippine government had already started considering nuclear technology, beginning with former Philippine President Fidel Ramos creating the Nuclear Power Steering Committee in 1995. Nuclear power was also considered in as part of the Philippine Energy Plan. The most important aspect is developing the manpower to handle nuclear technology. “We have to create more experts; engineers, chemists, physicists, utility professionals and among others. This means working with educational institutions to promote the science of nuclear energy,” De la Rosa said. De la Rosa reminded that there are still many improvements being done for nuclear technology, particularly the type of nuclear power plants that can be built. One such type is called a proliferation-resistant plant, which prevents the creation of fissible material for nuclear weapons. Nonetheless, the idea of using nuclear power also has very sensitive socio-political aspects, particularly with the failure of the utilization of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant during the time of former President Ferdinand Marcos. Also, the nuclear disasters such as Chernobyl in Ukraine and Three Mile Island in the US frighten even advocates of alternative energy. “There is still some need to convince people that nuclear power can become a safer choice. We’re stepping up campaigns to tell people about the potential of nuclear power and the assurances that can be made in its use,” De la Rosa said. Part of the plan is to create a regulatory body that will ensure the proper use of nuclear technology and working with the International Atomic Energy Agency in the disposal of nuclear waste. On the other hand, De la Rosa said nuclear power may or may not be used in the Philippines in the future. Nonetheless, she is optimistic that it could work for everyone’s benefit.