|
Is The Bataan Nuclear Power Plant Safe?
by
Prof. Roland G. Simbulan
Just when we all
thought that the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) in Morong had been
permanently laid to rest by its being mothballed in 1992, now
comes the "BNPP Commissioning Act" a bill in Congress attempting
to revive and operate the controversial nuclear plant that had become
the symbol of corruption and folly of the Marcos dictatorship.
Despite the BNPP's total cost of roughly $2.3
billion including interest, two
previous post-Marcos administrations had decided to permanently mothball
the nuclear plant after a comprehensive scientific and technical audit
that reviewed the condition of the plant from 1986 to 1990 showed that
the safety and health of the Filipino people would be at grave risk
should the plant still be put into operation. Very serious defects were
found in the construction, cover design, quality assurance, and
workmanship of this monument of the Marcos dictatorship's corruption and
folly.
An international group of
U.S. and European scientists, the
National Union of Scientists (NUS) Corporation whose scientists and
engineers are not tied to the nuclear industry found more than 4,000
technical defects in the graft-ridden project which even the Fortune
Magazine branded as a failed project from a fraudulent loan. The NUS
Corporation was commissioned by the Cory Aquino government to do a
technical audit of the BNPP. This last technical study became the basis
why Presidents Cory Aquino and Fidel Ramos decided to permanently
mothball the BNPP, a policy decision finally made in 1993, despite its
tremendous cost. If there will be efforts to commission it after
30 years in hibernation, it will again be the largest contract worth at
least 3 billion dollars at today's costs.
Before we get into any involved debate on this issue
again, there one basic question we have to answer:IS IT SAFE?
Now
more than 30 years after the nuclear power plant was constructed, a new
initiative has again embroiled the Philippine Congress to re-start the
Bataan Nuclear Power Plant. These people should know that nuclear power
plants only have a 30 year old lifespan, and now they want to re-start a
30-year old nuclear power plant? Is it really very hard for some
people to resist the temptation of a gargantuan contract in such an
expensive project? In recent months, and days, negotiated contracts have
been the subject of endless public hearings in the halls of Congress,
and the public perception is strong that out of these multi-million
contracts, certain public officials, their relatives and friends, are
filling up their pockets with at the expense of taxpayers.
They invoke the Constitution's prohibition of nuclear weapons on our
territory in the BNPP Commissioning Act, and yet do they not realize
that nuclear energy from nuclear power reactors are the first major step
in the development of nuclear weapons? They invoke environmental
concerns such as toxic gas emissions and climate change, and yet do they
know that up to now nobody knows how to dispose of the more or less 20
tons of high level radioactive nuclear waste that a 620-megawatts
reactor will produce annually.
Of course the nuclear scientists and engineers who rely on the nuclear
industry for a living will tell us that science and technology will take
care of everything. But they know that even up to now the
decommissioning of nuclear plants with a normal lifespan of only 30
years will even cost more than its construction, as a decommissioned
nuclear plant with its radioactive wastes will continue put risks to
health and safety of the people, as well as threaten the environment. We
will need at least 20-25 years to develop the necessary scientific and
technological infrastructure and national capability to operate a
commercial nuclear power plant to respond to nuclear accidents, plant
upgrades, repairs and maintenance, nuclear waste disposal and other
related problems.
U.S. nuclear engineer Robert Pollard who did his
own inspection of the BNPP in the early 80s after the Three Mile Island
accident in the
United States then concluded that the
BNPP is not safe since it used an old design plagued with unresolved
safety issues, making it a potential hazard to the safety and health of
the public.
This reaffirmed the Puno Commission's report in 1980
that warned of these flaws. The Puno Commission had made the following
conclusions:
1. The
BNPP is not safe.
2. It
is an old design plagued with unresolved safety issues, thus it is a
potential hazard to the health
and safety of the public.
3. Its
design needs fundamental changes and additional safeguards.
4. Its
safety is not assured because no safety devices were installed.
5. The
crucial problem of nuclear waste disposal had not been solved. These
safety issues were never really addressed nor resolved by the contractor
Westinghouse after both the Puno Commission and Dr. Pollard had pointed
them out, as shown by later technical audits of the BNPP in the post
Marcos era.
Dr. Kelvin Rodolfo, a noted geologist and Professor Emeritus from the
University of Illinois has recently warned that, based on his scientific
studies published in International Science Index journals, the BNPP
"sits on Mt. Natib, which is a caldera volcano like Mt. Pinatubo", and
that numerous faults of Mt. Natib were found to be extended to Morong,
Bataan. Undoubtedly, the BNPP was a man-made financial disaster, so let
us not make it into a national disaster.
Humankind continues to pay an enormous health and environmental price
for the development of nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons in many
parts of the world. Diseases related to the "invisible poison" of
radioactive contamination not only from previous nuclear plant
accidents/leakages, and weapons testing but also from the so-called
peaceful uses of nuclear energy in power plants haunt the victims who
suffer from radiation-related diseases. Even countries who pride
themselves on being at the forefront of nuclear technology have
thousands of citizens who are experiencing diseases related to
"low-level radiation."
What
then is the alternative? We have just approved the Renewable Energy Act
of 2008, so let us go on with it instead of distracting ourselves with
new projects like the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant commissioning that will
because of its costs, will only lead to more questionable contracts that
will further drain our country's coffers. Some have suggested, that the
Bataan Nuclear Power Plant in Morong, Bataan be aptly converted into a "never again" Museum on
the Folly and Corruption of the Marcos dictatorship.
The
safety and welfare of the people can better be assured with alternative
sources of energy which excludes non-nuclear options in our energy mix.
We should be tapping nature's bountiful energy sources, especially the
sun and water, energy from wind, waves, tides, oceans, earth
(geothermal) , biomass conversion, and many others. Alternative power
sources especially from nature can liberate us from foreign energy
sources whether its oil or uranium, the fuel for nuclear power plants.
Alternative power sources from nature's bountiful energy sources can
provide most of our energy needs, together with energy-saving technology
at the supply side. It only requires that the nation and its leaders
make the political decision to develop rapidly and expand these
renewable, safe and clean energy sources.
But evidently, some people are again aiming to corner
this gargantuan contract at the expense of the safety and health of the
Filipino people.
___________________________________________________________________
*
The author was the former National Chairperson of the Nuclear
Free-Philippines Coalition (NFPC). He is currently Full Professor in
Development Studies and Public Management at the University of the Philippines
* Article by Roland G Simbulan - For a full
professional background of Professor Roland G. Simbulan (Click
Here)
|
