You are on page 1of 3

INTRO

The mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power


Plant (BNPP) has been in the spotlight
since the Department of Energy (DOE)
admitted they are looking at the possibility
of utilizing nuclear energy to augment the
countrys power supply as our growth rate
progresses.
The Philippines has the second highest
electricity rate in Asia next to Japan. The
DOE estimates that we will need an
additional 10, 191 megawatts (MW) of
power to meet the countrys demands
until 2030.
Energy secretary Alfonso Cusi said 7, 200
MW will be coming from baseload plants
and 2, 931 MW will be supplied by midmerit or peaking plants.
The private sector places the countrys
current power requirement at 11, 500 MW,
which can increase to 14, 000 MW in five
years and 17, 500 MW in 10 years.

MOTHBALLING THE BNPP


The construction of the BNPP began in
1976 and was 98% complete in 1984.
It is the first plant to be built in South East
Asia.
It took 10 years to build but is now on
"preservation mode" since 1986. The
project was mothballed because of the
Chernobyl disaster in 1986 and Fukushima
nuclear plant incident in 2011.
Until now, the government continues to
pay 40 million to 50 million a year to
maintain it.
The Philippines completed the payment of
the $2.3-billion debt that had been used to
fund the BNPP's construction.

RECONSTRUCTION COSTS AND


ISSUES/FINANCIAL ISSUES
Owner and operator National Power
Corporation (NAPOCOR) signed a
memorandum of understanding with the
Korean Electric Power Company (KEPCO)
to assess the viability of harnessing
alternative energy in the aging station.
It would take $1 billion spread over 4
years to restore the BNPP, the study
concluded. 80% of the plant and
equipment needed overhauling. The rest
had to be replaced.
Other findings are that 24% of about
6,000 plant systems and equipment will
need to be replaced. With that, the BNPP
can be rehabilitated successfully.
Ben Muni, Greenpeace Climate and Energy
Campaigner, called it an "expensive
distraction" and argues that the proposed
$1-billion can instead be invested into
renewable energy, lessening the hazards
of nuclear energy.
Getting rid and disposal of the nuclear
waste is a problem as one of the hazards
identified, it is near our fault line, near the
Mount Samat area and as shown by later
technical audits of the BNPP in the post
Marcos era.

Yes, nuclear fuel is way cheaper than coal.


But I doubt if the cost will stay the same in
the next 15 to 20 years. Uranium, which is
the fuel source (of nuclear power plants),
it's only found in very few countries. We
will be at the mercy of market forces.

SAFETY CONCERNS
The BNPP Site has an unacceptably high
risk of serious damage from earthquakes,
volcanism, or both. Geological studies and
findings of Cabato et. al. conclude that
plants vicinity is filled with tectonic and
volcanic activity that poses a great threat
to the publics safety. The plant is in the
vicinity of Manila Trench Luzon Trough
tectonic structures, and risks being at the
epicenter of high magnitude earthquakes.
The plant sits on Mt. Natib, a calderaforming volcano with very powerful
eruptions separated by long repose
periods. If Natib erupts, pyroclastic flows
could overwhelm Napot Point. Subic Bay,
west of Mt. Natib, has faults that are
actively roughly every 2,000 years, and
the last activity was 3,000 years ago.
Undersea faulting could generate large
tsunamis that would overwhelm the
nuclear plant, which is situated near the
shoreline because its operation would
require large amounts of cooling water.
The Lubao Lineament, suspected to be a
fault, may also extend under Mt. Natib.
Should BNPP be rehabilitated, it will
violate the IAEA Provisional Safety
Standards Series no. 1 Volcanoes and
associated topics in relation to nuclear
power plant siting. Reviving the BNPP
without a resolution to these scientific
concerns will put the larger public in grave
danger of nuclear and geological
catastrophes.

SOCIAL ASPECTS
People of all levels, politicians,
environmentalists, students, different
organizations, have separate views about
the revival of the BNPP. The fact that it is
one of the projects of the late president
Ferdinand Marcos, who allegedly received

$80 million in kickbacks from the plant


developer Westinghouse, already breaks
the people apart. And we cannot say that
most of us are unaware of the Chernobyl
incident in Ukraine (1986) and 25 years
after, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
disaster which was considered the worst
nuclear crisis since Chernobyl. Fear of that
happening to our country once the
operation of the BNPP is approved already
creates different opinion from us Filipinos.

ALTERNATIVES
Hydropower (dams), geothermal power
(leyte, negros), wind power (ilocos), solar
power (joining bids in Dubai, US, Mexico)
and biomass power (biomass fuel).
Liquefied natural gas (malampaya 2023
20-30% of total reqs)

REFERENCES
http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2016/09/0
1/nuclear-power-bataan-powerplantalternative-source-energy-senate-powercrisis.html
http://www.rappler.com/trending/
%20Filemon%20T%20Berba%20Jr
http://powerphilippines.com/2016/09/19/pr
os-cons-reopening-bataan-nuclear-powerplant/
https://notobnpp.wordpress.com/2009/02/
01/seven-reasons-against-the-revival-ofbnpp/
http://www.yonip.com/is-the-bataannuclear-power-plant-safe-by-professorroland-g-simbulan/