Nuclear power in ASEAN

Donaldson Tan

The Governor of Banten Province, Ratu Atut Chosiyah, revealed in August 2008 that the Indonesian government is planning to build a 4,000 MW nuclear power plant in Banten Province. Indonesia’s national agency of nuclear energy (BATAN) is currently undertaking a study to verify the right location for the power plant whereas the provincial government has already indicated full support. Construction is expected to start in 2010.

However, Indonesia is not alone in ASEAN in the pursuit of nuclear power. Vietnam’s civilian nuclear power program dates back all the way to 1976, and it aims to have an operational 4,000 MW nuclear power plant by 2020. Malaysia foresees two nuclear plants by 2020, and Thailand began feasibility studies for nuclear power in March 2008, with the apparent aim of having a plant operational by 2020. The Philippines completed construction of the 621 MW Bataan Nuclear Power Plant in 1984 but it was never commissioned.

Why nuclear power for ASEAN?

Why Indonesia and other energy-resource-rich ASEAN states would need a nuclear power plant might look baffling to some. Despite Indonesia being the 2nd biggest LNG exporter in the world, Indonesia’s LNG export volume has been showing strains from growing domestic consumption. Natural gas is an extremely popular fuel for electricity generation at home and internationally. It is clean-burning and also much more energy efficient as a fuel than fuel oil and coal.

There is a substantial demand for natural gas from countries such as the EU-27 and the United States who are committed to reduce its green house gas emissions. One has to balance the needs of foreign investors who invested heavily into the domestic oil industry and the energy needs of the non-hydrocarbon domestic industries. On the other hand, diversifying domestic energy sources for energy security is also important in managing the nation’s exposure to volatile energy markets.


Breakdown of Power Generation Cost (05/2008)

From a financial perspective, the price of fossil fuel in a conventional power plant accounts for 77-93% of the total generation costs while the price of fuel in a nuclear power plant accounts for 27% of the total generation costs. This means a nuclear power plant is much less susceptible to fluctuations and sky-rocketing of commodity prices in the global energy marketplace. Yet at the same time, nuclear power does not contribute to global warming and acid rain. Studies from University of Chicago have shown that even if the price of uranium went up, total power generation costs would increase by at most 7%.

Coincidentally, Indonesia has somewhat of a domestic buffer against the supply uncertainty in the international uranium market. There are 2 established uranium mines in West Kalimantan and since 1991, Indonesia has been able to fabricate nuclear fuel elements from its domestic uranium ores. Indonesia is the most advanced ASEAN country in implementing the nuclear fuel cycle.

Remember the Chernobyl Disaster

Given Singapore’s limited land area and high population density, the Ministry of Trade & Industry (MTI) has concluded that nuclear power is not feasible for Singapore. However, our proximity to our ASEAN neighbours does not shield us from nuclear plant accidents and environmental fall-outs arising from the disposal of nuclear wastes.

The 1986 Chernobyl Disaster is the biggest nuclear power plant accident in the world. It provoked a radioactive cloud that originated from modern-day Ukraine and floated all over continental Europe and the United Kingdom. The health and ecological aspect of the Chernobyl Disaster is widely known but the incident is a social disaster too.

Former residents from Chernobyl were regarded as dirty and were socially rejected in many places for a variety of reasons such as increased competition within the localised job market and that a good number of them were visually sickly due to the radiation. This has created a generation of psychological trauma and inferiority complex amongst the former Chernobyl residents and their children. The City of Chernobyl remains uninhabited today.

Nuclear geopolitics in ASEAN

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 raised much concern amongst the ASEAN community for the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Looking back into history, it is interesting to note that Indonesia, under President Sukarno, had a short-lived nuclear weapons programme led by Brigadier General Hartono of the Army Ordnance Department in the 1960s. In view of the dual-use nature of nuclear technology, the Secretary-General of ASEAN said “while countries are free to address their energy needs, it would help to reassure nervous neighbours.”

These concerns were finally amalgamated in the Treaty of Bangkok which came into force in 1997. The treaty declares Southeast Asia as a Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone (NWFZ) while it re-affirms the right of each state party to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Notably, concerns over the safety of nuclear power plants and nuclear waste management were addressed. A full-scope safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is required for the pursuit of a civilian nuclear power program.

The sensitive nature of nuclear technology would require regional cooperation to cover its security, technological, economic and environmental aspects. It is a platform for fostering closer ties among ASEAN member states. Perhaps this could be the catalyst for ASEAN integration. After all, Southeast Asia is among the most densely populated region in the world. Embracing nuclear technology in ASEAN would be tying the entire region’s future together. There has been no objection to nuclear power among ASEAN governments and support for nuclear power was re-iterated in the Cebu Declaration on East Asian Energy Security and the Singapore Declaration on Climate Change, Energy and the Environment.

Implication for Singapore

Illegal traffic of nuclear material, components and know-how is an emerging problem. In 2005, IAEA investigation discovered that the AQ Khan’s network had infiltrated into Malaysia where local firms were unknowingly manufacturing centrifuges for clandestine nuclear weapon programs in Libya and North Korea. Dr AQ Khan is credited as the Father of Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons Program. It is logical to expect such problems to grow if nuclear technology were to be made available legally in ASEAN. Regional cooperation in policing of such illegal traffic would be needed, on top of security measures to prevent theft of nuclear materials (including waste) and components at established nuclear facilities in ASEAN.

Illegal centrifuges made in Malaysia for
AQ Khan’s Nuclear Weapons Smuggling Network (2005)

While the Treaty of Bangkok has made provision for the early notification of a nuclear accident, a need to collectively manage the risk of nuclear accident still exists. Although a modern-day Advanced PWR System is one-tenth as likely as the Chernobyl Power Plant to go nuclear, there is still no room for complacency. The establishment of a Nuclear Energy Safety Sub-Sector Network (NES-SSN) was announced during the 13th ASEAN Summit to explore nuclear safety issues in ASEAN. A joint governance framework for nuclear safety and environmental management would be key to allow the peaceful proliferation of nuclear power generation in ASEAN.

Realistically speaking, the risk of a nuclear accident is actively managed by the plant operators, so it is essential that the plant staff are not only competent, but also adhere to international safety standards and culture. The Treaty of Bangkok confers the IAEA as the competent authority to assess the safety standards of the nuclear power plant and competency of the plant staff but it does not require the assessment report to be made public or joint accountability to the entire ASEAN region compulsory.

IAEA Regulations on Safe Transport of Radioactive Material and the UN Convention on Law of the Sea do not offer adequate environmental protection. IAEA Regulations also make no mention if the consignee of the radioactive nuclear waste must be a competent organisation, but leaves this to the domestic laws of the countries involving in the transfer. This is contrary to the Basel Convention on Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, whereby the most stringent requirements of the country involved in the transfer (source, destination, or en-route) would be the default regulatory standard for the transfer. However, the Basel Convention excludes radioactive nuclear waste. Operators of nuclear power plant, nuclear waste disposal sites and nuclear waste transport vessels should be licensed by an ASEAN body to address this concern.

The Treaty of Bangkok attempts to answer this shortcoming by prohibiting the export of radioactive nuclear waste and requiring each state party to dispose radioactive nuclear waste in its territory on land but transferring of nuclear waste across internal waters will happen inevitably in archipelagos such as Indonesia and Philippines. This poses an environmental risk to the important shipping route linking the Straits of Malacca to the South China Sea. A unified ASEAN agency to govern the transfer of radioactive nuclear waste, whether within national boundaries or not, would be the best way to address all stakeholders. This perhaps could be an extended function of the Commission of the Treaty of Bangkok.

Last but not least, the Chernobyl Disaster highlighted the risk of trans-boundary pollution. For years to come after the incident, food import restrictions were in place in many EU countries to minimise the entry of radioactive pollutants into the human food chain. Accidents are not the only source of radioactive pollutants. Radioactive pollutants can also come from poorly managed nuclear waste disposal sites. The threat of trans-boundary pollution is very real. An ASEAN convention on trans-boundary pollution by radioactive substances and an environmental pollution liability directive should be implemented.

Strategic opportunities

MTI has stated that Singapore’s electricity consumption is expected to double by 2027 from 2007 level. Nuclear power generation may not be feasible in Singapore, but it does not necessary exclude Singapore from utilising it. Singapore would be connecting its grid to the Johor and Batam Island under Phase II of the ASEAN Power Grid Project. This is expected to be completed between 2009 and 2014. Through the grid connection, it is possible to receive electricity generated by a nuclear power plant in Batam. Under the Treaty of Bangkok, the national liability of nuclear waste generated by the nuclear power plant falls under Indonesia.

Given the capital intensive nature of nuclear power plants, there are emerging financing opportunities for nuclear power in Southeast Asia. Along with it would be opportunity for growth of vibrant nuclear industry in ASEAN to cover all aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle, from mining uranium, producing yellowcake and synthesising uranium oxide pellets to fabrication of nuclear fuel elements, spent nuclear fuel reprocessing and nuclear waste management.


Nuclear Fuel Cycle

Distributing different stages of the nuclear fuel cycle all over ASEAN would alleviate suspicion of any illegal nuclear weapons program in ASEAN. To illustrate how this works, consider the following: Country 1, without any established uranium mine, would not be able produce highly-enriched uranium without importing uranium from Country 2. Country 2 would be aware of its yellowcake export volume and can make meaningful comparison to Country 1ś export volume of nuclear fuel element to look out for the existence of an illegal nuclear weapons program. If Country 1 has no nuclear power plants, then any investigation carried out by Country 2 to verify the existence of an illegal nuclear weapons program would be simpler. Meanwhile, Country 3, which may or may not has a domestic uranium mine, could import nuclear fuel element from Country 1 for its domestic nuclear power plants without incurring any suspicion for a nuclear weapons program since Country 3 does not have any capability to enrich uranium or produce nuclear fuel elements.

Contrary to popular opinion, stages from mining to fabrication of nuclear fuel elements are actually not hazardous compared to operating a nuclear power plant because nuclear fission and the handling of dangerous radioactive isotopes only occur after the nuclear fuel element has been consumed at the nuclear power plant. Singapore could house some of these operations as a nuclear fuel hub in Southeast Asia.

Conclusion

Nuclear technology provides a platform for ASEAN countries to work together and invest greater trust in each other. Taking a conservative attitude towards the proliferation of nuclear technology impedes progress, but progress comes at a price. While nuclear technology poses security and environmental risks, there are also associated environmental and economic benefits. Properly managing the risk and liability of the emerging nuclear power industry in ASEAN would be key to betterment for a shared nuclear future in ASEAN.


This is written in response to Kompas´ article ¨Nuclear Power Plant will be built in North Coast, Banten¨ dated 5 August 2008. Kompas is the most widely read newspaper in Indonesia and it has a reputation for high-quality writing and investigative journalism.