Nuclear power, tectonic collision zones and climate targets: ASEAN's risky convergence

Following the magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami that hit northern Japan on 11 March, firefighters and troops are continuing to hose water over four reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in an attempt to minimise a meltdown and radioactive leakage.

In the weeks following this quake, several earthquakes measuring between 5.0 and 7.0 on the Richter Scale have occurred in Taiwan, the Philippines, and Afghanistan and most recently in Myanmar.

These earthquakes have on ething in common--the Eurasian plate. The Eurasian plate is a tectonic plate which is under most of Eurasia (consisting of continental Europe and Asia).

The plate is moving at an average speed of 2cm/year (0.8 inches/year), and collisions with the Philippines, Arabian and Indian plates have resulted in the recent regional seismic activity.

Earthquakes are natural occurrences resulting from the shifting of the earth's upper crust and are driven largely by convection currents in the molten hot magma beneath it. The recent string of events following the quake and tsunami in Japan has raised fears and questions about nuclear energy in ASEAN.

Pre-11 March plans for nuclear power in ASEAN

Nuclear energy has been but one of the ways proposed in recent years to help meet ASEAN's energy demand, while at the same time preventing irreversible damage to the environment and runaway climate change. Energy demand in the region has been steadily and rapidly growing, and it is increasingly critical for ASEAN to consider all available and possible sources of energy in order to maintain its growth momentum.

Prior to 11 March, with the exception of Brunei and Lao PDR, every other ASEAN nation had announced plans to undertake nuclear feasibility studies or had started investing in nuclear technology and capacity building to meet their country's growing energy needs. While some people regard ASEAN's exploration into the use of nuclear power as an opportunity for the region's continued growth and cooperation, others remain sceptical about the security and environmental risks which nuclear energy presents.1

In 1995, ASEAN entered into a Treaty on the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone, often referred to as the Bangkok Treaty. This Treaty serves to protect the region from destructive nuclear weapon development and use and has provisions for the early notification of nuclear accidents. It also indicates that State Parties have the freedom and right to use nuclear energy towards economic development and social progress, thereby tying the entire region into a common energy future.

In order for nuclear energy to be fully and readily accepted in the ASEAN community and internationally, issues of cost, safety, waste and proliferation need to be urgently addressed.

More recently, ASEAN announced the ASEAN Plan of Action for Energy Cooperation 2010-2015. This Plan aims to reduce regional energy intensity (energy consumed per dollar of GDP) by at least 8 percent by 2015 from the 2005 level. The plan also sets a strategic goal of having 15 percent of total power capacity installed by 2015 coming from regionally-derived renewable energy.

The 2nd ASEAN Energy Demand Outlook published by the ASEAN Centre for Energy (ACE) and the Institute of Energy Economics, Japan (IEEJ) estimates that nuclear energy will help achieve these targets by contributing 0.9 percent of the regions' total power capacity by 2010 and 1.6 percent in 2030.2 ASEAN energy officials had reportedly been developing systematic plans of action and monitoring mechanisms in light of the announcement. But this was before Japan's nuclear crisis.

Post-11 March ASEAN responses and rationale

As much of Southeast Asia sits astride or is near the "Pacific Ring of Fire", apprehension among the general public over pursuing nuclear energy in this region has become palpable following the 11 March disasters. However, as can be seen from Table 1 which summarises the 10 member states' responses to the events unfolding in Japan, several governments are undeterred.

While Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban formally announced that Thailand will halt plans indefinitely until officials have examined emergency measures and the potential for nuclear plants to become terrorist targets,3Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia have all indicated that they are moving full steam ahead regardless of international scrutiny and concerns pertaining to safety and risks, while the rest have opted to proceed with caution.

Here in Singapore, despite the national target for reducing carbon emissions by 16 percent by the year 2030, the city-state's size renders it impossible to meet the 30km safety radius requirement for construction and operation of a conventional nuclear power plant. Some months ago, the Republic's Ministry for Trade and Industry announced that a pre-feasibility study was being undertaken. Following the disasters in Japan, it recently reassured the public that the nuclear option for this country is still "far away".4

Why are Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia choosing to forge ahead"alternative" energy sources by 2020 and is aggressively moving forward with construction of ASEAN's first 4,000MW nuclear plant to be operational by the same year. The Government envisages 14 nuclear reactors online by 2030.

Malaysia's Prime Minister announced in Copenhagen in December of 2009 a conditional voluntary target of 40 percent reduction by 2020 from the 2005 level on condition that Malaysia receives technology transfer and effective financing from Annex-I nations.

Indonesia has committed a 26 percent (19 percent from the energy sector, 7 percent from forestry and landuse) reduction and up to 41 percent (15 percent from the energy sector, 26 percent from forestry and land use) by 2020 if international assistance is offered.

Conclusion

Whatever the reason for pursuing the nuclear option--be it national climate change and emissions reduction targets and/or a desire to diversify and enhance energy security--Japan's nuclear crisis has indeed complicated Southeast Asia's potential adoption of nuclear power, especially for the countries that are very prone to earthquakes.

With the Eurasian plate constantly ploughing into the Philippine, Arabian and Indian plates, it is safe to assume that ASEAN will never be free of seismic activity. And with the damage from the December 2004 Southeast Asian Tsunami still etched into many people's memories, there is much reason to reconsider nuclear power generation.

Despite the establishment of the ASEAN Nuclear Energy Cooperation Sub Sector Network during the ASEAN Energy Ministers meeting in Vietnam last July, the issues of building up a strong and effective capability base and having in place safeguards and standards have yet to be clearly addressed in the public realm.

Furthermore, ASEAN nuclear geopolitics and tensions have resurfaced with recent claims that Myanmar is embarking on nuclear weapons projects with Russian and Pakistan and this remains a highly sensitive issue that the region should address collectively and not let slide. The sensitive nature of nuclear technology and power plant operation requires greater regional cooperation so as to cover security, technological, economic and environmental aspects.

While regional agreements like the Treaty of Bangkok help govern ASEAN's nuclear path, individual countries lack significant capacity to deal with possible nuclear disasters. The risks of trans-boundary pollution and waste disposal also need to be addressed. Safeguards under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Statute XIII,5 the Regulations on Safe Transport of Radioactive Material and the UN Convention on Law of the Sea all lack specificity. What is needed is a "unified ASEAN agency" that would serve to govern the transfer and disposal of radioactive nuclear waste and address ASEAN-specific nuclear-related risks.

There is much work to be done among ASEAN member states, especially in capacity building, strengthening public information and education, and in institutional, legal and regulatory capabilities relating to nuclear energy for power generation so as to secure a safe nuclear future for the whole of ASEAN.

==================================================

1 D. Tan, "Nuclear Power in ASEAN", Singapore Institute of International Affairs, 2008 at [21 Mar. 2011].

2 ASEAN Centre for Energy and Institute for Energy Economics Japan, The 2nd ASEAN Energy Demand Outlook , 2009 at [23 Mar. 2011].

3 "Thailand Freezes Nuclear Power Plant Plans", The Business Times, 17 Mar. 2011.

4 "Decision on Nuclear Energy Will Take 'a Long Time': MTI", Channel News Asia, 16 Mar. 2011 at [21 Mar. 2011].

5 International Atomic Energy Agency, "Statute of the IAEA", 2011 at [21 Mar. 2011].

6 "Indonesia Ready for Binding Targets on Emissions Reduction", The Jarkata Post, 15 Jan. 2010 at [26 Mar. 2011].

7 "Indonesia Nuclear Reactor Plans to Go Ahead", BBC News, 15 Mar. 2011 at [27 Mar. 2011].

8 "Malaysia Commits to 40% Reduction in Emissions", Malaysian Digest, 18 Dec. 2009 at [27 Mar. 2011].

9 "PM to Meet Industry on Tsunami Impact: Government Warned Against Dismissing Nuclear Power Option", Bangkok Post, 20 Mar. 2011 at [27 Mar. 2011].

11 P. Parameswaran, "Southeast Asia's Nuclear Power Plans: Promises and Perils", 2010 at [27 Mar. 2011].

By : Melissa Low, ESI Energy Analyst