DENN | ENTERING A MODERN LEGACY: THE NUCLEAR ENERGY FOR THE MINDANAO POWER GRID

DENN
12 min readNov 16, 2022

--

Why nuclear power must be part of the energy options?

“Assuming that the world continues to develop, we have 10 billion people living in high energy resource intensive lives” (Shellenberger, 2019).

The Philippines is transitioning to economic recovery after the pandemic, but the increase in electricity demand, shortage of energy, and high electricity prices in Mindanao have put pressure on the Department of Energy (DOE) in 2022. This calls for planning to achieve sustainable energy sources that wean away from traditional ones. To attain inclusive economic growth throughout Mindanao, the DOE presented a mission to provide a secure and resilient energy strategy known as Ambisyon Natin 2040. As part of its mission, the DOE implements the Nuclear Energy Programme (NEP) as mandated by President Duterte in February 2022 (PNRI, 2022). The NEP plans to construct nuclear reactors in Regions IX and XII in the 2040s, taking into account social and environmental objectives (WNN, 2022). The DOE forecasts that the NEP will add more than 1,000 megawatts of power to the Mindanao Energy Grid (MEG). Currently, the DOE eyes 13 areas of Zamboanga del Norte and General Santos City as potential sites for constructing nuclear power plants (NPP) (Doquila, 2018). NPPs have nuclear reactors fueled with uranium-235 that generate heat, boil water, and produce steam. However, uranium-235 is highly feared by the public as its radioactivity can endanger the environment and human health. Despite the dangers of utilizing nuclear power, the DOE should implement the Nuclear Energy Programme (NEP) in Mindanao because it can slash carbon emissions, mitigate the energy crisis in Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM), and the Philippines will be ready for it by 2040.

“Oil is not finite. Someday it will dry up. It will be good for the government to make transition from fossil fuel to nuclear,” President Rodrigo Duterte said during a Cabinet meeting in May 2022.

However, some locals and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the Philippines are opposed to nuclear power since using it introduces the risk of a nuclear catastrophe. Although there is a low likelihood of a nuclear calamity, the public worries that there might be a failure along the way. As a result of the nuclear accidents at Three Mile Island in 1979, Chernobyl in 1986, and Fukushima in 2011, unsafe radiation levels were released over a large area, leading to severe health and environmental issues (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2019). Furthermore, Andal et al. (2022) claim that Filipinos are afraid of radioactive chemicals because they cannot be sensed by human senses. Because of this, residents who live close to potential NPP sites dislike NEP because of the exposure to radioactive materials. Greenpeace, a protest organization, claims that they do not desire a similar conclusion to what occurred in Fukushima, Japan, in 2011. The nuclear power plant there caused 500,000 people to evacuate and resulted in the deaths of nearly 20,000 individuals due to long-term health impacts (Mangosing, 2022). However, new nuclear power reactor designs are continually being created internationally. According to World Nuclear (2021), the Generation III+ nuclear reactors in Japan and the hypothetical Generation IV nuclear reactors have simpler designs and lessen the likelihood of core melt incidents. As a result, cutting-edge NPPs offer incredibly effective processes that guarantee the safety of the public and the environment in case of a nuclear disaster.

Filipino police block protesters holding umbrellas and posters with slogans as they protest outside a hotel in Manila (The Japan Times, 2016).

Locals also oppose nuclear power because they are concerned about the country’s frequent earthquakes and typhoons. The Philippines, located on the Ring of Fire, receives 100 to 150 earthquakes each year with a magnitude of 4.0 or higher, according to the OCHA-Philippines (2017). The 1,200 km long Philippine fault zone, which extends from northwest Luzon to southeast Mindanao, runs through the nation. According to Cullen (2022), an earthquake and tsunami struck Fukushima, Japan on March 11, 2011, causing the NPP there to detonate. Because of the possibility of nuclear catastrophe due to natural calamities, both environmental organizations and locals oppose nuclear power. Furthermore, powerful typhoons and other extreme weather phenomena frequent the Philippines, according to Greenpeace (2022), aggravating the crucial risk elements of a potential nuclear disaster. As climate change worsens, nuclear energy will be too hazardous to use in the Philippines. However, recent studies have revealed that improved NPP technology that can endure severe natural disasters would be the focus of future studies. According to Vienna (2021), the small modular reactor (SMR) is a cutting-edge creation made to sustain typhoons, earthquakes, and tsunamis. It also has equipment that is crucial to the whole NPP’s safety. Thus, nuclear power plants (NPPs) in 2040 will be far more sophisticated and secure than those in Chernobyl, Russia and Fukushima, Japan.

Lastly, the production of radioactive waste by an NPP, which is risky for the environment and people’s safety, is another problem. Every time there is a nuclear leakage, the region is negatively impacted. Nuclear waste should be properly disposed of to avoid radiation sickness and long-term cancer, which will slowly kill people and cause them to suffer, as well as genetic harm and human and animal mutations (Noto, 2021). In addition, the region will not be habitable for hundreds or maybe thousands of years due to the area’s long-term poisoning from nuclear waste released there (Cullen, 2022). On the other hand, because of natural processes like wind and moving rivers, nuclear waste would spread across the island, harming thousands of uninformed people. Those beyond the area where the nuclear facility is located are also affected (Conserve Energy Future, 2022). However, after declaring its desire to pursue a nuclear energy program, the administration has already given nuclear waste management some thought. According to Energy Commission Regulation (ERC) Commissioner Alexis Lumbatan in his online interview with one of the authors on March 21, 2022, he revealed that a Korean company is attempting to help the Philippines run its NPPs and handle waste management. Additionally, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) supports the safe and secure use of nuclear technologies. As a result, if the nation were to operate NPPs, the IAEA would help the nation manage its nuclear waste.

Despite the opposition to using nuclear power, the DOE must proceed with the NEP in order to support global efforts to reduce carbon emissions brought on by the polluting fossil fuel power fleet. Multinational organizations are recognizing that the globe is in severe danger if no change is made. According to Democracy Now (2022), “humanity has less than 3 years to trim greenhouse emissions roughly in half in order to prevent the most catastrophic disasters in the climate crisis.” Fortunately, nuclear power happens to be an existing potential source that belongs to clean power. NPPs emit almost nil to zero amounts of greenhouse gasses (Jawerth, 2020). Also, according to Muller (2016), a tiny pellet of uranium, about the size of an eraser at the back end of a pencil, contains about as much energy as that of a whole train car worth of coal. Additionally, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2021), “nuclear energy already makes an important contribution to climate change mitigation by displacing 1.6 gigatons of carbon emissions every year.” Nuclear energy is a great asset for development in Mindanao as it attempts to improve the economy while reducing the severity of global warming. It helps to avoid using fossil fuels for energy generation while securing energy sustainability. Furthermore, the nuclear sector will propel modernization in Mindanao by displacing outdated fossil fuel plants with more powerful and sustainable NPPs over the course of the next ten years as new smaller, safer, and more flexible designs enter the market.

“Our minds have been conditioned in the past that nuclear is not good and all we are just saying is that I think it’s about time for us to be open with it,” DOE secretary Alfonso Cusi said during his interview with GMA News in January 24, 2019.”

In addition, the NEP can help reduce the energy crisis in BARMM. Since 2013, there have been numerous brownouts in Mindanao (GMA News Online, 2013). This occurs as a result of greater megawatts demand than the total supply. According to the DOE, Mindanao lacks 295 Megawatts of electricity. Hydroelectric plants generate 52% of the energy used in Mindanao, but even when they are working at full capacity, their dependability is threatened by seasonal changes and limited water supplies. Fossil fuels account for 40% of energy production, and geothermal energy accounts for 7.77%. (DOE, 2022). As a result, Mindanao needs increased base load generation capacity, especially in areas of Muslim Mindanao. Additionally, according to data from the National Electrification Administration, 30% of the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) is still without electricity (Gatchalian, 2021). To improve the general standard of living in Mindanao’s rural areas, access to power — and not just any electricity, but affordable electricity — is crucial. South Korea produces about the same amount of energy as the Philippines but only spends around one-third as much on electricity because of its NPPs (Shellenberger, 2019). Running NPPs is inexpensive, and the local energy prices are where nuclear energy can have the most impact. In addition, the power generating capacity of NPP is around 1,000–1,200 megawatts, compared to the fossil fuel plant, which has around 400–600 megawatts. It is undeniable that the more electricity a nation consumes, the fewer people there are in poverty. As a result, the DOE’s NEP can simultaneously address Mindanao’s energy crisis and poverty.

Photo by United States Department of Energy (2021)

Lastly, the DOE should continue its nuclear energy program because the Philippines is preparing for it until 2040. In July 2017, the Philippine Congress formed the Philippine Nuclear Regulatory Commission (PNRC), an independent body for nuclear safety, to make decisions and determine how the NEP will affect people’s safety, security, health, and environment. Its studies aid the government in realizing that the nation needs to update the legal and regulatory framework required for the NEP in order to replace the outmoded nuclear regulatory regulations. According to Dela Cruz (2020), an inter-agency panel was created by President Rodrigo Duterte in 2020 to supervise the adoption of a nuclear energy policy nationwide. Furthermore, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has protected the Philippines and its nuclear energy use since 1974, which is still ongoing up to the present (Liou, 2022). On February 28, 2022, the government signed Executive Order (EO) 164, expressing the government’s intention to include nuclear power in the energy mix in Mindanao (Crismundo, 2022). In reaction to the previous administration’s disregard for safety and regulation, the EO also established the new, comprehensive legislative and regulatory framework necessary for the nuclear program. Moreover, the EO 164 conducted a public perception survey and found out that 65% of Filipinos are in favor of building new NPPs (Trajano, 2022). With this, the DOE is looking at several suitable NPP sites in Regions IX and XII where they intend to deploy small modular reactors, which are more modern, effective, and secure than Generation III reactors.

The Nuclear Energy Programme (NEP) is a project of the mission Ambisyon Natin 2040, in collaboration with the Department of Energy (DOE). President Duterte signed the project to utilize nuclear power in Mindanao in the 2040s, massively improving its modernization. The NEP should be implemented in Mindanao because NPPs provide three long-term benefits to every corner of the island. First, the NPP in Regions IX and XII would reduce carbon emissions while improving energy generation capacity and sustainability. Second, the project could help mitigate the current energy crisis in BARMM where there is a shortage of megawatts and NPPs could fill in the gap. Lastly, the DOE and the government are preparing for the utilization of nuclear power so that the Philippines will be ready for it by 2040. However, the risks of using NPPs cannot be undermined and to persuade the government and the people to implement the said project, the DOE should not be lenient in examining the feasibility and safety of running NPPs in Mindanao. Also, the government should ratify international nuclear conventions to ensure a nuclear security framework. These nuclear conventions are the Convention on Nuclear Safety, the Amendment to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management, and the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. Lastly, the general public should also research and provide knowledge that could assist the government with nuclear waste management in their area so that when the time comes where NPPs are to be built, the public is more aware and knowledgeable on how to prevent nuclear waste leakages. Nevertheless, with the nuclear power, Mindanao will have a wide and new future.

Photo by City Government of Tagum (2019).
Photo by City Government of Tagum (2019).

WORKS CITED:

Andal, A.G., Kumar, S.P., Andal, E.G., Qasim, M.A., & Velkin, V. I. (2022). Perspectives on the barriers to nuclear power generation in the Philippines: Prospects for directions in energy research in the Global South. Inventions. https://doi.org/10.3390/inventions 7030053

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2019). Nuclear power plant accidents. https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/multimedia/infographics/nuclear_power_plant_accidents.html

Conserve Energy Future. (2022). Dangers and effects of nuclear waste disposal. https://www. conserve-energy-future.com/dangers-and-effects-of-nuclear-waste-disposal.php

Crismundo, K. (2022, March 3). Duterte approves inclusion of nuclear power in PH energy mix. Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1168931

Cullen, S. (2022, July 3). The catastrophe to come — nuclear power plants. The Manila Times. https://www.manilatimes.net/2022/07/03/opinion/columns/the-catastrophe-to -come-nuclear-power-plants/1849528

Dela Cruz, E. (2020, July 29). Philippines takes ‘major step’ toward using nuclear power. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-philippines-energy-nuclear-idU SKCN24U14E

Democracy Now. (2022, April 7). Bill McKibben: Latest IPCC climate report underscores “Fossil fuel is at the root of our problems” [Video]. Youtube. https://youtu.be/Ovh gRR5ZbA8

DOE. (2022, September 26). DOE clarifies power situation in Visayas and Mindanao. https://www.doe.gov.ph/press-releases/doe-clarifies-power-situation-visayas-and-mindanao?withshield=1

Doquila, G. A. (2018, October 25). Nuclear power eyed in Mindanao. Sunstar. https://www. sunstar.com.ph/article/1771026/davao/local-news/nuclear-power-eyed-in-mindanao

Gatchalian, W. (2021, February 28). To BARMM: Address energy poverty amid COVID-19 threat. Win Gatchalian. http://wingatchalian.com/news/to-barmm-address-energy- poverty-amid-covid-19-threat/

GMA News Online. (2013, April 17). Infographic: Power on and off in Mindanao. https:// www.gmanetwork.com/news/money/economy/304327/infographic-power-on-and-off-in-mindanao/story/

Greenpeace. (2022, June 2). Greenpeace to BBM: Prioritize renewable energy, not nuclear. https://www.greenpeace.org/philippines/story/53239/greenpeace-to-bbm-prioritize-renewable-energy-not-nuclear/

Jawerth, N. (2020, September 22). What is the clean energy transition and how does nuclear power fit in? International Atomic Energy Agency. https://www.iaea.org/bulletin/what -is-the-clean-energy-transition-and-how-does-nuclear-power-fit-in

Liou, J. (2022, August 24). After 34-year gap, the Philippines has a nuclear facility again. International Atomic Energy Agency. https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/after-34-year-gap-the-philippines-has-a-nuclear-facility-again

Mangosing, F. (2022, March 12). Greenpeace members protest gov’t plan to revive nuclear power program. Inquirer. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1567050/greenpeace-members-protest-govt-plan-to-revive-nuclear-power-program

Muller, D. (2016, January 13). Is nuclear power good or bad? [Video]. Youtube. https://youtu.be/6lbjxk1Lexs

Noto, M. (2021, March 2). What are the negative effects of nuclear waste? Zenbird. https://zenbird.media/what-are-the-negative-effects-of-nuclear-waste/

OCHA Philippines. (2017, May 3). Philippines: Seismic events in April 2017. Relief Web. https://reliefweb.int/map/philippines/philippines-seismic-events-april-2017

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2021, November 10). How can nuclear energy help address climate change? [Video]. Youtube. https://youtu.be /m_-T8-MamIU

PNRI. (2022, March 11). EO 164 first step to nuclear power, nuclear agency says. https://pnri.dost.gov.ph/index.php/2-uncategorised/725-eo-164-first-step-to-nuclear-power-nuclear-agency-saysfbclid=IwAR3eDUSceSQr36aAStKbDKACBRqDnKElNDU211nsCOgc_nTSS-fKjjXBZWo

Shellenberger, M. (2019, July 5). Reactor [Video]. Youtube. https://youtu.be/hefGjyfSpVQ

Trajano, J. (2022, March 8) Reviving nuclear power: Is the Philippines ready? RSIS. https://www.rsis.edu.sg/rsis-publication/nts/reviving-nuclear-power-is-the-philippines-ready

WNN. (2022, March 3). Philippines relaunches nuclear energy programme. https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Philippines-relaunches-nuclear-energyprogramme#:~:text=%22The%20Nuclear%20Energy%20Programme%20is,power%2C%22%20the%20document%20states

World Nuclear. (2021, April). Advanced nuclear power reactors. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-power-reactors/advanced-nuclear-power-reactors.aspx

Vienna. (2021). Protection against internal hazards in the design of nuclear power plants. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY. https://www.iaea.org /publications/13644/protection-against-internal-hazards-in-the-design-of-nuclear-power-plants

--

--