MANILA, Philippines—The fallout from the nuclear emergency in Japan triggered by Friday’s temblor and tsunami has reached the Philippines.
In a privilege speech Monday, Pangasinan Rep. Kimi Cojuangco said she would seek a “moratorium” on debates on her bill pushing for the revival of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) until Japan contained the threat of leakages and meltdown at its Fukushima nuclear power plants.
Cojuangco’s husband, former Pangasinan Rep. Mark Cojuangco, pushed for the BNPP revival in the 14th Congress, saying it was the only viable alternative to the country’s energy requirements to sustain its economic growth.
She, however, continued to defend nuclear power in the face of vivid images of Japan’s nuclear plant troubles and declared that she was not yet giving up on her and her husband’s advocacy.
“Fukushima is not Chernobyl because of containment even if a meltdown will occur. It would be safe because of containment. Make no mistake, should containment fail at Fukushima, then I will immediately withdraw House Bill No. 1299,” Kimi Cojuangco said.
The $2.3-billion, 630-megawatt facility in Bataan was mothballed without generating a single electrical current 25 years ago by then President Corazon Aquino on safety and corruption issues.
Cojuangco said that the BNPP was a much better plant than those in Fukushima which were built earlier in the late 1950s and use boiling water reactor. The BNPP employs pressurized water reactor, she said.
“What is sad to me is that the Philippines could have lost the only viable alternative to fossil power which is cheap, safe and reliable. The implications to our future prosperity are sad,” Kimi Cojuangco said.
Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago shared Kimi Cojuangco’s view.
“There are alarmist calls borne out of superstition and ignorance that we should stop all talk in operating the BNPP. Let us be very, very careful with our facts,” Santiago said.
Right time for review
Mark Cojuangco, at a press conference at the House on Monday, declared his willingness to abandon his advocacy if it would be proven that Fukushima power plant came short in its safety standards that could have endangered the adjacent population.
“This is the right time for the whole world nuclear industry to be in a period of introspection, to examine the events of Fukushima and see if all the assumption for safety is still valid and if an adjustment is to be made and if so, what are the adjustments,” said the former representative.
“I’m imposing upon myself a temporary moratorium on my advocacy for BNPP, until such time that enough information, analysis, becomes available to me so that I can make proper adjustment.”
Earlier in the day, Parañaque Rep. Roilo Golez moved to have the BNPP revival shelved permanently in view of the mounting concerns arising from the nuclear crisis in Japan.
Golez warned that areas within 100-kilometer radius of the BNPP would be devastated from a meltdown.
Reports anecdotal
Mark Cojuangco told the Inquirer by phone that before the national government decides to close the door on nuclear plants, “it should first wait for findings of expert bodies, like the International Atomic Energy Agency and other international groups.”
“As of now, the reports we are getting are mere anecdotal and not from highly qualified people,” he said.
“Japan cannot hide the facts from the international community. Right now, [that] country’s nuclear power plants are like under magnifying glass, under scrutiny, and it is impossible for them to hide anything about what happened.”
Citing news footage of the Japan earthquake, Mark Cojuangco observed that the nuclear power plant buildings in Japan did not collapse even if other structures, like those in oil refineries, crumpled after the tremor.
Worst-case scenario
“It looked like the plant’s contaminant building in Fukushima has withstood the earthquake’s intensity. It could be possible, and it has not been proven yet, that no contaminants leaked from the building. This could mean that the safety engineering is successful,” he said.
Mark Cojuangco called the Fukushima experience “the worst-case scenario” and a “test case” in the nuclear power industry.
“Based on the experience, experts will surely come up with new regulations to govern the industry,” he said.
“If we turn our back on nuclear power, that would be sad because it has been proven to be an alternative source of power that is safe, clean and cheap. If the entire world turns its back on nuclear [power], we won’t have answer to the increasing cost of fuel, like diesel and coal. This will affect more the poor countries, like the Philippines,” he said.
But a report prepared by geologist Kelvin Rodolfo said geological hazards, like earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, abound at the site of the BNPP and around it.
“The activation of the Bataan plant poses the greatest threat to the well-being of the Filipino people and their environment in my quarter century of natural-hazard scientific experience,” said Rodolfo, professor emeritus of the University of Illinois.
Natural dangers
Rodolfo disseminated the report in July 2010 as “the natural dangers are being greatly compounded by nuclear proponents of great influence who know little geology.”
The BNPP site, he said, is on the flank of Mt. Natib volcano at Napot Point.
“Like Mt. Pinatubo, this volcano is ‘calderagenic,’ meaning that its eruptions are characteristically widely separated in time, but very violent, and leave a large caldera or depression at its summit,” he said.
Mt. Natib, he said, has two calderas.
“If caldera size is a measure of eruption power, the one that produced the large Natib caldera was much stronger than [the] Pinatubo [eruption in] 1991,” he said. With reports from TJ Burgonio in Manila; Yolanda Sotelo, Inquirer Northern Luzon, and Tonette Orejas, Inquirer Central Luzon