http://www.phillyimc.org/en/philippine-bataan-nuclear-power-plant-not-safe The Philippine Bataan Nuclear Power Plant is not safe. by GREEN CONVERGENCE | 05.07.

2009 The Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) located in Morong, Bataan was constructed during the martial law regime of then President Ferdinand E. Marcos. Westinghouse was contracted to build this light water reactor, designed to produce 621 megawatts of electricity as response to the growing energy requirements of the country. While the original loan was $600M for two units, it ballooned to $2.3 billion for one unit. After Marcos left the country after the peaceful People Power Revolution, Westinghouse withdrew from the project in 1986. In 1988, the Aquino government commissioned a series of assessment studies focused on two concerns (Saguisag, Statement on the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant dated January 9, 1991) with the end view of determining whether the facility could be opened: First, and foremost, serious questions had been raised by responsible parties on whether the BNPP was safe as designed and constructed. Second, there had been persistent rumours and speculation that he (Marcos) had been bribed in connection with the award of the BNPP contracts. (Saguisag 1991) In these contexts, a United Nations-funded study secured through the support of the Centre on Transnational Corporations, revealed that the Westinghouse-abandoned project since then carefully maintained in a state of preservation by the National Power Corporation (NAPOCOR) did not meet applicable regulatory and contractual requirements. (Saguisag 1991) Moreover, the government-commissioned report June 1988 confirmed that serious design, construction, and quality assurance problems existed in the plant . . . and recommended that a further, more extensive examination be undertaken to investigate known problem areas and to examine others not yet reviewed. (Saguisag 1991) James Keppler, a former senior official of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission responsible for inspection and licensing, described the overall results of a year-long study ending in September 1990 conducted by American and European nuclear experts on the BNPP compiled in twenty-eight (28) volumes as revealing . . . the pervasive and significant deficiencies in the design, construction, quality assurance and startup testing of BNPP. The identified deficiencies are so pervasive and severe---that the plant cannot be expected to operate safely and without undue risk to public health and safety until those deficiencies and their generic implications are satisfactorily resolved. (Saguisag 1991) The records brought by the fleeing President Marcos and impounded by US law enforcement in Hawaii show that . . . he shared, directly or indirectly, in millions of dollars of commissions paid by Westinghouse and Burns and Roe . . . and also

benefited personally in other ways from the plant. There is no question that the BNPP contracts were tainted by corruption. (Saguisag 1991) {Underlining ours} Based on these findings, the BNPP was mothballed by the Aquino government. GREEN CONVERGENCE for Safe Food, Healthy Environment, and Sustainable Economy, a social movement of environmental non-governmental organizations and various networks/coalitions, appeals to Congress not to recommission the BNPP and for civil society to resist attempts for the same. We base our positions on the following reasons: * BNPP sits on the slope of Mt. Natib, a volcano, and is surrounded by 2 other volcanoes, Mt. Pinatubo and Mt. Mariveles. An eruption by any of these could result in mechanical or nuclear problems which could release radioactive material into the air, water and soil. * The plant has numerous serious technical defects * Thee cost of recommissioning which, at the time of the studies pointed to $1 billion. It should be much more now that global safety standards are higher. * Disposal of nuclear waste will be a problem. As yet, no nation has addressed this problem satisfactorily. * Radioactivity is associated with routine operations of nuclear power plants * Insurance companies are staying away from nuclear power plants. What chance does the defective BNPP have of being insured? * Nuclear power is not for the Philippines, being situated on the juncture of 4 tectonic plates and is thus extremely geologically active. * the Philippines has a lot of sources of renewable energy. Geothermal and wind power, separately and together are computed to be able to meet all of our energy requirements. Each has much lower capital and operational costs. Solar energy has just been tapped to contribute to our electricity grid and holds much potential. In solidarity with our sisters and brothers in Bataan and for a nuclear-safe country: Stop the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant! The GREEN CONVERGENCE What is Green Convergence? Safe and adequate food is a basic for survival. A sustainable economy is an accepted mandate of government. A healthy environment is a must for safe food and a sustainable economy. However, not all Filipinos understand the interconnections of the above. Safe food has the needed nutrients, is free of toxins and of substances that interfere with the processes of the human body. Safe food requires healthy soil that has the necessary minerals, organic matter and microorganisms that allow the biogeochemical

transformations. It is also brought about by the technological, economic and political strategies that ensure fair and equitable access to resources for all. Large scale mining, clear-cut logging and giant dams destroy or submerge the top soil of thousands of hectares. They also obliterate the vegetation that serves as carbon sink, adding to global warming. Agriculture dependent on chemicals, mono-cropping and genetic engineering introduces toxins, makes the soil infertile and disturbs the over-all ecology of soil. Infant milk formulas cannot deliver the total nourishment and protection that can only come from mothers milk. A countrys economic framework aims to continuously add to the nations coffers to ensure social services, safe food and a healthy environment. Programs like the National Minerals Plan that promote large scale mining, the agricultural modernization program that pushes genetically modified food, treaties like the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA) that allow importation of toxic and hazardous waste from Japan these not only endanger our peoples health and surroundings, but also effect negative net flow of financial resources from our country. The GREEN CONVERGENCE for Safe Food, Healthy Environment, and Sustainable Economy (Green Convergence) includes organizations, coalitions, and networks that aim for a development paradigm that would address the need for social and economic upliftment, but at the same time preserve life-supporting water, air and land for generations to come. Its members are each working on broad themes or specific issues that either promote or are stumbling blocks to the attainment of its vision. Green Convergences Vision. Synergy of multi-sectoral organizations, communities, and individuals who constantly will work for safe food, healthy environment, and sustainable economy as the cornerstone of sustainable development. Green Convergences Mission. As a synergy of the green movement in the Philippines, the Green Convergence will build a critical mass of citizens that understand the interconnectedness of issues of food, environment, and economy to achieve sustainable development. To do this, the Green Convergence will endeavor: 1. To build mechanisms for closer coordination, sharing of knowledge and capacities, and cross-cutting strategies within the Philippine environmental movement; 2. To be a force that can exert stronger pressure on the government and business sectors in behalf of civil society for a genuine implementation of sustainable development; and 3. To support thematic issues and local/community struggles that impact on safe food, healthy environment, and sustainable economy. At present, the Green Convergence promotes Philippine Agenda 21 (PA 21) in general and in particular:

* organic agriculture; * breastfeeding; * solid waste management; and * community-based resource management. However, the Green Convergence opposes: * mining as it is promoted by the Mining Act of 1995; * genetic engineering as applied to food and feed; * JPEPA; and * the proposal to resurrect the defunct Laiban Dam Project. The Green Convergence hopes to grow by attracting other organizations concerned with the above issues, as well as those with other advocacies that support the pursuit of Safe Food, Healthy Environment, and Sustainable Economy. Our Members * Akbayan Citizen's Action Party * Alternative Research for Empowerment (ALTEResearch) * Alyansa Tigil Mina * Anti-Laiban Dam Campaign * Balay Rehabilitation Center, Inc. * Basel Action Network - Asia Pacific (BAN-AP) * Civil Society Counterpart Council for Sustainable Development (CSC-CSD) * Columban Fathers * Concerned Citizens Against Pollution (COCAP) * Consumers' Coalition for Truthful Information (CCTI) * Ecological Society of the Philippines (ESP) * Ecowaste Coalition * Environmental Broadcast Circle (EBC) * Environmental Education Network of the Philippines (EENP) * Environmental Studies Institute, Miriam College (ESI) * Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC) * Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (Gaia) * GreenPeace-Southeast Asia (GreenPeace SEA) * HARIBON * Health Care Without Harm (HCWH) * Initiatives for Dialogue and Empowerment through Alternative Legal Services, Inc. (IDEALS) * Justice, Peace, and Integrity of Creation - Association of Major Religious Superiors of the Philippines (JPICC-AMRSP) * Laiban Commission * Legal Rights Center - KSK/Friends of the Earth Philippines (LRC-KSK/FOE Phil) * Lingkod Tao-Kalikasan (LTK) * MASIPAG

* Mother Earth Foundation (MEF) * National Economic Protectionism Association (NEPA) * NO to GMOs * Partido Kalikasan Institute * Philippine Federation for Environmental Concerns (PFEC) * Philippine Greens * Philippine Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas (PHilHDRRA) * Saniblakas ng Inang Kalikasan (SALIKA) * Sibuyan Island Sentinels League for Environment, Inc. * Southeast Asia for Regional Initiatives for Community Empowerment (SEARICE) * Task Force Sierra Madre (TFSM) * Third World Network (TWN) * World Environment Day - Philippines (WED-Phil) * Xaverian Missionaries (SX) * Youth for Sustainable Development Assembly - Pilipinas http://greenconvergence.blogspot.com/ Photos from NO to BNPP: http://notobnpp.wordpress.com/

EPIC FAIL! Bataan Nuclear Power Plant July 23, 2011 Posted by Lakwatsero on Jul 23, 2011 in Roadtrip | 13 comments I am often asked where I get ideas for my lakwatsas. Sometimes I hear stories from friends about a place they visit. Sometimes I read about it from someone elses blog. Sometimes I see on television. And sometimes I read about it in the newspaper. A few weeks ago, I came across this article from the Inquirer News Website: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/18711/ph-launches-%e2%80%98clean%e2%80%99nuclear-tourism (or its duplicate entry with the authors name, Karla Malakunas, here: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/18525/philippines-launches-nuclear-tourism) [ please read the Inquirer article before proceeding ] Note the article was dated 4 weeks ago. View Bataan Nuclear Power Plant in a larger map

When we got to the plant, we were told by the guard that we needed to have made special arrangements before going to the plant. When we asked how we could make such special arrangements, we were told that during weekdays, they could call ahead to the General Manager. But since it was a Saturday, the General Manager was not there. He then shut the gate on us.

Before I start venting, let me say that I do not blame the guard. He was, after all, just following whatever instructions was given to him. So there were. After a 3 hour drive not being able to see what we came to see and do what we expected to do as described in the Inquirer article. I am not sure who to blame. Perhaps it is The Inquirer and the reporter for not fully explaining what the procedure was? They had written and published such a great article that it convinced me to drive 3 hours to see the place. I reread the article looking for a mention about limitations or disclaimers saying what one needed to do to get a tour of the place. Nothing was mentioned in the article. In fact, the article does not really say much about where to go, who to see, what time a tour is, or what have you. All it says about the tour itself is that it will cost P20 and a chemical engineer runs the tour. The way the article is written, one would assume that the tourism aspect was already open for business (if it was, someone forgot to tell the guard). Perhaps I should blame The National Power Corporation (Napocor) who conducted the press event to journalists that included the Inquirer who talked about this wonderful eco-

tourism launch, yet fail to inform the reporters when and if the tour was already operational. And of course they forgot to tell the guard. Alas, I think I will just blame myself for now. I blame myself for assuming everything I read in the paper is true and forgetting that while in marketing myself, many things I read in the newspaper could just be some government-image-enhancing marketing drivel about a humongous white elephant no Philippine administration can decide what to do with yet we spend $10,000 a day on. I blame myself for reading Inquirers headine assuming when they meand launched actually means is still thinking of launching or maybe not. Oh yeah, the article was written almost 4 weeks ago. I actually thought the article would inspire folks to flock to the site. Apparently, ako lang pala. Basta. Sige na nga, kasalanan ko na nga. Maybe one day, they will get organized and actually open the place up to tourists. Sadly, I probably will not bother. If any of you are interested in visiting the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant. Dont bother. Wait to read about it from someone who has successfully been on the said tour (one open to the public not some special sponsored event for bloggers and reporters). PS: Do I sound bitter? Yeah Im bitter, How would you feel driving 3 hours just to be told to go away?

http://notobnpp.wordpress.com/2009/02/01/seven-reasons-against-the-revival-of-bnpp/

Seven Reasons against the Revival of BNPP 01feb09

The Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) represents the flawed and wasteful programs and policies that have resulted in untold suffering, poverty, and environmental degradation. It symbolizes the peoples resistance against administrations practices of rent-seeking and cronyism across decades.

Today the proponents of House Bill 4631 are pushing for the immediate rehabilitation, commissioning and commercial operation of the BNPP to address an alleged energy crisis. Contrary to claims, reviving the mothballed Power Plant will put the larger public in great danger of nuclear and geological catastrophes, and will place undue burden to poor Filipinos and to our crisis-stricken economy. Below are the seven major reasons culled from the position papers of the Panel of Resource Speakers during the hearing conducted by the Committee on Appropriations on the proposed BNPP revival last February 2, 20091 : 1. The BNPP Bill lacks feasibility study. Safety concerns had led the Aquino government to mothball the BNPP in 1986, before it could start operations. After 22 years, these issues on safety remain unresolved. The state or the proponent of the bill had not done nor commissioned any recent technical, economic or financial feasibility study to justify the proposal to rehabilitate the BNPP. In effect, the bills proponent wants Congress to authorize US$1 billion, equivalent to PhP 47 billion, to a project unsubstantiated by expert studies. Back to top 2. The BNPP is structurally defective and unsafe. The construction of the BNPP was attended by numerous irregularities among the contractors, especially on the part of the government, sacrificing safety, quality, and rigidness of methods and materials. None of those involved in the construction of the nuclear power plant could give an assurance that they complied with internationally acceptable standards. In fact, some of our fishermen in Morong were hired as welders during its construction without any briefing on safety and the hazards that their carelessness could result in. Nuclear power plants, whose malfunction can cause some of the worlds worst disasters can never be considered safe or reliable since in reality, accidents can never truly be discounted. The risks of accidents in a nuclear power plant are very prevalent and will come at very high financial and humanitarian costs, one such example is cancer as a result of exposure to nuclear radiation. A nuclear melt down, the ultimate risk of a nuclear power plant, creates immediate, serious repercussions to nearby communities, their water, and soil. The effects and rehabilitation usually last for decades. Containment of nuclear wastes poses a grave danger to the public. Like at all reactors in the United States, the spent fuel would be kept in a pool of water beside the reactor, awaiting storage underground. A classified report by nuclear experts assembled by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences has challenged the decision by federal regulators to allow commercial nuclear facilities to store large quantities of radioactive spent fuel in pools of water because they are very vulnerable to terrorist attacks. They are also very vulnerable to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. The United States has failed to date to create permanent underground storage. Even if eventually sequestered underground, any leakage from it may not immediately be detected and the radioactive components may poison and kill living organisms for tens and hundreds of thousands of years.

Compounding the BNPP constructions noncompliance with major international safety standards and the dangerous nature of a nuclear power plant, to operate the BNPP would be to orchestrate a disaster. Back to top 3. 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 caldera- forming 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. Back to top 4. The BNPP is an unnecessary response to faulty power shortage projections.The government track record at projecting energy demand is highly questionable due to their flawed methodology. It has been proven in different studies that there is a huge disparity in projected and actual electricity demands, and between the forecasting done by government, and the calculation made by multi-sectoral agencies. The disparity between actual and projected demand, data provided by the Department of Energy (DoE) for the period 1992-1993 clearly establishes the faulty projections made in the 1993 by Power Development Plan. Data also show that installed capacity and dependable capacity of generation plants had consistently been greater than demand for the period of 1990-2001, except in 1993 when the country was hit with El Nio that had crippled the hydroelectric plants in Mindanao. A comparison of DoE projections of demand growth for Western Visayas, and that of the Multi-Stakeholders Power Development Plan also shows the latter to be closer to actual demand. Over-projecting demand has led to an overcapacity situation in the Philippine electricity sector for more than a decade now, and this has been proven to be as expensive if not more than a power shortage. As of April 2008, DoE data shows an excess generating capacity of 4,212 MW; this is the dead weight loss to the Filipino consumers, mostly households, who must pay for the excess capacity even if the plants are idle, thanks to the take or pay clause in the contracts the Ramos government signed with the independent power producers (IPPs). Meralco, as a major distributor of electricity in Luzon, sources its power from only three major power plants, namely Sta. Rita, San Lorenzo, and Quezon Power Plant Limited to

service its consumers. Aside from these sources, there are a number of power plants from the total of 55 generation facilities operating in Luzon that could very easily meet base load requirements, or minimum demand for power given any time of day. Moreover, the demand has to be recalibrated to factor in the effects of the unfolding domestic crisis and the current thrust of our service-sector driven economy. Only with the consideration for the current state of the economy, and the inclusion of the crisis indicators will forecasts be more accurate in measuring demand. Back to top 5. The BNPP would be costly to operate and accompanied by enormous hidden costs. Rehabilitation and construction costs historically and by experience of other countries exceed budget around 2-3 times the estimates. For operational costs, procurement of uranium fuel is not cost effective and is volatile to larger price hikes. Especially as the Philippines has no natural resource for uranium and only three countries are in control of 58% of its production, we will be subjecting the Filipino people to greater dependence on foreign fuel. Plant decommissioning approximately costs some US$300-450 million, as reported by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2004. Plants are not decommissioned until years after they have been shut down, and the costs will not be incurred until then. Waste storage is another problem. Even as the bill will indicate a certain amount for the storage of nuclear wastes, the long-term radio activity of nuclear wastes can outlive and outlast any facility constructed, and will defy any sort of economic planning. The greatest cost of a nuclear facility is the possibility of a nuclear accident. A nuclear fall out results in the depletion of nutrients found in arable land and health defects to people exposed to radiation and their descendants. The cost of such an accident to lives and livelihood is immeasurable. The cost to public finance includes evacuation plans, relocation of communities, plant repairs, and rehabilitation of surroundings. Back to top True Cost of Power Generators, in USD 20072 Technology/ Power Generator Nuclear Wind (on shore) Solar (parabolic troughs) Geothermal 8 True Cost, USD 2007 (c/kWh) 18 6.7

12.8

6. The BNPP is a glaring testimony to the governments continuing wasteful debt policy at the expense of the peoples welfare. The BNPP incurred a monster loan of US$ 2.3 billion and some US$ 640 million worth of interest payments, from an initial estimated cost of US$600 million in 1975. That the BNPP has yet to produce a single megawatt of power makes its debt fraudulent, wasteful, and useless. While the governments accounting books have already cleared the original BNPP debt, these methods of repayment have yet to be examined and successor loans of the BNPP have yet to be identified. The bill has already indicated that US$ 1 billion is to be raised either by charging consumers an additional 10 centavos surcharge in electricity generation, or by incurring more debts. This is less of a choice than a matter of enslavement that the people will have to pay either way because the priority of government has always been debt service over social welfare. This is better explained by over-crowded public schools, deteriorating quality of education, insufficient health services, low-cost housing that the poor cannot afford, grossly incomplete agrarian reform and inadequate support for agrarian reform beneficiaries, a steady state of joblessness to which the governments primary response it to send its citizens overseas these are but a few of the manifestations of this mis-prioritization of debt service over addressing the needs of the poor. The Filipino people continue to pay for the BNPP debts that an Honor All Debts policy has created. The people have suffered long enough by the costs created by the collusion of the financial institutions, cronies, and a few government officials. In reviving the BNPP, we exacerbate this injustice. Back to top 7. The BNPP is not an answer to Climate Crisis, nor an alternative to Renewable Energy. The claim that nuclear power plants will lessen emission of harmful gases into the atmosphere and will, thus, not exacerbate the process of climate change is false. Uranium mining, milling, leeching, plant construction, and decommissioning all produce substantial amounts greenhouse gases. Even the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) estimates say, inclusive of direct and indirect carbon emissions, wind and solar energy generators are 50 and seven times less intensive than nuclear plants, respectively. Every kWh of renewable power avoids the emission of more than one pound of CO2. Nuclear energy distracts governments from taking the real global action necessary to tackle climate change and meet the peoples energy needs. House Bill 4631 would be an outright contradiction of the vision and intent of the Renewable Energy Law that the same lawmakers from the same energy committee so enthusiastically supported and passed just last December. Back to top CONCLUSION Given the risks and hazards of the immediate restoration and operation of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant, it is the constitutional obligation of our nations lawmakers to

protect the interests, safety, and well-being of the people. At the very least, that obligation should be exercised by heeding the calls of concerned civil society groups and individuals, and of the Bataan communities that continue to be haunted by the past and that will be most affected by this monstrous project. Back to top ___ Notes:
1

Dr. Kelvin Rodolfo is an Adjunct Professor at the National Institute of Geological Sciences, UP-Diliman. He is also a Professor Emeritus at the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago. He is also a DOST Balik Scientist. With Cabato and Siringan, he co-authored the paper entitled History of sedimentary infilling and faulting in Subic Bay, Philippines revealed in high-resolution seismic reflections profiles published in the Journal of Asian Earth Science vol. 25 in 2005. Von Hernandez is the Executive Director of Greenpeace-Southeast Asia. Greenpeace has produced extensive studies on nuclear technology and alternative renewable energy resources. Loretta Ann P. Rosales is a former Akbayan! party-list representative to the House of Representatives and is currently Vice President of the Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC). She was one of the staunch oppositors of the BNPP at the height of the Marcos dictatorship. For more than two decades now, FDC continues to work on debt and development issues. Engr. Roberto Verzola is a member of the Philippine Greens and one of the lead authors of The Philippine Nuclear Power Plant: Plunder on a Large Scale in the bookDebts of Dishonor published by the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement in 1991. The statement of the Association of Major Religious Superiors in the Philippines(AMRSP) was submitted to the Committee on Appropriations.

http://www.alternat1ve.com/biofuel/2009/03/04/bataan-nuclear-power-plant-on-thereporters-notebook/

Local channel, GMA7, came up with a feature on the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) last night. It was on the show Reporters Notebook and was narrated by Jiggy Manicad. The segment was in Filipino but basically the gist of the segment were:

1. BNPP was the Biggest White Elephant Project in the time of the Marcos government, costing about $2.3 Billion. Despite it not working, the government still continued to pay for the loan subscribed to construct it. The loan was fully paid in 2007. 2. Ironic that the communities surrounding the BNPP still have no electricity. The person interviewed there grew up without electricity, he had already gotten married and sired 2 teenage kids by the time of the interview. 3. $2.3B wasted to build the BNPP is enough to buy 130 Million sacks of rice. That is enough the feed the country for 1 year. It is also enough to have built 200,000 classrooms. Enough to house 11M students. 4. The BNPP started construction in 1976. It was born out of the need to solve the energy crisis which was gripping the nation. It was finished in 1984 but already there were allegations of overpricing, defective design and structures. 5. Those responsible for the faulty construction were charged but charges were dropped. 6. In present time, the cooling plant has already been made into a house by nesting birds. A Lot of the equipment are already old and rusting. 7. 1986 was the last time the control room of the power plant was run. 8. National Power Corp spends about P30 Million/year for maintenance of the plant despite it not being operational. 9. Former senate technical consultant, Nicanor Perlas, said that about 50 nuclear experts from US and Europe who investigated the BNPPs design concluded that their are 4000 field change notices, making the power plant unfit for operation. 10. The group No To BNPP says that there are 3 volcanoes surrounding the area, posing a natural danger. The three volcanoes are: Mt. Pinatubo (erupted in 1992), Mt. Natib and Mt. Mariveles. 11. Rep. Mark Conjuango, author of the bill to revive the nuclear power plant says that the BNPP is designed to resist a .4G earthquake. Coincidentally, Rep. Mark Conjuangco is the son of San Miguel Corp (SMC) owner Danding Cojuangco. SMC has expressed its intent to diversify from its core business of food and beverage to heavy industries. One of which is energy generation and sales. 12. The Catholic Church voiced opposition to the revival of the BNPP. Bishop Socrates Villegas, said that this is not a political issue on the part of the Church but rather a life issue. Because operation of the ill designed BNPP poses a threat to life. 13. Greenpeace, meanwhile talks about the nuclear waste issue disposal and radioactive contamination that will be a result of the spent nuclear fuel reactor rods. 14. Rep. Conjuangco countered however that a US Military facility study already proved the viability of final disposal of nuclear waste. 15. Another thorny issue is the $1Billion dollar that the Bill of Rep. Conjuangco will allocate to rehabilitate the BNPP. The source of the funds will be taken from loans and from the Filipino people. 16. The loan will result in an additional 0.10 cents per hour on top of the current electricity bill to be paid by the consumers.

http://www.alternat1ve.com/biofuel/2009/03/24/solita-monsods-analysis-of-the-bataannuclear-power/

Prof Winnie Monsod tackled the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant issue on her Analysis segment at QTV and based from that its easy to discern that she seems to be in favor of its reopening. Solita Monsod was once head of NEDA during the time of the Aquino administration so she knows the issue by heart, since the decision to shelve the power plant came during her tenure in government. Her stand at that time was that as long as the BNPPs safety issues were resolved satisfactorily, BNPPs operating cost would be much lower than regular power plants. The cost of the BNPP was not considered anymore during their evaluation because it was already classified as sunken cost. Her take on the Earthquake and fault issue was that it was well within the safety limits set by Philvocs for a nuclear power plant. Thats Ok I suppose if you treat like a footnote the fact that one of main issues for the opposition of the BNPP was the faulty design. She points out that Japan should be considered as a basis for reassurance of the track record of reliability of nuclear power plants operating in earth quake prone areas since Japan is a country that has a lot of earthquakes. But dont the Japanese always over design what ever it is they build? The oppositionists will just counter this with the faulty or under-design of the BNPP. The report also states that between 1970 ~1992 there have been far more deaths in regular power plant than in nuclear power plant. She also says that the plan of Rep Conjuangco to evaluate first the power plant is reasonable enough. Yeah, but not to the people who are footing the bill for that I suppose. Considering that there was already a previous report made for the Senate during the Aquino administration, oppositionists will just point out that we should consider using that report.

The geological hazards of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant STAR SCIENCE By Kelvin S. Rodolfo, PhD (The Philippine Star) Updated February 19, 2009 12:00 AMComments (0)

(First of a series) Introduction The Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) that President Ferdinand Marcos had built on Napot Point at the seacoast in the Bataan town of Morong has an unacceptably high risk of serious damage from earthquakes, volcanism, or both, should it be activated in accordance with a bill currently being considered by the House of Representatives. Marcos decided to build the BNPP in 1973, to address the first serious energy crisis that happened that same year. This rushed timing clearly indicates that the natural hazards of the site could not have been assessed properly. Such a study would have taken at least several years. Marcos must not have known that more than the entire northern half of the Bataan peninsula consists of one large volcano, Mt. Natib, which even extends its base below sea level. In the 1970s, volcaniclastic sedimentology the science of how volcanic explosion debris is produced, transported and deposited had not yet even been formalized. Only in 1991 was the major international monograph Sedimentation in Volcanic Settings published. (It included one of the earliest formal uses of the term lahar, in an article on Mt. Mayon that I co-authored.) When Pinatubo erupted in 1991, it left at its summit a huge caldera, a hole two kilometers in diameter. Much of the two to three cubic kilometers blown out to make the caldera formed pyroclastic flows mixtures of very hot gases and rock debris that flowed down the sides of the volcano at speeds of 100 kilometers per hour or more, with temperatures of about 500C. Mt. Natib, a sister to Pinatubo, has two calderas, one as big as Pinatubos, the other more than twice as big, with a diameter of five kilometers. So Natib has erupted at least twice. And if caldera size is a valid measure, one of those eruptions must have been much larger than Pinatubo made in 1991. Early concerns In the 1970s, the volcanic nature of Natib was virtually ignored, but technicians were quite concerned about how earthquakes might affect the plant. Recognition of the dangers that earthquakes posed to the BNPP was recognized very early, but apparently was ignored. A year after construction began, nuclear technologists Elmer Hernandez and Gabriel Santos submitted an alarming eight-page Report on the evaluation of the geological and seismological studies made on the Philippine Nuclear Power Plant I Site in which they said that the probability of an earthquake occurring there is unacceptably very high, and that 49 significant earthquakes had occurred in the area over 74 years, one within one to two kilometers of the proposed site itself. They also noted the presence of a possible fault in satellite photographs, which they confirmed on the ground with a magnetometer survey.

But construction continued anyway. Nevertheless, the Philippine Atomic Energy Commission was concerned enough to send Prof. Ernesto Sonido, the geophysicist of the UP-Diliman Department of Geology and Geography, to investigate the site further in early 1979. On Jan. 25, Dr. Sonido reported that he and a Mr. John Palmer, the groundwater geological consultant of the contractor firm Ebasco, agreed on site that a fault zone existed in the vicinity of Napot Point. Faulting of otherwise impermeable rocks had made many fractures from which water was seeping. Palmer said that he had drilled more than 30 holes at the plant site. The boreholes encountered a particular rock at different depths, suggesting that the area had been tectonically active. When the plant was designed and built, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the United Nations had not yet made rules governing what must be done to build a plant on volcanic terrain. IAEA announced those criteria only in 1997, three years after volcanologists began to develop them, in the document Volcanic Hazard in Nuclear Power Plant Siting An IAEA Guidance Provisional Safety Standards Series No. 1. Had those standards existed in the 1970s, the BNPP would never have been built. And if applied today, the site would be unacceptable to the IAEA. (To be continued) *** Kelvin Rodolfo is concurrently professor emeritus with the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois in Chicago, and an adjunct professor with the National Institute of Geological Sciences, University of the Philippines-Diliman. He is currently a DOST Balik Scientist. Discussion and

(Second of a series) The 1992 Torres report While he was still at Phivolcs, Dr. Ronnie Torres, a foremost expert regarding pyroclastic flows who is now at the University of Hawaii, warned of volcanism and faulting at the site in a 1992 report, The vulnerability of PNPP site to the hazards of Natib volcano (Phivolcs Observer, Vol. 8 No. 3: 1-4). Quoting Dr. Torres: Natib volcano does not erupt very often but could still erupt. As a rough rule of thumb, the longer a volcano is in repose, the more time it has to store eruptive energy, and thus, the stronger the eventual eruption.

The Sonido-Umbal 2001 Report to the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority Dr. Ernesto Sonido collaborated with Mr. Jesse Umbal to submit in 2000 an exhaustive, 38-page analysis for SBMA of the geology and geohazards of the Subic Bay area. Jess Umbal is one of the brightest, most competent volcanologists and geologists I know. Working with me during the Pinatubo eruption, he earned his Masters degree at the University of Illinois in 1993. Dr. Sonido is not a volcanologist, so we can assume that Umbal wrote those aspects in the report, which adjudged Natib as potentially active. The report documented two Natib eruptions that formed large calderas, one with a diameter more than twice as big as that of the new caldera on Mt. Pinatubo. Sonido and Umbal also studied the system of faults exposed on land in the larger region. They estimated the recurrence period for earthquakes of Magnitude 6.4 to 7.0 at 22 years; of Magnitude 7.0 to 7.3 at 59 years; and of Magnitude 7.3 to 8.2 at 157 years. The Cabato et al. study In 1997, Ms. Joan Cabato, Dr. Fernando Siringan and I of the National Institute of Geological Sciences of UP Diliman, collaborating with the Mines and Geosciences Bureau and the National Power Corp., initiated a geophysical study of the marine geology of Subic Bay. The study was supported as due diligence hazard evaluation by then SBMA Chairman Richard J. Gordon. From a slowly moving boat or ship, we gathered 125 kilometers of seismic reflection data. That method puts powerful pulses of low-frequency sound into the water. The sound passes down through the water and into the layers of sediment below the sea floor. Some of the sound is reflected back upwards from the different sediment layers, and is collected by hydrophones trailing behind the boat. Much as if we took an X-ray, electronic equipment automatically uses the returned signals to make a detailed picture of the structure underlying the sea, in our case down to a depth of about 120 meters. After we processed the data and prepared the manuscript, it underwent rigorous scrutiny by our geological peers in the Philippines and abroad, before it was published in the international Journal of Asian Earth Sciences. I am proud to have been part of that effort, which earned a Masters degree for Joan Cabato, a very bright young woman who recently earned her doctorate from the University of Heidelberg in Germany. Our main finding was that over the last 18,000 years, Subic Bay has experienced faulting roughly every 2,000 years. The last such episode occurred about 3,000 years ago, so the area is overdue for another. Quite by accident, we discovered a massive deposit of sediment that can only be explained as originating as a large pyroclastic flow from the large Natib caldera, in an eruption that occurred sometime between 11,000 and 18,000 years ago. That date has wrongly been called Natibs latest eruption. A systematic study of Natib itself could find evidence of even younger eruptions.

(To be continued) *** Kelvin Rodolfo is concurrently professor emeritus with the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois in Chicago, and an adjunct professor with the National Institute of Geological Sciences, University of the Philippines-Diliman. He is currently a DOST Balik Scientist. Discussion and corrections are welcome at krodolfo@uic.edu.

The geological hazards of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (Third of a series) STAR SCIENCE By Kelvin S. Rodolfo, PhD (The Philippine Star) Updated March 05, 2009 12:00 AMComments (0)

New earthquake data Since 1973, many more earthquakes have occurred around and even under Mt. Natib; one on June 24, 1991 with a magnitude of 4.6 occurred directly under Napot Point. Since 1981, six have occurred within 25 kilometers of the BNPP. Note that the largest nuclear complex in the world, the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant in Japan, was shut down by a magnitude 6.6 earthquake in July 2007 only 19 kilometers away. It is still inactive today. The Lubao lineament In 1997, Prof. Fernando Siringan, his students and I began to study land subsidence in coastal Bataan, Pampanga, Bulacan and Camanava. Very early, we noticed a sharp lineament in Lubao, Pampanga that trends southwest to Mt. Natib, where it abruptly disappears. Many earthquake epicenters plot along the lineament which, if extended farther, trends to Napot Point. The possibility that the lineament is a fault, and the possibility that it extends under Mt. Natib need urgently to be explored by scientists of Phivolcs and other institutions. Professor Mahar Lagmay has established genetic relationships between faults and volcanoes, including Mt. Pinatubo and the volcanoes in Bicol. Spent fuel pools No country in the world has yet solved the problem of how to store nuclear waste permanently and safely for tens and hundreds of thousands of years. In the meantime, spent fuel is stored next to the plants, in pools of water that absorb the radiation and

disperse the heat. The need for huge volumes of water to absorb excess heat from the reactor and from spent fuel is why the BNPP was built on the coast. The US National Academy of Sciences has challenged the decision by federal regulators to allow this practice because of the risks of terrorist attacks. The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission is also very worried because loss of pool water could cause the zirconium alloy cladding of the most recently discharged spent fuel assemblies to combust spontaneously. The fire would then ignite adjacent fuel assemblies. Spraying the fire with water would make it worse because steam and zirconium react to produce even more heat. Just like a fire in a reactor core, one in a spent fuel storage pool would release huge volumes of radioactive gases to the atmosphere, including much Cesium-137, which is water-soluble and extremely toxic, even in minute quantities. Pool water could be lost in many ways such as pump valve or piping failures or a simple brownout. At Natib, an earthquake could simply slosh the water out of the pool. In an eruption, a pyroclastic flow could evaporate the water instantaneously. *** Kelvin Rodolfo is concurrently professor emeritus with the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois in Chicago, and an adjunct professor with the National Institute of Geological Sciences, University of the Philippines-Diliman. He is currently a DOST Balik Scientist. Discussion and corrections are welcome at krodolfo@uic.edu.

(Fourth and last of a series) Final thoughts House Bill 4631 mandating the immediate rehabilitation, commissioning and commercial operation of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant has benefited from no geohazard assessment. It does not even taken into account the studies just discussed. Given the danger posed to millions of people, a thorough assessment of the very real natural hazards is urgently necessary. Instead of this bill, what we need is legislation that properly funds a thorough, inter-agency evaluation of the site. The study would properly be led by Phivolcs and involve geologists of the Mines and Geosciences Bureau, the National Institute of Geological Sciences, and the Geological Society of the Philippines. A seismic-reflection offshore survey around southern Bataan is also obviously necessary.

We also should remember that a technical audit of BNPP was commissioned by a Senate Ad-Hoc Committee on BNPP in 1988. The multi-disciplinary audit involved over 15 nuclear experts from the US, Germany, Brazil, South Korea and Japan. That audit was only preliminary. From 1988 to 1990 over 50 nuclear experts from the US and Europe made a much more extensive audit that cost the government $10 million. The study was kept confidential because of the pending litigation vs Westinghouse. Its many volumes remain locked up in the Senate vaults. The study should be made fully available for public scrutiny now; it may save much unnecessary and expensive duplication. After all, the Pinoy taxpayers paid for it, and are entitled to full perusal and proper use of it. There are other very strong reasons why nuclear power is wrong for the Philippines. We have no uranium ore in the Philippines, and no hope of finding any. Reviving nuclear power here, in addition to putting many Filipinos in harms way, means that we would expend a huge amount of money to put ourselves at the mercies of countries that have uranium, much as we have made ourselves utterly dependent on petroleum-exporting companies. The very well-funded global nuclear lobby claims that nuclear power generates no carbon dioxide to add to global warming. But much fossil fuel is spent to mine, mill and process uranium before it reaches a reactor. Every watt of electricity generated by a nuclear plant indirectly makes about a third as much CO2 as a watt generated by burning fossil fuel. That quantity inevitably will increase as the quality of the remaining ore goes down. The Filipino taxpayer has already paid $2.3 billion for the plant, plus $460 million in interest, without receiving any benefit. Now it is proposed to spend another $1 billion to renovate it. Half of that funding is supposed to be paid by a tax of P0.10 on every kilowatt-hour consumed in the entire country for several years. *** Kelvin Rodolfo is concurrently professor emeritus with the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois in Chicago, and an adjunct professor with the National Institute of Geological Sciences, University of the Philippines-Diliman. He is currently a DOST Balik Scientist. Discussion and corrections are welcome at krodolfo@uic.edu.

View previous articles from this author | Subscribe to this author via RSS

http://www.pinoypress.net/2009/02/05/revival-of-bataan-nuclear-power-plant-a-sourceof-corruption/

Revival of Bataan Nuclear Power Plant a Source of Corruption? 5 February 200940 Comments BY RONALYN V. OLEA Bulatlat.com Activists are gearing up for protests against the planned revival of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP). In a telephone interview, Roman Polintan, chairperson of Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) in Central Luzon, said they would launch a massive campaign against the proposed reopening of the BNPP. In July last year, Pangasinan Rep. Mark Cojuangco filed the bill titled Bataan Nuclear Power Plant Commissioning Act of 2008. The bill has already been approved by the Energy Committee and is now pending in the Appropriations Committee. It has already gained 190 signatures in the House. In December 2008, the Department of Energy through the National Power Corporation signed a memorandum of agreement with the Korea Electric Power Corp (Kepco) to conduct a feasibility study on the possible revival of the BNPP. A Westinghouse light water reactor, it was designed to produce 621 megawatts of electricity.[2] The BNPP was a project of former President Ferdinand Marcos. The BNPP construction began in 1976 and was completed in 1984 at a cost of $2.3 billion. The nuclear plant is located at the foot of Mt. Natib in Morong, Bataan. Marcos was toppled in 1986. The succeeding administration of Corazon Aquino decided not to operate the plant after citing 4,000 defects in its design and construction. However, former President Aquino, rejecting the call of various sectors not to pay the BNPP loan because it is considered as onerous, stood pat in her decision to pay the loan. The succeeding administrations of Ramos, Estrada, and Arroyo likewise were adamant in paying the loan for the mothballed BNPP. The loan, amounting to P120 billion ($2,532,179,784 at the current exchange rate of $1=P47.39) including the principal and interest, was fully paid by April 2007

Historic struggle Polintan said that the BNPP is unacceptable to the people of Central Luzon. It is not the ordinary people who will benefit from it but the foreign business corporations and their local partners. The activist leader joined the mammoth protests against the BNPP in the 80s. Polintan recalled, Tens of thousands of residents of Bataan and nearby provinces joined the welgang bayan (peoples strike) against the BNPP. He added, People would come out from their houses to join the protests. We call on the people of Central Luzon to once again act in unison and raise their voices to thwart this move [revival of BNPP]. Polintan said Balanga, Bataan Bishop Socrates Villegas and Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo said the plan of some lawmakers to re-open the BNPP would be met with opposition due to the risk the power plant poses to human life and safety. Villegas in a text message said the nuke plant, based in Morong town, was already declared unsafe 30 years ago and it cannot be made safe by a mere congressional act. Polintan welcomed the statements of Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Oscar Cruz, Balanga Bishop Socrates Villegas and Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo. Polintan said they plan to get the support of other Church leaders in the region. Courting disaster Polintan said Cojuangcos proposal is courting disaster, stressing that the operation of the power plant poses grave danger to life and environment, and is unacceptable to the people of Central Luzon. Noting that the plant sits right on an active volcano, Polintan warned that any seismic activity might cause it to explode.

Revival of Bataan Nuclear Power Plant a Source of Corruption? Polintans claim is supported by scientists who categorized Mt. Natib as potentially active. In their paper, Dr. Ernesto Sonido, formerly geophysics professor of the National Institute of Geological Sciences (NIGS) at the University of the Philippines, and Mr. Jesse Umbal, who obtained his masters degree at the University of Illinois found Mt. Natib to be a caldera-forming volcano, a type which characteristically has very powerful eruptions separated by long repose periods.

Dr. Kelvin Rodolfo, a professor at the NIGS in UP Diliman said, Natib volcano does not erupt very often but could still erupt. As a rough rule of thumb, the longer a volcano is in repose, the more time it has to store eruptive energy. Polintan said, We will not allow a Three Mile Island or a Chernobyl disaster to happen in the Philippines, particularly in Central Luzon. The Three Mile Island accident occurred on March 28, 1979 at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station in Pennsylvania, United States. An estimated 43,000 curies of radioactive krypton were released when the pilot-operated relief valve did not close when the pressure on the primary system decreased. Although no deaths or injuries resulted, it is considered as the most serious accident in US commercial nuclear power plant operating history. The Chernobyl disaster was a nuclear reactor accident in the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in the Soviet Union. It resulted in a severe release of radioactive elements into the environment. The overall cost of the disaster is estimated at $200 billion. Polintan added that the BNPP suffers from a grossly defective design made worse by the ravages of time. In 1979, a commission created by then Pres. Ferdinand Marcos conducted an investigation on all issues surrounding the construction of the BNPP. The findings of the commission revealed that the power plant had an old design plagued with unresolved safety issues. Polintan said further it is a folly to try to revive the mothballed plant when nuclear power generation is already being discarded all over the world because it is an extremely hazardous and outmoded technology. Costly Greenpeace asserts that nuclear plants are grotesquely capital intensive and expensive at almost all stages of its development. Historically, it said, nuclear construction projects consistently run over budget, so even the $1 Billion projected cost for BNPPs rehabilitation could be exceeded. The group further said, The plant would also make the country dependent on imported uranium, a resource found only in a few countries. There are further costs for spent fuel storage and security, and should an accident occur, massive costs for evacuation, relocation of communities, health costs, aside from the repair of the plant and the rehabilitation of surroundings would be incurred. From previous experience of nuclear disasters, these costs amount to hundreds of billions of dollars spent for a period of decades.

Greenpeace Southeast Asia Executive Director Von Hernandez said, Nuclear energy is not clean, not safe and not cheap. In fact, it is probably the most dangerous and expensive power source there is. To say otherwise is to endorse patent falsehoods for the benefit of the nuclear industry.

Revival of Bataan Nuclear Power Plant a Source of Corruption? Source of corruption? Bautista said, The most probable reason why the Arroyo government, particularly the Department of Energy, is reviving the nuclear option is that it is a multibillion dollar project where fat and grease money will come in from foreign energy corporations and international financial institutions. Bautista recalled that Marcos and his cronies are estimated to have gotten $80 million in kickbacks from the BNPP. He said that with the current administration, perceived to be the most corrupt, the BNPP would just be another source of corruption. The Aquino government sued Westinghouse for overpricing and bribery but ultimately lost the case in a United States court. San Miguel Corp., which is being managed by Cojuangcos father, has already expressed interest in taking over the BNPP. The food and beverage conglomerate is diversifying into power generation. Not the solution to the energy crisis Dr. Giovanni Tapang, chairperson of progressive scientists group AGHAM said the BNPP is not the apt solution to the countrys energy problems. Tapang said there is no question regarding the need to be energy independent. He added the government must harness the indigenous and sustainable energy resources such as hydro, geothermal, solar, wind, natural gas and oil to provide for the countrys needs. He said however that these energy resources have been all put to sale by the government to private independent power producers (IPPs). Instead of looking at nuclear power to provide cheap energy, President Arroyo only has to realize that most of the energy resources she has auctioned off could have provided the Philippines cheap and renewable energy, said Tapang. The scientist said, [A]s long as the Arroyo government continues to auction and privatize the countrys energy facilities and resources to private and foreign companies, like what they are doing with BNPP and other power plants, the problem on energy will remain. (Bulatlat.com)

http://www.sunstar.com.ph/manila/local-news/2011/03/15/aquino-cautioned-overreviving-bataan-nuclear-plant-144885

Aquino cautioned over reviving Bataan nuclear plant

|More|

Tuesday, March 15, 2011 ALTHOUGH Malacaang ruled out the possibility of putting up nuclear power plants, a group of scientists asked government to no longer entertain such proposals. Dr. Giovanni Tapang, chairperson of Advocates of Science and Technology for the People (Agham), specifically ditched moves to revive the mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant, which reportedly sits on top of a dormant volcano. Have something to report? Tell us in text, photos or videos. "Issues concerning the safety, viability, and environmental risks associated with the Bataan nuclear plant are still unresolved and yet the Department of Energy and the National Power Corporation seem to be hell bent on pushing through with plans to privatize the operations of the BNPP," he explained. Energy Secretary Jose Rene Almendras had said American firm Excel Services Corporation and Korea Electric Power Corporation (Kepco) were interested in assisting the Philippines in mounting an efficient nuclear power plant. A second explosion hit the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant on Monday, reportedly injuring six. Technicians and scientists have been running against time to avoid the overheating of reactors whose cooling system conked out after the devastating magnitude-8.9 earthquake. "There are chances of having a similar accident if the government operates the NPP. The Philippines is vulnerable to earthquakes, being near the Manila Trench and is sitting on the slopes of Mount Natib (in Bataan)," Tapang said. Almendras earlier said that Luzon faces at least 300 megawatts (MW) of power deficiency this year, while Visayas and Mindanao already experienced critical energy supply situations in 2008 and 2009.

To address the power shortage, the government received recommendations to reopen the $2.1 billion BNPP, connect the Mindanao grid to the geothermal power source in Leyte, and establish coal plants. Calamity hit-Japan relies on nuclear power for about a third of its energy needs, officials said. In Southeast Asia, fast-growing economies such as Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand have openly embraced nuclear reactors to meet future power requirements. Vietnam reportedly planned to operate four nuclear reactors by 2025, while Indonesia will do the same sometime in 2015. Meantime, environmental group Greenpeace said the Japanese experience only shows that nuclear reactors are "inherently hazardous." "This is yet another reminder of the inherent risks of nuclear power, which will always be vulnerable to a potentially deadly combination of human error, design failure and natural disaster," said Jan Beranek, nuclear campaigner at Greenpeace International. Expenses for the construction of nuclear power plants already run in the billions and are still subject to massive cost overruns and delays, while decommissioning of plants can cost up to tens of billions of dollars. The spending for radioactive waste storage, which must be maintained for hundreds of thousands of years, is impossible to estimate, according to Greenpeace. With this, both groups called for the phase out of existing reactors, and no construction of new commercial ones. "What should be done is to reverse the privatization of the power industry and build safe and reliable sources of electricity. The country has vast indigenous energy resources from fossil fuels to alternative energy that we can use if only the government stops selling these to private investors," Tapang said. Fukushima emergency no argument vs Bataan plant The author of a Senate bill that seeks to reactivate the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant said that using a nuclear emergency in Japan as an argument against commissioning the facility is alarmist and ignorant. Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago told critics of nuclear power to be careful with facts and avoid "calls borne out of superstition and ignorance that we should stop all talk in operating the BNPP."

Only four people were hurt in the partial meltdown that the Japan Atomic Energy Agency has assumed in Fukushima, Japan. "We have to wait for what will be the effect of the partial meltdown in Fukushima before we make any comments," she said. Santiago added the reactor in Fukushima is older than the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant. "The BNPP and its sister plant in Korea have containment units, so if there is a meltdown, it will be confined and will not necessarily spread immediately," she said. Santiago added that her bill will only ask government experts to check if the BNPP can still be operated safely or not. "If the result is 'No go', then we will proceed in permanently closing down the BNPP. That is what the bill says. We want it to be closed down permanently if our experts tell us that we cannot operate it. If they say 'Go,' then we still have a second part of the process," she said. She recognized that the bill's deliberation may be delayed since the Senate will likely be busy with the impeachment trial of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez. And that now may be "the worst time to advocate it," since Japan is still trying to contain the Fukushima plant and Filipinos have raised undue fears over the effects of nuclear radiation.

Bataan nuclear plant rehab opposed

|More|

Saturday, March 12, 2011 AFTER a nuclear emergency was declared in earthquake-hit Japan, a party-list legislator appealed to his colleagues to abandon the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) rehabilitation. Akbayan Representative Walden Bello pointed out that the BNPP sits across the Manila Bay, which would likely bring disastrous consequences to residents of Metro Manila if a nuclear malfunction occurs. Have something to report? Tell us in text, photos or videos.

Although the government needs to improve the generation of electricity to make it costefficient and environmentally-safe, the logical thing to do is still abandon all efforts to revive the BNPP, Bello said. Nuclear plant malfunctions and the possibility of a radioactive leak came at the heels of the 8.9-magnitude earthquake in Japan Friday, prompting the evacuation of residents living within ten kilometers of the facility in Fukushima. The plant is located at Honshu Island, Japan's largest island. Especially for proponents of nuclear energy in Congress, this should serve as a lesson: nuclear energy remains to be extremely unsafe, especially for countries like Japan and the Philippines that experience earthquakes and volcanic eruptions periodically, Bello said. Last Congress, Bello blocked the efforts of former Pangasinan Representative Mark Cojuangco to rehabilitate the BNPP. Marks wife, Kimi, who replaced him as the province's congressman filed a House measure which would mandate an immediate validation process to recommend if the plant should be rehabilitated or permanently closed. The nuclear power option is timely since an impending power crisis is expected by 2012 or 2013, Cojuangco stated in House Bill 1291. According to Bello, it is important to remember that the BNPP is situated on the worstpossible geographic location: at the foot of a volcano and with fault lines running in the vicinity. Built during the term of the late President Marcos, the power plant was never commissioned due to faulty engineering. A study commissioned by the Senate ad hoc committee on the BNPP and the Presidential Commission on the Philippine Nuclear Power Plant during the administration of President Corazon Aquino found some 40,000 defects in the power plant. It prompted James Keppler, one of experts reviewing the plant, to comment that the team found pervasive and significant defects in the facility's design, construction, quality assurance, and start-up testing. The nuclear emergency is taking place in the very country that has engineered the best technology to keep nuclear power plant facilities as earthquake-proof as possible, Bello emphasized. The BNPP on the other hand, suffers faulty geographic and engineering foundations. Should an operational BNPP be put in a similar situation, the disaster would be simply unimaginable, he stressed. (Kathrina Alvarez/Sunnex)

http://www.usnewslasvegas.com/national/up-study-bataan-nuclear-power-plant-is-on-avolcano/

UP study: Bataan Nuclear Power Plant is on a volcano Posted by admin on Mar 28th, 2011 and filed under Featured, National, Photo Gallery. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

By Ellen Tordesillas, Yahoo! Southeast Asia Advocates for the rehabilitation of the long- mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant led by former Rep. Mark Cojuangco and his wife, Kimi, the incumbent representative of the 5th district of Tarlac have been quoted as undaunted by what happened to the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant which is now beleaguered after its stability was shaken by the 8.9 intensity earthquake and tsunami that followed the tremor that hit Japan last March 11. Mark Cojuangco was quoted by Kyodo News as saying, The design for BNPP is more earthquake resistant than Fukushima. What Im telling you is that the Bataan plant is a better power plant (design) than Fukushima, although we really need to look at Fukushima as a benchmark.

Kimi, who has filed a bill to determine the BNPPs operability, acknowledged public sentiments in the light of what is happening in Fukushima. Pursuing the bill needs to wait, she said. The Cojuangco couple should take a look at the findings of the study conducted by the University of the Philippines led by its National Institute of Geological Sciences. The BNPP was a project by the Marcos government energy department as a solution to the countrys energy problems. It was stopped by the Cory Aquino administration. I have covered the BNPP way back in the 80s and there were allegations that showed it was sitting on an earthquake fault but Dr. Carlos Arcilla, director of the National Institute of Geological Sciences (NIGS) at the University of the Philippines, belies that. Nevertheless BNPP proponents then assured the public that they have the plant was built to withstand a high intensity earthquake. That was what the Japanese also did in all their nuclear plants including Fukushima because it is known that Japan, like the Philippines, is in the so-called Pacific Ring of Fire, an area where large numbers of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions occur in the basin of the Pacific Ocean. And look at what is happening now. Worse that being in an earthquake fault, a recent UP study showed BNPP is on the volcano, Mahar Lagmay, one of the scientists that participated in the study, said. The volcano is Mt. Natib and the BNPP is on its slope, Lagmay said. Theres a lot of scientific jargon in the study but its conclusion is clear enough. It says according to the guidelines of the International Atomic Energy Agency, when evidence shows the existence of capable faults within 1 km of the nuclear facility, another site must be considered. The study said, Such is the case for the BNPP where capable faults associated with the Lubao Fault were identified within 1 km of the nuclear power plant. Heres excerpts from the studys conclusion; Natib is considered a capable volcano based on evidence of an active hydrothermal system with a magmatic signature and a calculated 1 x 10-4 2 x 10-4 per year with 95% confidence interval probability of a future volcanic eruption with VEI 6-7. Given that Natib is considered a capable volcano the impacts of volcanic hazards to the site were assessed based on the draft guidelines provided by the IAEA. Among the hazards identified, lava flows and pyroclastic density currents are within the screening distance value (SDV), the maximum distance from the source to the site at which the volcanic phenomenon could be a hazard. Out of all the volcanic phenomena, the occurrence of PDCs and opening of new vents proximal to the NPP do

not have any engineering solutions. Lava flow and lahar hazards, however, can be addressed by engineering design. Faults were mapped in southwest Natib with one seen in Napot Point cutting through an indurated lahar outcrop up to the ground surface. Using the second criterion of the IAEA guidelines for seismic hazards, these tectonic structures in Napot Point are evaluated as capable faults because they show a structural relationship with the Lubao Fault, which is considered active based on truncated recent fluvio-deltaic sediments and paleo sea-level reconstruction from a peat layer recording as much as 3.5 m movement over the past 1,500 a BP. The study said Although the work on Natib Volcano is still in progress, enough data has been gathered, sufficient for use as one of the scientific bases for the decision of the Philippine government to recommission or not, the mothballed Bataan Nuclear facility and general hazards preparedness by communities on the slopes of the volcano. Aside from NIST, UPs Marine Science Institute and National Institute for Science and Mathematics also participated in the study.

http://technogra.ph/2008/04/27/bataan-nuclear-plant/

Marcos: Lets Pay $155,000/day for the Bataan Nuclear Plant!

Posted on April 27th, 2008. Written by Rico.

An article written in 2004 noted that Filipino taxpayers were paying $155,000 a day for the infamous Bataan Nuclear Plant. It lamented the fact that while the power plant never produced electricity, the Philippines was still paying interest for a never-completed project thats now 34 years old.

The US Dollar was worth 56 Philippine pesos back in 2004, making $155,000 equal to P8,680,000 (ouch!). Last Friday the rate was P42.09 to the dollar, making the daily payment worth P6,523,950. If were still paying for the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant, then thats over P2 million off our fiduciary backs. The stronger Philippine Peso comes to our rescue again! But more importantly, the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant proves that good planning always beats bad planning. As the article goes: The Bataan nuclear power plant was a knee jerk reaction by former Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos to the energy crisis of the early 1970s Construction began in 1976 and was completed in 1984 at a cost of 2.3 billion dollars In early 1986 a team of international inspectors visited the site and declared it unsafe and inoperable as it was built near major earthquake fault lines and near the Pinatubo volcano which at the time was dormant. Debt repayment on the plant is the countrys biggest single obligation. Isnt it amazing how the screw-ups of the past continue to haunt the present? If and when we manage to recover the money Marcos stole while in power, we can use it to pay off this debt (if its still pending of course)! Consider this: even if we finally get the Bataan Power Plant up-and-running, its ability to produce 621 Megawatts of electricity will be of little help to a region (Luzon) that requires over 12,000.

http://weblog.greenpeace.org/nuclearreaction/2009/02/the_story_of_a_mothballed_nucl.html

The story of a mothballed nuclear plant, a dormant volcano, and misguided congressmen

Something strange happened during the Christmas holidays of 2008 in the Philippines. Instead of celebrating the enactment of the Renewable Energy Law, a baffling report was published in the local newspapers. RP revives nuke program proclaimed headlines in Philippinian newspapers. According to reports, the Philippine government had officially restarted its nuclear energy development programme. It entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Korean government for a feasibility study on the possible revival of the mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP). The MOU sought cooperation in the

rehabilitation, operation and maintenance of the controversial BNPP which was abandoned following vociferous protests from civil society, ecologists and non-governmental organizations. This was certainly not a bolt from the dark. Earlier in the year, in July, Energy Secretary Angelo Reyes had announced that a team from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that inspected the power plant in Bataan months ago has reported that this could be rehabilitated in at least five years at a cost of $800 million. No one took Secretary Reyess statements seriously since it was clear that it was not IAEAs role to go around reviving, rehabilitating, and resuscitating obsolete and inactive nuclear power plants. This was a fact confirmed by Dr. Kelvin S. Rodolfo, Professor Emeritus, Department of Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago and Adjunct Professor National Institute of Geological Sciences at the University of the Philippines during an enlightening presentation to the media in Manila. The good professor quotes Mr. Akira Omoto, Director of the IAEAs Division of Nuclear Power and leader of the mission to the Philippines - "In the case of Bataan, the plant was completed over 20 years ago. Our mission visited the plant to gauge the current state of the plant, but our suggestion to the Philippines was simply on what steps they need to take and what needs to be considered to complete their own assessment." This is straight from the horses mouth, so to speak, as it is based on the staff report filed on the IAEA website. Clearly Secretary Reyes misunderstood or he was misquoted. But he is not the only one. Congressman Mark Cojuangco (5th District of Pangasinan) who filed House Bill 4631 of the 14th Congress, Mandating the immediate re-commissioning and commercial operation of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant chose to misquote a scientific report, in the explanatory note in the bill certifying the safety of the site: Top geologists have evaluated Bataan and, with the exception of Mount Natib which is a dormant volcano whose last eruption was estimated to have been between 11.3 to 18 thousand years ago (Cabato et al. 2005) and which is ten kilometers (10 km) from the BNPP, could find no anomalies in locating the plant there. The good Professor, Dr. Kelvin S. Rodolfo, is hopping mad. He is after all one of the authors of the report and, as he informed the media in Manila, BNPP is not 10 kilometers away from Natib, it is on Natib, which is the entire northern half of the Bataan peninsula. Mount Natib is not dormant Prof. Rodolfos most vehement argument. And it is difficult to argue with a man who has done years of analysis with his fellow scientists to arrive at the conclusion that a breach in the caldera of Mt Natib is the most likely source of a presumed pyroclastic deposit in the eastern bay that is associated with sediments about 11.318 thousand years, indicating that a Natib eruption occurred much more recently than previously documented for this volcano. (Cabato, M. E. J. A., Rodolfo, K. S., and Siringan, F. P., 2005). On the basis of geological studies and seismic reflection tests carried out by his team, Dr. Rodolfo is willing to bet his degrees and grey hair, that Mt. Natib is overdue for a serious shake up. The usual faulting intervals are about 2,000 years, and the last faulting episode and about 3000 years ago. Well, we are not arguing with the good professor! We wonder why, then, is Congressman Cojuangco fast-tracking the house bill promulgating the revival of such a dangerous proposition, on the basis of an ocular inspection carried out by vested interests, lay men and uneducated congressmen and ignoring the advice of the scientists? Why are hundreds of congressmen, who let the Renewable Energy Bill languish for over a decade, pushing for a quick passage of a bill that spells disaster for the Philippines? This is the one billion dollar question that all Filipino tax payers should be asking our congressmen. Greenpeace South East Asia Executive Director, Mr. Von Hernandez reiterated at the media briefing, This is an expensive distraction, from real solutions. Development of wind, solar, geo-thermal energy, demand side management for improved electrical efficiency and decentralized renewable energy are the urgent issues that need to be addressed in the implementing rules and regulations (IRR) of the Renewable Energy Law. The congressmen

pursuing this foolish nuclear fantasy, for quick personal gains, are wasting our time, money and energy. We have to bring an end to this nonsense, now. (This is a post by Shailendra Yashwant, campaigns director for Greenpeace South East Asia)

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Soc/soc.culture.filipino/200602/msg00792.html

The Bataan Nuclear Reactor - RPs White Elephant

From: "Datu Puti" <amboytex@xxxxxxxxx> Date: 25 Feb 2006 13:21:11 -0800

Published on 1 Jul 2004 by INQ7. Archived on 1 Jul 2004. Philippines: Bataan nuclear plant costs $155,000 a day but no power by Karl Wilson NEARLY 30 years after work began on the Bataan nuclear power plant just north of Manila, Filipino taxpayers are still paying 155,000 dollars a day in interest on a structure that has never produced one watt of power. Thelmo Cunanan, chief executive of state-run Philippine National Oil Co., said it had become the country's most outstanding white elephant. "The fact that we are still paying interest on a project that is 30 years old and has not produced a watt of electricity should send at least one positive signal to the investment community," he told Agence France-Presse in a telephone interview. The signal was that "If we enter an agreement at least we pay our bills. There were times when I thought: why should we? Why don't we simply turn our backs and walk away from it but that is not the way we Filipinos do business." The Bataan nuclear power plant was a knee jerk reaction by former Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos to the energy crisis of the early 1970s. The oil embargo had put a heavy strain on the economy and Marcos saw nuclear power as the best way forward in terms of meeting the country's future power needs and lessening the nation's reliance on imported oil.

Construction began in 1976 and was completed in 1984 at a cost of 2.3

billion dollars. The power station, 60 miles (97 kilometres) north of Manila, has been the centre of controversy from the day construction began. When Marcos was overthrown by the so-called People Power Revolution in early 1986 a team of international inspectors visited the site and declared it unsafe and inoperable as it was built near major earthquake fault lines and near the Pinatubo volcano which at the time was dormant. The first post-Marcos government of Corazon Aquino sealed the nuclear plant's fate for good when it banned the use of nuclear power and enshrined it into the Constitution. Debt repayment on the plant is the country's biggest single obligation.

Successive governments have looked at ways of converting the plant into an oil, coal, or gas-fired power station. According to Cunanan a South Korean company recently expressed an interest in taking over the nuclear power station and developing it as a commercial operation. But the provision in the constitution ruled it out. Cunanan said it would be unfair to name the company but said the government has not ruled out converting the plant into a fossil fuel power station. Some studies in the past have shown that converting the plant may be too expensive. The plant itself has been maintained despite never having been commissioned. A Westinghouse light water reactor, it was designed to produce some 621 megawatts of electricity. Much of the technology used in the plant was early 1970s but modified following the Three Mile Island accident in the United States in 1979. Comment: So members of the RP Congress, will you please do something about that provision in our constitution? Do your constitutional duties as legislators, fire it up, and jump start the RP economy. The Westinghouse company built the reactor near a major earthquake fault line & the people are paying for it? I smell something fishy here................ People of the Philippines UNITE!

Online slideshow http://www.slideshare.net/gtapang/09-0214-no-to-bnpp-bataan-dr-kelvin-rodolfo