Page 1 of
2 Asia's new nuclear
race By Purnendra Jain
ADELAIDE - With energy security appearing
as a major concern on policy agendas of many Asian
nations, both large and small, the option to go
nuclear is gaining increasing support in many
capitals.
Power generation through nuclear
facilities was a big no-no in the past and those
such as Japan that went for it in a big way in the
1970s were criticized both from within and
externally. However, context has changed and
continues to change rapidly, particularly
in
the Asia-Pacific region.
Added to the
concerns about the stable supply of fossil fuel,
especially from the Middle East, and the rising
oil prices in recent years is the management of
environment and how to tackle the issues of global
warming and greenhouse emissions.
India,
China, South Korea and Japan have recently
announced decisions to increase their numbers of
nuclear power plants. Vietnam, Malaysia and
Indonesia are likely to consider commissioning
such plants. Australia has also announced its
willingness to consider joining the nuclear-energy
race.
Australia currently does not have
any nuclear industry and a proposal in 1969-71 to
commission a nuclear power plant at Jervis Bay in
New South Wales was abandoned in 1971. Having
dropped that idea, Australia ratified the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1973. The only
nuclear facility Australia currently has is a
research reactor in Lucas Heights in southern
Sydney.
The possibility that Australia
will go nuclear has grabbed local media headlines
for some weeks with the release early this month
of a federal government report on the nuclear
industry, chaired by former high-profile Telstra
chief executive officer Ziggy Switkowski, a
physicist by training. It recommends up to 25
nuclear power plants for Australia by mid-century.
The aim of providing one-third of its energy needs
by 2050 with nuclear energy, from zero nuclear
power in 2006, is a rather fanciful idea.
The government of Prime Minister John
Howard has given its full support to going down
the path of nuclear energy. Howard believes that
public sentiment in Australia has changed and the
majority would now support nuclear power. Some
have commented that people in Australia, as in
many other countries, are realizing that the only
alternative to reducing greenhouse emissions and
arresting climate change is to go nuclear.
It is true that opposition to both
uranium-enrichment plants and uranium mining in
Australia has softened dramatically. Australia
holds some 40% of world uranium deposits and is
the second-largest supplier of this commodity
after Canada. It won't be surprising if it
increases its supply as demand rises, especially
in Australia's neighborhood. Australia has
recently approved a deal to supply uranium to
China, although it has rejected India's request on
the grounds that New Delhi is not a signatory to
the NPT.
While Australians don't mind
their country supplying the material to overseas
consumers, domestically Canberra faces several
challenges, and the likelihood of Australia going
nuclear seems rather implausible. While Howard may
be right in terms of greater public support for
nuclear facilities, it could take years before the
first nuclear power plant is commissioned. Some
estimate at least 10 years; others think it could
be 15 years or even longer.
There are
several impediments that the Australian government
will find hard to overcome. First, nuclear powers
plants are expensive and the gestation period is
long before plants can be commissioned and
electricity generated and distributed. It will be
difficult for any government in Australia to find
the massive amount of money required to kick-start
this industry, especially as Canberra struggles
even to provide sufficient levels of funding for
education and health. Commercially, it will be an
unviable proposition without heavy government
subsidies, a policy that will be opposed
vehemently in Australia. Non-agricultural
government subsidies have never been popular here.
Second, the knowledge base of Australia is
extremely low. Students and researchers in
Australia have never linked the study of physics
and nuclear technology to good career prospects.
University departments and research centers seem
to be ill-equipped for cutting-edge research in
this area and there are few top-class scientists
in Australia specializing in the discipline.
Third, current Australian laws do not
allow the establishment of nuclear-fuel-cycle
facilities, and these laws will be hard to change
without the Labor Party's support, which is
unlikely. This raises the all-important question
of the politics of it all. The Labor Party is
opposed to this option and it would be hard to
establish 25 nuclear power plants, as the "not in
my back yard" sentiment is too strong in
Australia, despite the increasing support for
cleaner and greener power-generation options.
Impact on Asia Whether or not
Australia will go nuclear is academic at this
stage. But it is true that many of Australia's
northern neighbors are competing for nuclear
status in a way not seen since the 1970s. Reports
suggest that 17 of the 28 nuclear power plants
under construction around the world are in Asia.
The nuclear debate sparked through the
Switkowski Report will have some immediate
implications for Australia's neighbors. First,
Australia cannot stand on its earlier moral high
ground of opposing nuclear facilities in its
neighborhood. Second, Australia's acceptance of
nuclear energy as a cleaner and greener option
will put further pressure on Canberra to approve
the supply of uranium to a range of countries,
including India, that Australia has embargoed
hitherto.
Demand for even larger energy
resources is being generated through rapid
industrial activity in China and India. But it is
not
