Bottom Line
A case for nuclear energy in Bangladesh
Bangladesh has the potential to be a middle- income country. International financial institutions and the reputed investment firm, Goldman Sachs, have assessed that the country can generate a double-digit figure of economic growth annually.
It is common knowledge that two primary factors -- inadequate supply of energy/electricity and poor infrastructure -- impede the growth. At present, the country's energy is 90% gas-based.
With regard to energy in Bangladesh, almost 70% of it is being used in the urban and industrial centers. 65% per cent of the population does not have access to electricity. There is a wide gap between the availability of energy and the demand, with about 800 to 1000 MW shortfall.
Energy is vital for running industries and manufacturing plants, and also mechanised agricultural equipment. Bangladesh is gradually integrating with global economy and the demand for energy will increase day by day.
Furthermore, the current population of 145 million will grow to 254 million by 2050, according to a UN Report. With the increase in population the demand for energy/electricity will naturally grow.
It is believed that the demand is likely to grow by almost 50% percent in the next 15 years, and Bangladesh needs to increase the capacity to 8,000 MW by 2010 according to one estimate.
Any energy plan has a long gestation period. There is no quick-fix to the problem. Therefore, if one decides now, the result will be seen after some years. There is no a quick implementation process.
Suitability of nuclear energy
According to energy experts, one of the sources of energy is nuclear energy. Compared to coal and hydroelectric dams, nuclear energy is the safest and cleanest way, from an environmental standpoint, to produce electricity. And the fuel it uses, uranium, is more abundant than fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas). One pound of uranium produces 20,000 times more energy than one pound of coal. Nuclear energy (uranium 235 and uranium 238-derived plutonium produce) emits no harmful gases or toxic metals into the environment. And, unlike hydroelectric dams, it does not alter a region's ecosystem. Furthermore, despite what activists and the media say, experts who favour nuclear energy argue that the waste that nuclear power creates is far less of a problem than that produced by coal, or the by the silt that builds up behind dams. Coal-fired plants generate 320 lbs. of ash and other poisons per person per year, of which 10 percent is spewed into the atmosphere. Experts say that a nuclear power plant generates radioactive waste the size of one aspirin tablet per person per year (a plant's yearly waste fits comfortably in a small ditch). Disposal personnel encapsulate nuclear waste in fireproof, water-proof, and earthquake-proof, boron-silicate glass or ceramic and then bury it deep in the ground. According to nuclear experts, third generation reactors, with an output of 600 MW, are simpler, smaller and more rugged, and reduce substantially the possibility of a core meltdown accident, from a likelihood of 1 in 20,000 to 1 in 800,000 per reactor year. Furthermore, third generation reactors are known to have, for example, 80 percent fewer control cables and 60 percent less piping. They are standardised to expedite licensing and reduce construction time. Fourth generation fusion reactors, one hopes, will be coming into operation in the foreseeable future. When one speaks of suitability of nuclear energy, it is natural that one is reminded of the Chernobyl accident in 1986. Experts hold the view that it was unique. They argue that that kind of accident will not happen in any other nuclear power plant because all the reactors currently in operation around the world are placed inside a containment building, while Chernobyl was not. Nuclear energy in use in many countries
France uses nuclear power to generate 77 percent of its electricity, and Russia gets 20% of its total energy requirements. More than 35 nuclear power plants are currently under construction around the world, 24 of them in Asia, including in China. Today, about 12,500 nuclear plants provide safe, clean and cheap energy to about 32 countries. Indonesia, Malaysia and Egypt are developing nuclear energy. Countries which, at one stage, did not encourage nuclear energy are currently seriously debating on the use of nuclear energy because of environmental concerns. Sweden, Australia and Germany are among them. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has found that the weighing of pros and cons comes out differently for different countries. The most important determinant will be cost-competitiveness compared to alternatives. Nuclear power plants have a "front-loaded" cost structure, i.e. they are relatively expensive to build but relatively inexpensive to operate. For new construction, the economic competitiveness of nuclear power depends on several factors. * First, it depends on the alternatives available. Some countries are rich in alternative energy resources, others less so. Some alternatives that used to be cheap and attractive in the past may be less so in the future -- e.g. coal for environmental reasons or natural gas for cost reasons. * Second, it depends on the overall electricity demand in a country, and how fast it is growing. * Third, it depends on the market structure and investment environment that assures attractive returns. If one considers the above factors, one may reasonably argue a strong case for nuclear energy in Bangladesh. IAEA is likely to advise Bangladesh as to the possible disadvantages of nuclear energy, if any, considering Bangladesh's flood-prone physical characteristics and density of population. During my tenure as concurrent Permanent Representative/ Ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna, I had several occasions to discuss this issue in 1989-90 with the then Director-General Dr. Hans Blix. He suggested that Bangladesh might seriously consider nuclear energy because of its lack of adequate energy resources. The difficulty at that time was how to finance it. No country was at that period willing to provide a huge loan for the nuclear reactor. It is commendable that the caretaker government has considered development of nuclear energy as an option, and reportedly obtained a green signal from IAEA for it. The Roopur 300-500 MW power plant can be revived. It is noted that the site for a reactor at Roopur was selected in the '60s. It has been recently reported that France is providing two nuclear reactors to Libya. The Bangladesh authorities may take up the matter with France on this issue, if it has not already been taken up. Russia may also be of assistance in building a nuclear reactor, as it is building nuclear reactors in China and Iran, among other countries. Many nuclear energy experts suggest that besides the rigorous internal review mechanism for a nuclear safety program, an independent, external Safeguards Advisory Panel may be set up so that it may annually submit its report to parliament. Barrister Harun ur Rashid Former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva.
According to energy experts, one of the sources of energy is nuclear energy. Compared to coal and hydroelectric dams, nuclear energy is the safest and cleanest way, from an environmental standpoint, to produce electricity. And the fuel it uses, uranium, is more abundant than fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas). One pound of uranium produces 20,000 times more energy than one pound of coal. Nuclear energy (uranium 235 and uranium 238-derived plutonium produce) emits no harmful gases or toxic metals into the environment. And, unlike hydroelectric dams, it does not alter a region's ecosystem. Furthermore, despite what activists and the media say, experts who favour nuclear energy argue that the waste that nuclear power creates is far less of a problem than that produced by coal, or the by the silt that builds up behind dams. Coal-fired plants generate 320 lbs. of ash and other poisons per person per year, of which 10 percent is spewed into the atmosphere. Experts say that a nuclear power plant generates radioactive waste the size of one aspirin tablet per person per year (a plant's yearly waste fits comfortably in a small ditch). Disposal personnel encapsulate nuclear waste in fireproof, water-proof, and earthquake-proof, boron-silicate glass or ceramic and then bury it deep in the ground. According to nuclear experts, third generation reactors, with an output of 600 MW, are simpler, smaller and more rugged, and reduce substantially the possibility of a core meltdown accident, from a likelihood of 1 in 20,000 to 1 in 800,000 per reactor year. Furthermore, third generation reactors are known to have, for example, 80 percent fewer control cables and 60 percent less piping. They are standardised to expedite licensing and reduce construction time. Fourth generation fusion reactors, one hopes, will be coming into operation in the foreseeable future. When one speaks of suitability of nuclear energy, it is natural that one is reminded of the Chernobyl accident in 1986. Experts hold the view that it was unique. They argue that that kind of accident will not happen in any other nuclear power plant because all the reactors currently in operation around the world are placed inside a containment building, while Chernobyl was not. Nuclear energy in use in many countries
France uses nuclear power to generate 77 percent of its electricity, and Russia gets 20% of its total energy requirements. More than 35 nuclear power plants are currently under construction around the world, 24 of them in Asia, including in China. Today, about 12,500 nuclear plants provide safe, clean and cheap energy to about 32 countries. Indonesia, Malaysia and Egypt are developing nuclear energy. Countries which, at one stage, did not encourage nuclear energy are currently seriously debating on the use of nuclear energy because of environmental concerns. Sweden, Australia and Germany are among them. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has found that the weighing of pros and cons comes out differently for different countries. The most important determinant will be cost-competitiveness compared to alternatives. Nuclear power plants have a "front-loaded" cost structure, i.e. they are relatively expensive to build but relatively inexpensive to operate. For new construction, the economic competitiveness of nuclear power depends on several factors. * First, it depends on the alternatives available. Some countries are rich in alternative energy resources, others less so. Some alternatives that used to be cheap and attractive in the past may be less so in the future -- e.g. coal for environmental reasons or natural gas for cost reasons. * Second, it depends on the overall electricity demand in a country, and how fast it is growing. * Third, it depends on the market structure and investment environment that assures attractive returns. If one considers the above factors, one may reasonably argue a strong case for nuclear energy in Bangladesh. IAEA is likely to advise Bangladesh as to the possible disadvantages of nuclear energy, if any, considering Bangladesh's flood-prone physical characteristics and density of population. During my tenure as concurrent Permanent Representative/ Ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna, I had several occasions to discuss this issue in 1989-90 with the then Director-General Dr. Hans Blix. He suggested that Bangladesh might seriously consider nuclear energy because of its lack of adequate energy resources. The difficulty at that time was how to finance it. No country was at that period willing to provide a huge loan for the nuclear reactor. It is commendable that the caretaker government has considered development of nuclear energy as an option, and reportedly obtained a green signal from IAEA for it. The Roopur 300-500 MW power plant can be revived. It is noted that the site for a reactor at Roopur was selected in the '60s. It has been recently reported that France is providing two nuclear reactors to Libya. The Bangladesh authorities may take up the matter with France on this issue, if it has not already been taken up. Russia may also be of assistance in building a nuclear reactor, as it is building nuclear reactors in China and Iran, among other countries. Many nuclear energy experts suggest that besides the rigorous internal review mechanism for a nuclear safety program, an independent, external Safeguards Advisory Panel may be set up so that it may annually submit its report to parliament. Barrister Harun ur Rashid Former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments