The future looks nuclear

I lifted the following article from The New Straits Times today:

TNB is pushing for the use of nuclear energy and it wants a decision around 2013 to head off a power crunch in 2025. Shahriman Johari takes a look at the nuclear issue and the concerns Malaysians have over the energy source.

IN THE 1970s, Tenaga Nasional Bhd (TNB) had actually examined nuclear power as an option after oil prices surged when the main producing countries decided to turn off the tap. But Malaysia found gas in Terengganu and the government decided to use that as the main source of fuel for the power sector. That was about 20 years ago and in another 10 years or so, we would have used up all of that gas.

It was probably deja vu for TNB last year when gas and coal prices shot through the roof. The volatile price of those commodities has raised concerns over Malaysia’s ability to secure enough fuel supply that would also help to keep electricity prices at a reasonable level.

Now, TNB is actively pushing for the government to use nuclear energy and it wants a decision around 2013 to comfortably head off a power crunch sometime in 2025. SHAHRIMAN JOHARI takes a look at the nuclear issue and the concerns Malaysians have over the energy source.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


If Malaysia wants a reliable source of power that is also reasonably priced in the future, all roads lead to nuclear energy.

Supporters say that it is an option that cannot be discounted because other alternatives may either be too expensive or unreliable in terms of supply security.

"We have to prepare for the nuclear future," said Tenaga Nasional Bhd (TNB) (5347) head of energy unit, Dr Zamzam Jaafar.

Malaysia has a long-term plan to become a developed nation by 2020. But that is also the time when natural gas earmarked for the local power sector is expected to run out. This is a problem because since the 1980s, the country has been relying on heavily subsidised gas price to keep electricity rates low.

Cheap energy cost was one of Malaysia's trump cards as it went through an industrialisation drive in the eighties. Steel companies like Perwaja was born while the national car company, Proton, was also set up at the same time. Foreign investors were also wooed to Malaysia, thanks in part to cheap electricity.

Now, national oil company Petronas has warned that gas supply to the power sector after 2019 would be uncertain.

Gas for the power sector comes from fields offshore Terengganu. While Malaysia has other gas sources in Sabah, these are being sold (at higher market prices) to countries like Japan under contracts that run for around 20 years.

"Our concern now is Peninsular Malaysia where we will have very little gas by 2020," Zamzam told reporters at a briefing in Terengganu recently.

If the country wants to continue using gas, it will have to import at much higher international prices, which means that electricity prices will have to rise as well. Natural gas futures in New York trade around RM13 per unit currently while the local power sector now pays a fixed RM10.70 per unit. (This price was the result of a hike in July 2008. Before that, the power sector enjoyed a price of RM6.40 per unit for a long time).

But the gas price follows the oil price, which means that buyers will be in for another rude shock when the oil price rises again.

When oil reached a record US$147 (RM513) a barrel in July 2008, the gas price also followed suit and was trading around US$13.60 or RM47.60 per unit.

Another option would be to use coal to generate electricity. Unlike gas, Malaysia imports almost all of its coal needs and the price of coal has also proven to be volatile.

In the six months between September 2008 and February 2009, TNB's coal costs averaged US$100 a tonne, double what it paid in the same period a year ago.

The country would also have to double coal imports to cover the loss of electricity powered by natural gas.

It would also mean that Malaysia will be over reliant on coal, a fuel source that's not exactly good for the environment. In addition, future sites of coal plants will be harder to find because the plant needs to be close to a port to lower transportation costs.

What about generating power from the rivers of Sarawak? TNB has estimated that Sarawak rivers have the potential to generate some 28,000MW of electricity. That's about 12 hydro electric plants the size of Bakun.

However, the most that can be transported to Peninsular Malaysia is 10,000MW.

Base load is best

There are certain rules that need to be observed in the electricity industry. The main reason for that is to ensure the security of supply.

One rule is having spare capacity of about 20-30 per cent, which protects the system against sudden surges of demand.

Another rule of thumb is the need to have base load power or power from the most reliable and cheapest sources, making up 60-70 per cent of the peak demand capacity. Currently, Malaysia's base load comes from gas and coal-powered plants. The rest will come from other more expensive plants or those designed to provide power quickly during peak times.

"If TNB must ensure reliable and reasonably priced electricity, the proven base-load nuclear option must not be precluded.

"With uncertain future supply and volatile fossil fuel prices, nuclear power could be viewed as a proven insurance base load power generation option to prevent runaway gas and coal prices," Zamzam said.

TEPCO, the Japanese equivalent of TNB, has nuclear as its base-load power, with its 53 nuclear plants. Nuclear is also the base-load option in South Korea, making up 40 per cent of the country's generation capacity.


If Malaysia wants a reliable source of power that is also reasonably priced in the future, all roads lead to nuclear energy.

Supporters say that it is an option that cannot be discounted because other alternatives may either be too expensive or unreliable in terms of supply security.

"We have to prepare for the nuclear future," said Tenaga Nasional Bhd (TNB) (5347) head of energy unit, Dr Zamzam Jaafar.

Malaysia has a long-term plan to become a developed nation by 2020. But that is also the time when natural gas earmarked for the local power sector is expected to run out. This is a problem because since the 1980s, the country has been relying on heavily subsidised gas price to keep electricity rates low.

Cheap energy cost was one of Malaysia's trump cards as it went through an industrialisation drive in the eighties. Steel companies like Perwaja was born while the national car company, Proton, was also set up at the same time. Foreign investors were also wooed to Malaysia, thanks in part to cheap electricity.

Now, national oil company Petronas has warned that gas supply to the power sector after 2019 would be uncertain.

Gas for the power sector comes from fields offshore Terengganu. While Malaysia has other gas sources in Sabah, these are being sold (at higher market prices) to countries like Japan under contracts that run for around 20 years.

"Our concern now is Peninsular Malaysia where we will have very little gas by 2020," Zamzam told reporters at a briefing in Terengganu recently.

If the country wants to continue using gas, it will have to import at much higher international prices, which means that electricity prices will have to rise as well. Natural gas futures in New York trade around RM13 per unit currently while the local power sector now pays a fixed RM10.70 per unit. (This price was the result of a hike in July 2008. Before that, the power sector enjoyed a price of RM6.40 per unit for a long time).

But the gas price follows the oil price, which means that buyers will be in for another rude shock when the oil price rises again.

When oil reached a record US$147 (RM513) a barrel in July 2008, the gas price also followed suit and was trading around US$13.60 or RM47.60 per unit.

Another option would be to use coal to generate electricity. Unlike gas, Malaysia imports almost all of its coal needs and the price of coal has also proven to be volatile.

In the six months between September 2008 and February 2009, TNB's coal costs averaged US$100 a tonne, double what it paid in the same period a year ago.

The country would also have to double coal imports to cover the loss of electricity powered by natural gas.

It would also mean that Malaysia will be over reliant on coal, a fuel source that's not exactly good for the environment. In addition, future sites of coal plants will be harder to find because the plant needs to be close to a port to lower transportation costs.

What about generating power from the rivers of Sarawak? TNB has estimated that Sarawak rivers have the potential to generate some 28,000MW of electricity. That's about 12 hydro electric plants the size of Bakun.

However, the most that can be transported to Peninsular Malaysia is 10,000MW.

Base load is best

There are certain rules that need to be observed in the electricity industry. The main reason for that is to ensure the security of supply.

One rule is having spare capacity of about 20-30 per cent, which protects the system against sudden surges of demand.

Another rule of thumb is the need to have base load power or power from the most reliable and cheapest sources, making up 60-70 per cent of the peak demand capacity. Currently, Malaysia's base load comes from gas and coal-powered plants. The rest will come from other more expensive plants or those designed to provide power quickly during peak times.

"If TNB must ensure reliable and reasonably priced electricity, the proven base-load nuclear option must not be precluded.

"With uncertain future supply and volatile fossil fuel prices, nuclear power could be viewed as a proven insurance base load power generation option to prevent runaway gas and coal prices," Zamzam said.

TEPCO, the Japanese equivalent of TNB, has nuclear as its base-load power, with its 53 nuclear plants. Nuclear is also the base-load option in South Korea, making up 40 per cent of the country's generation capacity.



Concerns of radiation are overblown, says agency

The radiation exposure during an x-ray treatment is 2,000 times higher than radiation received by someone staying close to a nuclear plant, says the Malaysian Nuclear Agency


JAPAN is one of two countries in the world that has experienced the terrifying effects of radiation from atomic energy.

Yet, the Asian country has more than 50 nuclear power plants, making it the world's second after France with the most number of reactors.

Nuclear power plants are now much safer than what they were ever since the Chernobyl incident in 1986.

Malaysia's national utility, Tenaga Nasional Bhd (TNB) (5347), reckons that the country should also join the bandwagon if it wants a cost-effective and reliable source of power.
Already, other countries in Southeast Asia have decided to go nuclear. Indonesia wants to build four plants with a total capacity of 4,000 megawatts (MW) by 2016, Vietnam wants to build two plants of 1,000MW each by 2018 and Thailand is also aiming for a total of 2,000MW by 2021.

The top concern for a nuclear power plant is safety.

But radiation concerns are overblown, said the Malaysian Nuclear Agency.

"For example, the radiation exposure during an x-ray treatment is 2,000 times higher than radiation received by someone staying close to a nuclear plant," it said on its website.

In Taiwan, people live just 12km away from a plant in the capital Taipei.

As for the safety of a plant, there is an international nuclear safety regime based on international conventions, internationally-accepted safety standards and a system of peer reviews.

For example, countries with plants must report every three years about the safety of their plants under detailed guidelines.

Under the peer review, almost every plant worldwide must be inspected for operational safety by the World Association of Nuclear Operators and this is repeated every three years.

Probably the most serious concern is what is being done with spent fuel or the uranium that has been used by a plant.

Currently, spent fuel are being stored within the respective nuclear plant areas. Although there is a broad scientific consensus that storing the waste deep underground is one option, no country has done it yet, the International Atomic Energy Agency said on its website.

"The technical means for final disposal of these wastes are readily available, and political factors have been the principal cause for delays in the implementation of such solutions," it added.

Spent fuel can actually be reprocessed and the uranium can be used again.

However, the reprocessing technology is also one that allows a country to build nuclear bombs and as such, the US is loathe to allow for it to be used worldwide, a TNB official explained.