Thailand mulls nuclear power to address its energy shortage
Monday, May 21, 2007
FEARING a looming electricity shortage, Thailand has for the first time included nuclear power as an option in its long-term energy planning, despite worries about environmental problems.
The government's planners believe that by the end of the next decade building nuclear plants will be the most affordable way of meeting the country's growing energy needs. "We estimate that by the year 2019, nuclear power plants will be cheapest power plants to generate electricity," said Twarath Sutabutr, an official at the energy ministry. Construction of four conventional power plants has already been approved, but Twarath said the government's latest 15-year Power Development Plan calls for considering nuclear as a new energy source.
Although a nuclear plant is far more expensive than conventional power plants, the energy produced is much cheaper especially if global oil and natural gas prices keep rising in the future, Twarath said. Thailand spent 912 billion baht (US$26 billion) on energy imports, mainly crude oil, in 2006, up 16 per cent year-on-year, according to the ministry.
About 70 per cent of Thailand's electricity comes from natural gas, with the rest from oil, coal and hydropower. But natural gas reserves are running low, leaving Thailand scratching for new energy sources to ease its dependence on petroleum imports.
Thailand has already embarked on a series of energy deals with neighbouring Myanmar, including a six-billion-dollar hydropower project on the Salween River, the longest undammed river in Southeast Asia.
Twarath said the nuclear possibility is now back on the table because the government sees limited options for generating affordable electricity in the future. But environmentalists disagree, pointing to a recent report by Greenpeace that found constuction costs for nuclear plants frequently run over budget sometimes by as much as 300 per cent. A survey of 75 US nuclear reactors showed that the predicted construction costs were US$45 billion, but the actual costs were US$145 billion, the Greenpeace report said.
Twarath said the government planners also believe that nuclear energy would provide a way of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases that fuel climate change. That possibility was endorsed in early May at a UN conference on global warming here, after extensive debate among delegates at Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Thai environmentalist expert Tara Buakamsri pointed out that nuclear power carries the risk of ecologic damage. Thailand does not need nuclear power plants as there are many alternative options including biofuels and wind energy, he said.
Tara also voiced concern that nuclear waste could be used to make weapons, and could make Thailand a target for international terrorism.
Twarath from the energy ministry said the nuclear plan could be shelved if a better choice emerges. AFP
The government's planners believe that by the end of the next decade building nuclear plants will be the most affordable way of meeting the country's growing energy needs. "We estimate that by the year 2019, nuclear power plants will be cheapest power plants to generate electricity," said Twarath Sutabutr, an official at the energy ministry. Construction of four conventional power plants has already been approved, but Twarath said the government's latest 15-year Power Development Plan calls for considering nuclear as a new energy source.
Although a nuclear plant is far more expensive than conventional power plants, the energy produced is much cheaper especially if global oil and natural gas prices keep rising in the future, Twarath said. Thailand spent 912 billion baht (US$26 billion) on energy imports, mainly crude oil, in 2006, up 16 per cent year-on-year, according to the ministry.
About 70 per cent of Thailand's electricity comes from natural gas, with the rest from oil, coal and hydropower. But natural gas reserves are running low, leaving Thailand scratching for new energy sources to ease its dependence on petroleum imports.
Thailand has already embarked on a series of energy deals with neighbouring Myanmar, including a six-billion-dollar hydropower project on the Salween River, the longest undammed river in Southeast Asia.
Twarath said the nuclear possibility is now back on the table because the government sees limited options for generating affordable electricity in the future. But environmentalists disagree, pointing to a recent report by Greenpeace that found constuction costs for nuclear plants frequently run over budget sometimes by as much as 300 per cent. A survey of 75 US nuclear reactors showed that the predicted construction costs were US$45 billion, but the actual costs were US$145 billion, the Greenpeace report said.
Twarath said the government planners also believe that nuclear energy would provide a way of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases that fuel climate change. That possibility was endorsed in early May at a UN conference on global warming here, after extensive debate among delegates at Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Thai environmentalist expert Tara Buakamsri pointed out that nuclear power carries the risk of ecologic damage. Thailand does not need nuclear power plants as there are many alternative options including biofuels and wind energy, he said.
Tara also voiced concern that nuclear waste could be used to make weapons, and could make Thailand a target for international terrorism.
Twarath from the energy ministry said the nuclear plan could be shelved if a better choice emerges. AFP
Business Besides Oil
