Fukushima crisis fails to dampen Indonesia's nuclear ambitions
The government is talking up the country's nuclear future, but progress may be hamstrung by characteristic indecision
The city of Jakarta at night. Only 65% of Indonesians have access to electricity. Photograph: Getty
Japan has raised the level of its nuclear crisis to the same as Chernobyl 25 years ago.
Yet the reverberations of the crises at Fukushima have scarcely cast a ripple in Indonesia's political quarters. Two weeks after Japan's nuclear crisis, the Indonesian government stated that it will continue to pursue an ambitious nuclear power programme of its own that will triple the country's electricity output by 2025.
The most significant proposal is the planned construction of two nuclear power plants comprised of four nuclear reactors by 2022. The two plants would have a cumulative capacity of 18GW. The majority of officials have settled on a preferred location - Bangka – which sits between the islands of Sumatra and Borneo. Supporters of Indonesia's nuclear bid are adamant that Bangka is far from active fault lines, thus minimising the potential for a Fukushima-style crisis. They emphasise that the technology used by Indonesia will be much more advanced than the 40-year-old reactors in Fukushima.
Last week, Sri Setiawati , a deputy to the minister for technology and research, gave her assurances that out of the 10 Asean nations, Indonesia "is the most ready to build a nuclear power plant". Ferhat Aziz, a spokesman from the country's national nuclear agency, BATAN , says that Indonesia has the requisite expertise to go nuclear, with "many experts who have been prepared [for a nuclear plant] for decades" and numerous tests conducted at three research reactors in Bandung, Central Java and Banten.
But a significant proportion of the Indonesia public, it seems, isn't as convinced. Plans to build a nuclear power plant in Muria in Central Java – nestled next to an inactive volcano – were eventually sidelined after vociferous protests by the local community. There has also been strident resistance from NGOs and environmentalist groups such as Greenpeace, who have consistently voiced their concerns over Indonesia's geological vulnerability - such as its ill-fated position atop the "ring of fire" - in addition to Indonesia's history of inefficiently coordinated responses to disaster. While Japan has demonstrated its extraordinary capacity for order and efficiency in a crisis,Indonesia's capacity to mobilise resources in an emergency is usually cuckolded by a well-entrenched preference for bureaucratic buck-passing.
Then there's the pervasive culture of corruption in Indonesia. Nothing less than utmost stringency is required where nuclear power is concerned, but opponents fear a penchant for cutting corners could eclipse safety concerns. These fears are felt among some members of the country's National Energy Council (NEC), the advisory body that maps out power infrastructure in Indonesia, which has led to some members calling for the exploration of geothermal sources, hydroelectricity and biofuels before resorting to nuclear power.
To its credit, the Indonesian government has recognised – with increasing urgency – the need for reform. The depletion of fossil fuels and ever-increasing oil prices means that initiatives promoting renewable energy are a necessity. Currently, ensuring a stable power supply is of foremost importance: only 65% of Indonesians have access to electricity; the government aims to increase this figure to 91% by 2019. Furthermore, blackouts in the nation's overburdened capital, Jakarta, occur with chronic frequency.
This is compounded by the hucksterism of Indonesia's coal producers, who would prefer to export their product for a higher selling price to foreign markets instead of selling locally for a lower price to the state-owned electricity utility, PLN. At the heart of the problem is that the government continues to undervalue the price of electricity, which has subsequent ramifications for incentives for firms to invest in electricity infrastructure. It's a quandary that plagues many emerging economies: how does the government determine a price that ensures affordability of electricity to consumers while encouraging much-needed investment in the industry?
It's not surprising, then, that advocates of nuclear power have found support in the Indonesian government, which is well aware that the only way electricity output can be stabilised and increased is if the country is self-sufficient in energy production; that is, it is no longer dependent on fossil fuels.
Certainly, Indonesia is not the only developing nation with designs on developing nuclear power plants - although after Fukushima, it is certainly part of a select club. While the Philippines, Malaysia and China have temporarily halted their nuclear power plans, Vietnam - also bedeviled by the cumulative forces of increasing prosperity and unsustainable urban growth rates - is also to build a nuclear power plant. Both countries have been offered financial support from Russia to pursue nuclear power projects: Vietnam has already signed a deal with Russia to have a nuclear power plant ready by 2020. Indonesia has been more coy about committing to anything on paper, but will receive roughly $1.5m from Russia per year to jointly finance renewable energy initiatives.
However, it is just as likely that all the talk of nuclear power in Indonesia will be simply that - talk. A cursory glance at Indonesia's chequered history of infrastructure projects suggests that significant movement on big capital and time-intensive proposals tends to be hamstrung by characteristically protracted decision-making processes. Indonesia is already on track to miss a target set by the government to have nuclear power online between 2015 and 2019. One member of the NEC, Herman Agustiwan, said that with a population of 240 million, nuclear option is a necessity for Indonesia as it has to "consider [its] energy supply in the long-term ...[we] have no choice". He may be right - but either way, one just hopes Indonesia's plans for a sustainable energy future aren't paralysed by governmental indecision.
• Gillian Terzis is a freelance journalist based in Jakarta
Yet the reverberations of the crises at Fukushima have scarcely cast a ripple in Indonesia's political quarters. Two weeks after Japan's nuclear crisis, the Indonesian government stated that it will continue to pursue an ambitious nuclear power programme of its own that will triple the country's electricity output by 2025.
The most significant proposal is the planned construction of two nuclear power plants comprised of four nuclear reactors by 2022. The two plants would have a cumulative capacity of 18GW. The majority of officials have settled on a preferred location - Bangka – which sits between the islands of Sumatra and Borneo. Supporters of Indonesia's nuclear bid are adamant that Bangka is far from active fault lines, thus minimising the potential for a Fukushima-style crisis. They emphasise that the technology used by Indonesia will be much more advanced than the 40-year-old reactors in Fukushima.
Last week, Sri Setiawati , a deputy to the minister for technology and research, gave her assurances that out of the 10 Asean nations, Indonesia "is the most ready to build a nuclear power plant". Ferhat Aziz, a spokesman from the country's national nuclear agency, BATAN , says that Indonesia has the requisite expertise to go nuclear, with "many experts who have been prepared [for a nuclear plant] for decades" and numerous tests conducted at three research reactors in Bandung, Central Java and Banten.
But a significant proportion of the Indonesia public, it seems, isn't as convinced. Plans to build a nuclear power plant in Muria in Central Java – nestled next to an inactive volcano – were eventually sidelined after vociferous protests by the local community. There has also been strident resistance from NGOs and environmentalist groups such as Greenpeace, who have consistently voiced their concerns over Indonesia's geological vulnerability - such as its ill-fated position atop the "ring of fire" - in addition to Indonesia's history of inefficiently coordinated responses to disaster. While Japan has demonstrated its extraordinary capacity for order and efficiency in a crisis,Indonesia's capacity to mobilise resources in an emergency is usually cuckolded by a well-entrenched preference for bureaucratic buck-passing.
Then there's the pervasive culture of corruption in Indonesia. Nothing less than utmost stringency is required where nuclear power is concerned, but opponents fear a penchant for cutting corners could eclipse safety concerns. These fears are felt among some members of the country's National Energy Council (NEC), the advisory body that maps out power infrastructure in Indonesia, which has led to some members calling for the exploration of geothermal sources, hydroelectricity and biofuels before resorting to nuclear power.
To its credit, the Indonesian government has recognised – with increasing urgency – the need for reform. The depletion of fossil fuels and ever-increasing oil prices means that initiatives promoting renewable energy are a necessity. Currently, ensuring a stable power supply is of foremost importance: only 65% of Indonesians have access to electricity; the government aims to increase this figure to 91% by 2019. Furthermore, blackouts in the nation's overburdened capital, Jakarta, occur with chronic frequency.
This is compounded by the hucksterism of Indonesia's coal producers, who would prefer to export their product for a higher selling price to foreign markets instead of selling locally for a lower price to the state-owned electricity utility, PLN. At the heart of the problem is that the government continues to undervalue the price of electricity, which has subsequent ramifications for incentives for firms to invest in electricity infrastructure. It's a quandary that plagues many emerging economies: how does the government determine a price that ensures affordability of electricity to consumers while encouraging much-needed investment in the industry?
It's not surprising, then, that advocates of nuclear power have found support in the Indonesian government, which is well aware that the only way electricity output can be stabilised and increased is if the country is self-sufficient in energy production; that is, it is no longer dependent on fossil fuels.
Certainly, Indonesia is not the only developing nation with designs on developing nuclear power plants - although after Fukushima, it is certainly part of a select club. While the Philippines, Malaysia and China have temporarily halted their nuclear power plans, Vietnam - also bedeviled by the cumulative forces of increasing prosperity and unsustainable urban growth rates - is also to build a nuclear power plant. Both countries have been offered financial support from Russia to pursue nuclear power projects: Vietnam has already signed a deal with Russia to have a nuclear power plant ready by 2020. Indonesia has been more coy about committing to anything on paper, but will receive roughly $1.5m from Russia per year to jointly finance renewable energy initiatives.
However, it is just as likely that all the talk of nuclear power in Indonesia will be simply that - talk. A cursory glance at Indonesia's chequered history of infrastructure projects suggests that significant movement on big capital and time-intensive proposals tends to be hamstrung by characteristically protracted decision-making processes. Indonesia is already on track to miss a target set by the government to have nuclear power online between 2015 and 2019. One member of the NEC, Herman Agustiwan, said that with a population of 240 million, nuclear option is a necessity for Indonesia as it has to "consider [its] energy supply in the long-term ...[we] have no choice". He may be right - but either way, one just hopes Indonesia's plans for a sustainable energy future aren't paralysed by governmental indecision.
• Gillian Terzis is a freelance journalist based in Jakarta
No comments:
Post a Comment