No one can overemphasize the importance of nuclear safety. The crisis at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant demonstrates how vulnerable they are. It revived the specter of the 1979 Three Mile Island accident in the United States and the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.
The ultimate lesson from the major nuclear catastrophes is that there is no way to prevent such calamities other than by firmly establishing a failsafe system. Prevention is easier said than done. The Japanese case should serve as a leverage to enhance safety measures for the use of atomic energy and step up international cooperation to avoid a potential nuclear holocaust.
In this regard, South Korea must do more to better control risk factors related to generating electricity from nuclear fission. Since the start of the Japanese turmoil, Seoul officials have tried to convince people that Korean reactors are far safer than those of the Fukushima plant. Of course, it is important to stave off irrational and undue worries about local nuclear power plants. But words alone are not enough to be 100 percent sure of zero defects in the operation of the reactors.
It is somewhat fortunate that the Lee Myung-bak administration has decided to take substantial steps to prevent any potential nuclear accidents. One of them is to upgrade the status of the Nuclear Safety Commission as an independent regulator. The commission has so far been affiliated with the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. Thus, it virtually acted as a rubber stamp on the government’s policy of stressing economic efficiency of atomic power. This invited criticism that Korea put nuclear safety on the backburner.
Belatedly aware of such criticism, the Lee administration and the governing Grand National Party have decided to have the independent safety commission in July to be led by a ministerial-level figure under the wing of the President or the Prime Minister’s Office. We hope the improved status of the panel will allow it to function as a real regulator without being influenced by politics and bureaucracy.
At stake is how to guarantee the panel’s neutrality and independence to shift the nation’s long-held efficiency-oriented policy to a safety-first one. The nation has continued to push deregulation to make business easier, encourage local firms to invest more, draw foreign direct investment and create more jobs. But, the nuclear power sector is not the target of deregulation. Instead, it needs to strengthen regulations, at least for safeguards.
Korea is one of world’s nuclear powerhouses with 21 reactors in operation. Its nuclear power accounts for 40 percent of the nation’s total electricity supply. It plans to build 10 more plants to increase the ratio to 60 percent by 2030. It also has an ambitious plan to construct 80 nuclear plants overseas by that year to export its technology and operational know-how, stimulated by a $20 billion deal to set up four plants in the United Arab Emirates.
Such plans cannot be realized without guaranteeing nuclear safety. The so-called worldwide nuclear renaissance is now faced with a hitch in the wake of the Japanese disaster. Overconfidence in harnessing fission energy could lead to unpredictable consequences. It is still doubtful if Korea’s nuclear plants can actually withstand a quake of 6.5-manitude as the government officials repeatedly claim. Are they not overly confident?