Rethinking nuclear-free plan

By Kwon Bong-woon

After President Moon Jae-in declared the pursuit of clean and renewable energy, the government decided to halt construction on the Shin Kori 5 and 6 reactors, currently underway. The government in a single five-term in office is pulling down the know-how of nuclear power technologies built up for over 50 years. President Moon's nuclear-free policy has neglected the country's ambitious plan to export more reactors abroad, and how to find eco-friendly replacement for the plants.

The nuclear-free plan should not be something political _ it should be about the people.

"It will cost about 2.6 trillion [$2.27 billion] to permanently shut down the ongoing construction, and it appears that it will have a big impact on the regional economy,” said Hong Nam-ki, head of the Office of Government Policy Coordination. The workers will be laid off temporarily, or until the final decision is made. Some 1.6 trillion won has already been spent on the reactors. Construction began in June 2016. They were supposed to have the capacity to generate 2.8 megawatts of energy. If construction is permanently halted, everyone residing in the region will suffer from a loss of jobs and a decline in the economy.

The Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power workers union and local residents want construction to continue because jobs are at stake along with compensation money to local residents.

"There are no legal grounds to halt the construction of the Shin Kori 5 and 6 reactors but they were suspended after the President's order," said Kim Do-eup, a lawmaker from the opposition Liberty Korea Party at a meeting of the National Assembly Trade Committee held Wednesday. Following the decision, 417 professors from universities across the country and abroad released a joint statement urging the government to reconsider its nuclear-free plan.

According to the Korea Electric Power Corporation, the portion of eco-friendly renewable resources such as wind and solar power is less than 1 percent. While renewable energy is the calling of the time, it is not yet as stable and efficient as nuclear energy. Korea is not rich in available renewable resources such as wind. A grand energy plan for a resource-poor country should be made comprehensively and thoroughly from a long-term perspective. Last month, the Taiwanese government decided to reopen two nuclear power plants that were shut down. Many countries have reversed decisions and returned to the use of nuclear plants.

Japan decided to give up its nuclear power plants after the Fukushima disaster in 2011, but changed recently. Japan's dependence on nuclear power was 26 percent of total power generated in 2016. Tokyo plans to raise its dependence back to between 20 percent and 22 percent by constructing more nuclear power plants through 2030. China and Russia are also expanding their nuclear plants. According to the World Nuclear Association, leading the construction of nuclear power plants, China is ahead with 20.

The government has already pledged to reduce the share of fossil fueled power stations in order to reduce fine dust pollution. It wants to replace the generating sources with natural gas and renewable energy, but the move would send utility fees up. The government must reconsider renewable energy matters with energy experts. Phasing out nuclear power must be a long-term plan based on a public consensus and should not be an agenda to be rushed through in a single five-year term. The government must not push ahead because it was a campaign pledge. If a conclusion is difficult, it should be put to a public vote, instead of leaving the matter to a select group of civilians. It must be discussed at a legislative hearing.

The writer lives in Dongjak-gu in Seoul, my email is kbw8234664@naver.com.