PLTN adalah masa depan industri listrik kita memang saat ini sebagian besar bangsa kita belum paham dengan pentingya PLTN walau saya bukan engineer nuklir tapi dalam pandangan saya PLTN tetap sumber energi masa depan kapal perang AS saja bisa menggunakan Nuklir untuk energinya dan dia bisa berlayar tanpa mengisi bahan bakar selama 20 tahun bahkan lebuh, kenapa kita di darat tak berani?

Pembahasan – soedardjo batan

http://www.sacw.net/article1268.html

Nuclear option is not for future generations!

by Dhirendra Sharma

Ten thousand (10,000) young scientists, engineering students and concerned citizens, have, in a Memorandum to Prime Minister who is also Atomic Energy Minister, asked the Government of India to re- assess the futuristic social cost of its ambitious Nuclear Power programme. On the anniversary of Bhopal Gas tragedy, the signatories questioned the country preparedness to face any nuclear mishaps.

The memorandum referred to recent accident at Indian Oil Corporationâ„¢s Jaipur depot which destroyed millions of litres of petrol, diesel and kerosene. The fire burned abetted for 6 days, killing workers and destroying millions worth industrial property. Had the explosion occurred in an Atomic power plant at Kota, Rajsthan, e.g., no one would tell the scale of devastation. Yet, the Indian government has announced its long-term nuclear commitment to generate 40,000. MWe nuclear power by 2030. It had entered into Nuclear deals with seven countries, including the United States, costing the nation more than US$ 150 billion.

It takes 10-15 years to build a nuclear power plant but the designed life of a reactor is only 50 years. There after for hundred years the entire structure, plant area, equipment and tones of nuclearwaste material pose serious engineering and financial problems for their safe-keeping. According to the World Nuclear Industry Status Report, (August, 2009), the Nuclear Power is on “downward trend world wide and the largest nuclear builders in the world AREVA NP has turned into financial fiasco.

There are many post-Chernobyl (1986) scientific studies warning us against Nuclear Power. The US National Academy of Sciences Committee for Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation and the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effect of Atomic Radiation had cautioned against long-term epidemiological radiation effects. The Kyoto Protocol had excluded nuclear power from the Clean Development Mechanism. Dr. Richard Mould study Chernobyl: Th Real Story describes how tens of thousands citizens in Europe suffered the radiation effects. Contaminated helicopters, vehicles, buildings, machines, tools, roads, soil, trees, and forests had to be abandoned. The accident at Chernobyl reaffirmed what an abyss will open if nuclear war befalls mankind. For inherent in the nuclear arsenals stockpiled are thousands upon thousands of potential disasters far more horrible than the Chernobyl one, concluded Dr. Mould.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that world wide energy demand in 2030 would be 16.9 TW (terawatts or TW). And the Water, Wind and Solar (WWS) each can meet human demand globally. Solar energy alone offers 6,500 TW. (A Plan for a Sustainable Future, WWS by 2030, in the Scientific American: India, November 2009, pp. 38-45, www.sciam.co.in).

Mr. Hans-Holger Rogner, Head, Planning and Economic Studies Section of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), says that the arguments against the nuclear power deserve an objective assessment. And the German Nuclear Safety Act 2002, plans To phase out the use of Nuclear Power. Since it had been dormant for 30 years, Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dr. Dale Klein says that no scope for revival of Nuclear sector in the US. And the Editor-in-Chief and Head of the IAEA Information, Mr. Lothar Wedekin admits that the future of Nuclear Power is uncertain but One thing looks clear the next generation of (nuclear) plants will not be Made in the USA. (The IAEA Bulletin, vol.49/1, 2008). The memorandum calls for a national debate on nuclear energy as no Parliamentary Committee had discussed the reliability and performance of Peaceful Nuclear” programme. The government had avoided inter-departmental discussions with Science and Public Policy ministries Energy, Finance, Planning Commission, Science and Technology, and Environment. Since the safer and economical Renewable Sources of Energy: Water, Wind and Solar are available to us, there is absolutely no necessity to commit the future generations to potentially hazardous nuclear industrial option.

Dr. Dhirendra Sharma, Centre for Science Policy. Psand (at)vsnl.net

Nirmal Nilay, Bhagwantpur, Dehradun 248 009. (0135) 2735 627.

Mob. 989788 3741.

Tanggapan 1 – Frank

Selamat Pagi KMI,

Bagi saya Pembangkit Listrik Tenaga Nuklir sangat clean energy, ketimbang Batu Bara dan Fuel Fossil. Hanya saja mungkin dari segi keamanan bila terjadi kebocoran perlu perhatian yang tinggi. Biasanya orang kita lemah dalam pemeliharaan.

Tanggapan 2 – Andry Soetiawan

Salam kepada rekan2 milis,

Tambahan lagi dari saya, kecelakaan2 yang pernah terjadi itu hanya pada reaktor nuklir generasi 2, sekarang sudah generasi 3+ dimana safetynya sudah berlapis2, sebagai contoh desain EPR dari Areva, memiliki safety berlapis untuk kecelakaan internal, misalnya core meltdown atau external, misalnya serangan teroris. Dan rencananya antara 2020-2030 akan ada generasi 4 yang lebih efisien, powerful dan aman.

Lagipula di industri nuklir, salah satu prasyarat sangat ketat adalah dokumentasi terhadap semua hal yang terjadi dan hasil dokumentasi tersebut selalu direport ke lembaga internasional, kalau tidak salah WANO dan IAEA. Satu lagi koreksi saya dari artikel tersebut, sekarang sudah dimulai standarisasi dari suatu reaktor nuklir sehingga pembangunannya bisa lebih murah, lebih reliabel, lebih cepat, dan tahan lebih lama. Sekarang hanya butuh 8 tahun untuk buat PLTN dan memiliki 60 tahun lifetime.

Tetapi saya sangat setuju apabila kita selain menggunakan energi nuklir, tetap mengembangkan penggunaan energi alternatif yang sudah ada sehingga lebih efisien lagi. Banyaknya variasi dari sumber2 energi yang digunakan, akan meminimalisir ketergantungan terhadap sumber energi tertentu.

Tanggapan selengkapnya dari pembahasan yang diambil dari Mailing List Migas Indonesia bulan Desember 2009 ini dapat dilihat dalam file berikut: