23.05.2013 09:09
Turkey will be getting three nuclear power plants in one go.
Turkey will be getting three nuclear power plants in one go. The public at large is far from being aware of its implications. However, there is a widespread and very sound apprehension among the people, probably due to the deadly nuclear accidents of Chernobyl and Fukushima. It is now clear that the government -- from the prime minister on downwards -- is implementing a well-planned "public awareness" campaign aimed at dissipating these fears.
Recently, every time a microphone is placed before the prime minister, he delves into the topic. There are two basic arguments on which the government's communications strategy is based. Firstly, the money that is lost as a result of our energy deficit and the money spent by Turkey in importing energy, and secondly, minimization of the risks.
On money here goes the prime minister: "Currently, we get 72 percent of our energy needs from abroad. When the nuclear power plants are up and running, there will be no more need to import a full third of the natural gas we are currently importing. In other words, we will take control of the yearly $7.2 billion of natural gas imports." This may all sound great, but it is not so cheap to acquire this kind of energy.
According to an article in Zaman by nuclear economy professor Erhun Kula: "Some circles in Turkey maintain that it will cost around $3 billion to build a 5,000 megawatt plant. A complete lie. A calculation for a 1,200-megawatt nuclear power plant in the UK costs at least $8 billion. So how is it that a plant four times as large in our country could be built for only $3 billion? The real cost should be somewhere around $30 billion.
"Another point often mentioned by circles is that nuclear energy is very cheap. According to calculations done by independent sources, in fact the front-end costs of 1 kilowatt of nuclear electricity are actually 57 percent more than the same amount of electricity produced with coal (International Energy Agency, Energy Policy in IAE Countries, OECD, Paris 2005). I say 'front-end costs' because these calculations do not include the high costs associated with dismantling an obsolete plant or the storage for thousands of years of its nuclear waste. If we add up these factors the real cost of nuclear power is quite exorbitant."
When it comes to the risk topic let's listen to what the prime minister has to say: "Of course, what happened at Fukushima saddened not only all the Japanese, but also us. But these are also things that happen in life; life has to go on, though, and now, with the much advanced technology we have, we can take much more advanced steps forward." What more can be said about this level of consciousness?
Two points: According to Greenpeace, the Atmea-1 reactor which is due for the Sinop power plant -- built in cooperation between France's Areva and Japan's Mitsubishi -- is an untested sample. Thus, the government is taking the whole country as a guinea pig to test out a technology that has not received permission anywhere else. It appears that something big is being palmed off on Turkey, which has no culture of nuclear safety.
By the way on Monday Todays Zaman's Barış Altıntaş did excellent reporting on the German Friedrich Ebert Foundation's recent meeting in İstanbul to mark the anniversary of the Fukushima disaster. Apparently not a single government official attended the event. Representative of the foundation Michael Meier said in his opening remarks that he finds it difficult to understand why Turkey is opting for this "obsolete technology." Highly recommended reading from Altıntaş in Today's Zaman: "Gov't wants nuclear plant, but doesn't want to talk about it" (March 18, 2012). Another noteworthy initiative is www.nukleersiz.org aiming at building awareness on this deadly industry.
Lastly, for those who ask "Well, what alternatives would you suggest?" read on: According to WWF Turkey, it would actually be possible to completely meet Turkey's current electricity needs through 790 square kilometers of solar panels, or just one-thousandth of Turkey's surface area. In the year 2050, this would be around two times as much, in other words, as two Ataturk Dams worth of solar panels. So, how about it?
CENGİZ AKTAR (Cihan/Today's Zaman)