Development & Aid, Energy, Environment, Global Governance, Headlines, Latin America & the Caribbean, Nuclear Energy - Nuclear Weapons, Peace

LATIN AMERICA: Enthusiasm for Nuclear Power Cooling Off

Marcela Valente*

BUENOS AIRES, Mar 25 2011 (IPS) - The nuclear disaster in Japan has revived the debate in Latin America on the pros and cons of expanding the use of nuclear energy. While both Argentina and Brazil, which had put the greatest emphasis on nuclear power, plan to continue down that road, other countries have put plans and unfinished projects on hold.

There are five nuclear power plants currently operating in Latin America. The two in Argentina account for seven percent of that country’s power supply; the two in Brazil cover 2.5 percent of national energy needs; and the one in Mexico provides 2.3 percent of all electricity consumption.

Argentina and Brazil are building a third plant each, and authorities in the two countries have expressed a determination to forge ahead with the plans despite the failings of the Fukushima nuclear reactors, which were severely damaged by the tsunami that slammed into northeastern Japan after the Mar. 11 magnitude-8.9 earthquake.

The full scope of the health and environmental damages caused by the catastrophe in the Fukushima complex is not yet clear, as the disaster is still ongoing.

In Argentina, the 370-MW Atucha I, located in the eastern province of Buenos Aires, 100 km from the capital, has been functioning since 1974, and the 648-MW Embalse, in the central province of Córdoba, began to operate in 1984.

Argentina’s nuclear power programme, which was frozen in the mid-1990s, was relaunched in 2004 by the government of Néstor Kirchner, the late husband of President Cristina Fernández.

The construction of Atucha II, on a site next to Atucha I, is set to be completed this year. It will generate twice as much energy as its predecessor.

Efforts are also underway to prolong the useful life of the two older plants, with millions of dollars invested in boosting safety.

“I see no technical reasons for Argentina to postpone its nuclear projects because of what happened in Japan,” nuclear engineer Jorge Barón, a professor at the National University of Cuyo, told IPS. “But I do think we can learn some lessons for improving our emergency management plans.

“Our plants have high safety standards, with resident National Regulatory Authority inspectors in the complexes themselves, and well-rehearsed emergency plans to prevent a major impact on the surrounding population,” he said. “But that doesn’t mean accidents can’t happen.”

Argentina is a signatory to the Convention on Nuclear Safety, under which member nations can ask for information about safety programmes at facilities in other member states, as part of a mutual oversight system. “Last time, this country oversaw Germany’s nuclear safety and then vice versa. It’s an excellent way to detect weak areas,” he explained.

“I repeat, we are not exempt from accidents, but work is done to keep the risk level very low and to be prepared for the eventuality of an accident,” Barón said.

“The project to extend the useful life of Embalse will raise its safety levels, and put the plant ahead of the pack,” said the expert.

For his part, engineer Rodolfo Touzet with the National Atomic Energy Commission told IPS that Argentina’s reactors have a “much better” containment system than Japan’s, with a secondary containment structure of reinforced concrete, even though this South American country does not face the risk of natural catastrophes like Japan.

In Brazil, the two nuclear plants are in Angra dos Reis, 170 km south of Rio de Janeiro.

The useful life of the 657-MW Angra I, inaugurated in 1985, was already extended. The 1,350-MW Angra II has been operating since 2001. In 2010, construction got underway again on Angra III, which will produce another 1,350 MW as of 2015.

“So far, no country has explicitly declared that it is going to cancel its thermonuclear generation programme because of what happened in Japan; what has been said is that the safety systems of currently functioning plants will be checked,” Francisco Rondinelli, with the Brazilian Nuclear Energy Association, told IPS.

Carlos Figueiredo, an engineer at Nuclebrás Equipamentos Pesados, a state-owned heavy equipment manufacturer in Brazil, stressed that the structure of his country’s nuclear reactors is very different from that of Fukushima.

“We have total safety, because it depends on natural mechanisms,” he said. “The water to cool off the reactors is in a raised deposit and will flow down by the force of gravity, without requiring energy.”

He also explained that the Angra plants are pressurised water reactors, which are safer than Japan’s boiling water reactors.

Both Argentina and Brazil’s plants are operated by state-run companies, and although the regulatory bodies are also public agencies, they are made up of independent experts, said the sources who spoke to IPS.

Unlike the two large South American countries, Mexico, which in the last few years has flirted with the idea of increasing nuclear power production, is now wavering. The director of the National Commission for Nuclear Safety and Safeguards, Juan Eibenschutz, said this month that there is no plan to expand nuclear energy in his country.

“Mexico should abandon nuclear energy as soon as possible, because it is dirty, expensive and inefficient, and depends on technology from abroad,” Eduardo Rincón, an energy expert at the Autonomous University of Mexico City, told IPS.

The Laguna Verde complex, run by the Federal Electricity Commission in the southeastern state of Veracruz, launched its first reactor in 1989 and the second in 1995. They produce a combined total of nearly 1,400 MW.

The Commission was planning to build between two and 10 new plants by 2028, although no concrete steps had been taken in that direction. Laguna Verde uses boiling water technology similar to that of Fukushima.

In all three countries, there have been incidents and minor accidents that have made it necessary to adjust safety measures.

As a result of Latin America’s economic growth in the last few years, countries that had never considered nuclear energy began to study that alternative. One example was Venezuela. But the nuclear crisis in Japan prompted President Hugo Chávez to promise to freeze plans that were still at a preliminary stage.

And Chile, which had been more determined to follow the nuclear power route, has now decided to postpone its plans. “During our government, no nuclear energy plant will be built or planned,” President Sebastián Piñera said this week after U.S. President Barack Obama’s visit there.

Although Chile and the U.S. signed a nuclear cooperation agreement, the idea is to be prepared and to “better understand and increase our knowledge of nuclear technology,” Piñera said.

A year ago, Chile was hit by an earthquake of nearly the same magnitude as the one that shook Japan this month, followed by a tsunami that left a death toll of around 600.

Nuclear physicist Roberto Morales at the University of Chile told IPS that his country “is not yet ready for a nuclear plant,” although he did not rule out the option.

“Safety systems for reactors can work anywhere in the world,” but Chile does not have the necessary human resources, he said.

* With additional reporting by Mario Osava in Rio de Janeiro, Pamela Sepúlveda in Santiago and Emilio Godoy in Mexico.