Go for solar power, not nuclear energy

25 June 09

I READ with utmost concern of TNB’s plan to implement the first nuclear plant by 2025, as reported in the Star on June 23. My immediate question is, has TNB made any detailed study on the viability of solar energy before deciding on nuclear power plant (NPP)?

For TNB to invest RM6.9 billion to build a 1,000 MW station is way too expensive. Let us be mindful that this is already the cheapest option if the Chinese design is used. It will cost even more (RM13.9 billion) if the US design is used. The move will certainly add financial strain to the already cash–strap TNB, and what is even more worrying is putting public safety at a high risk due to possible nuclear fallout should an accident happen.

The cost mentioned does not even include other costs in running the NPP, such as the disposal of nuclear fuel and other hidden costs associated with the safety and security of its plant. Malaysia is just a small country, and any nuclear fallout would certainly affect almost the entire population of Asean countries.

On the contrary, studies made by Pusat Tenaga Malaysia (PTM) and its IEA international consultant have shown that solar Photovoltaic offers a more viable and environmentally friendly option.

It is estimated that 6,500 MW power can be generated by using only 40% of nation’s house-roof tops (2.5 million houses) and 5% of commercial buildings alone. The cost of solar PV system is continuing to decrease and solar energy experts have forecasted that grid parity is expected to be reached by 2015, which means the cost of electricity generated by solar PV is competitive with the cost of electricity generated from conventional energy resources such as gas, coal, oil and nuclear.

Malaysia is not only blessed with plenty of solar energy but we are also endowed with huge reserves of sand – some of which can be used as basic raw material to make solar cells. Already a huge silicon ingot-making factory is being planned to be set up in Sarawak.

Thus, Malaysia has all the basic ingredients to use this huge potential of solar energy for future electricity needs. From China to Europe and across America, utility companies and governments are focusing more towards increasing renewable energy contributions to its energy mix, but TNB is doing otherwise.

The Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) is considering several applications from private investors to build several hundreds of MW of solar PV power plants to meet the ever increasing energy needs in the country.

Obviously, opting for nuclear power station is going to be a financial nightmare not only to TNB but to the taxpayer’s money as well. From the point of national security, nuclear power plant poses even greater risk not only due to possible accident but it is also an easy target for terrorist attack. The risks are just overwhelming.

The way forward for Malaysia now is to go in big way for solar power, not nuclear.

AHMAD SHADZLI ABDUL WAHAB,

Director, Global Renewable Energy Network (GREEN),

Bangi, Selangor.

I believe there are more than 900MW of Solar Power Plant applications at EGAT, yes investors want to invest their money for solar energy development in Thailand. Lets hope the Powerful (and untouchable) make right decision for the people & the environment.One more thing, facing the truth about renewable energy and a sustainable future is a positive action. Positive thinking is contagious, can lead to all  kinds of solutions to Thailand's other problems.       

Have a look at Desertec:

http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/ariel-schwartz/sustainability/desertec-worlds-largest-solar-initiative-charges-ahead

An ambitious programme, but thats how solar power plants perhaps will look like in the future.

Costs: ~ 26,000 Billion THB !!!!!!!

Damn....someone already pointed out DesertTec... (I'm getting to slow for TF...) ;-)

I oppose any proliferation of nuclear power - in the UK particularly it would never have got off the ground but for the military shouldering part of the research cost with an eye on getting weapons grade fissionable material as a by-product. Likewise, neither the spent fuel disposal costs nor those costs associated with decommissioning nuclear plants that will continue to be lethally radioactive for tens of thousands of years were apparently included in the initial calculations. The result is that nuclear was pushed with hardly any consideration for the long term financial or human costs, which seems to be exactly what TNB is doing now.

I am very sceptical about PV technology, but the alternative, using soalr thermal power to run standard steam turbines and store thermal energy during the night by heating oil, is a much more effective way to go.

http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0209-solar.html

Have a read!

Talk to Southern California Edison about PV Rooftop

LOS ANGELES, June 18 (Reuters) - A program to place 500 megawatts of solar photovoltaic panels on commercial rooftops in the Southern California Edison territory was approved unanimously by the California Public Utilities Commission on Thursday.

The Edison International subsidiary SCE will own half of the 500 MW of solar PV to be installed, and half will be developed under purchased power agreements.

The SCE-owned portion of the program is to be completed in five years and will cost an estimated $875 million. SCE says that each year it will install 50 MW.

PV rooftop has the advantage of generating power where you need it with no transmission power loss or cost. Not a total solution, but an integral part of the renewable energy mix.