Debunking Cojuangco’s claims

The NO to BNPP Revival! summarized in five points their reasons for rejecting Cojuangco’s proposal:

1) The BNPP is not essential in addressing the looming “energy crisis” in 2012. The country has vast indigenous energy resources that we can tap which are more safe and reliable than nuclear power.

2) The operation of the BNPP does not assure cheap electricity for the people and energy independence for the country.

3) The BNPP is defective, almost obsolete and is not safe to operate. There are numerous and significant arguments being raised with regards to geologic hazards, infrastructure integrity, and nuclear waste storage and disposal. Its operation will pose great risks to the health and lives of the people and the environment.

4) The fund for the BNPP, to be paid by additional people’s taxes and foreign loans, would be a source of corruption and kickbacks for the corrupt officials and cronies of the current administration. Until now, no one has been held accountable for the BNPP corruption scandals of the Marcos administration.

5) The BNPP’s contribution to the reduction of global carbon emissions would be very minimal as the Philippines is not a top producer of greenhouse gases.

Geologist Kevin Rodolfo, professor at the National Institute of Geological Sciences (NIGS) at the University of the Philippines, bolstered further the said arguments.

Rodolfo said, “The only geological evaluation [on the rehabilitation of the BNPP] was made by Mark Cojuangco himself who is not a geologist.”

The geologist said Bataan and the entire Philippines are too tectonically and volcanically active, making nuclear plants dangerous. He added that earthquakes near the Mt. Natib where the BNPP is located would cause a catastrophe.

“This is the biggest threat that has ever been posed to the Filipino people.”

Rodolfo said nuclear wastes remain toxic for hundreds of thousands of years and that no country has solved the problem of permanent storage of nuclear wastes. “We are not capable of handling our domestic garbage, how do we manage nuclear waste?” he said.

Rodolfo said the BNPP will not provide energy independence. “Uranium is not a local fuel. It is finite and a shrinking resource.” He said the price of uranium, like the imported petroleum products, may also increase.

Meanwhile, medical doctor Sylvia dela Paz, said the $1 billion rehabilitation fund for the BNPP would be better used to treat 2,500 cardiac patients. She said the fund could provide badly-need health services for the poor.

Dela Paz, who also joined the protests against the BNPP in the ’80s said toxic waste may cause cancer and other respiratory diseases. She added that the country is not well-equipped in dealing with nuclear accidents.

Actions

The network initiated a signature campaign to junk both House Bill No. 4631 and Senate Bill No. 2665, which aims to demand for the immediate re-commissioning and commercial operation of BNPP.

The group will also hold discussions in schools and communities.

Tapang said, “We are also coordinating with people from different sectors in Bataan and Central Luzon in preparing for a big mobilization just in time before the Congressional Committee on Appropriations resumes deliberations regarding the approval of the budget for the rehabilitation of the BNPP.”

Dela Paz called on those who joined the ’80s protests against the BNPP to come out once again.”We are doing this for our children and for our children’s children.” (Bulatlat.com)

 Save as PDF