hankyoreh

South Korean anti-nuclear activists hold signs, together reading, "Remember Chernobyl," during their press conference on Monday in downtown Seoul to mark the 35th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. (Yonhap News)

Thirty-five years ago yesterday — on April 26, 1986 — there was an explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine. The exact number of deaths has never been established. According to reports, the toll may have reached the tens of thousands, considering long-term deaths from radiation exposure.

The environmental risks of nuclear power were also seen in the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident in March 2011. The ravages of both disasters continue to this day, yet we still hear people arguing for nuclear power as an alternative and the "energy of the future."

They base this on the advantages in terms of the ability to supply power at a larger scale than renewable energy sources while providing a low-carbon energy source with fewer greenhouse gas emissions due to the use of nuclear fission instead of fossil fuels.

"Positive" signals regarding nuclear power are emerging from the US, the UK, France and other members of the European Union following their pledges to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.

At the Leaders Summit on Climate on Thursday and Friday, the US Joe Biden administration declared plans for carbon neutrality in the area of power generation by 2035. One of the clean energy sources it mentioned as part of that was nuclear power.

The UK similarly announced plans late last year for the expansion of nuclear power. France previously announced that it would be reducing the rate of electricity generation from nuclear power to 50 percent by 2025, only to delay that until 2035. The EU has been in a debate over the inclusion of nuclear power in its green industry taxonomy.

The mood has also been changing in Asia. China, which declared plans last year for "carbon neutrality by 2060," is building nuclear power plants concentrated on its eastern coast, which sits across the sea from western South Korea. Japan has been moving to reopen its nuclear power plants, insisting that nuclear power is "still a necessary energy source."

In South Korea, nuclear power advocates and proponents of technological development are viewing carbon neutrality as an opportunity for nuclear power advancements.

Members of the group Energy Justice Action hold a press conference in front of the National Assembly in Seoul on Monday, calling for a complete shutdown of nuclear power plants in South Korea. (Yonhap News)

On April 14, a National Assembly Forum on Innovative SMRs (small modular reactors) was launched under the auspices of Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power and the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, with Democratic Party lawmaker and National Assembly Science, ICT, Broadcasting, and Communications Committee chairperson Lee Won-wook and People Power Party lawmaker Kim Yeung-shik serving as co-chairs.

"Nuclear power does not emit carbon dioxide directly in the energy production process," said Cheong Jae-hak, a professor of nuclear engineering at Kyung Hee University.

"While small amounts of CO2 may be emitted when fossil fuels are used in the process of manufacturing and transporting nuclear fuel, those quantities are negligible, so you can view it as a helpful energy source in terms of achieving carbon neutrality," he added.

Environmental groups aren't focusing solely on the fundamental issue of the nuclear power's imperfections, as seen with the disasters at Chernobyl and Fukushima. They're also fighting back with the argument that as long as nuclear power relies on distribution networks optimized for large-scale, centralized generation, this will be an obstacle on the path to carbon neutrality as it stymies the adoption of renewable sources centering on small-scale, decentralized power generation.

The group Energy Justice Action held a press conference Monday in front of the National Assembly to insist that "the climate crisis should not be used as an excuse for calling for nuclear power."

"It can't be called an 'alternative' when we're averting the vast threat of the climate crisis with a different threat in the form of nuclear power," said the group's secretary-general Lee Young-kyeong.

South Korea is currently home to 24 nuclear power plants, with 16 reactors online as of April 26. Even if post-nuclear power policies are implemented, nuclear power is to remain in operation through 2084.

"Given the increase in technology capabilities employing renewable energy sources and their economic feasibility, it would be economical to invest in renewable energies [rather than nuclear power] starting now so that we can keep to the timeline for carbon neutrality," said Kim Joo-jin, who heads the company Solutions for Our Climate.

By Choi Woo-ri, staff reporter

Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]