Too frequent shutdowns

Atomic plants’ top priority is safety, not production

Officials at Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KHNP) have been proud of two things: the successful localization of atomic power plants and a very high capacity utilization ratio.

Unfortunately, both are causes of concern for the nuclear-wary public. And their worries increasingly appear justified, given the frequent shutdowns of reactors this year. Even now, reactors at two of the nation’s 23 atomic power plants are not running because of technical problems that occurred right after the Chuseok holiday.

These are the sixth and seventh shutdowns so far this year, already tying the number for the whole of 2011.

Stoppages happen at both new and old plants and their causes are varied. At the Shingori 1 Reactor, which started operations a few months ago, problems occurred with the rods controlling the fission of nuclear material, the most important part that can lead to a meltdown. In the older Younggwang 5 Reactor, a steam generator showed a low-water level.

Officials at the virtual state utility firm say new parts and components need an“adjustment period,” adding there are limitations to preventing troubles with all of the millions of parts and components in each reactor. They emphasize these are minor, almost usual failures, which have no possibility of radioactive leaks. To sum up their explanations, new reactors cause problems because they are new, and old ones do so because they are old.

But it’s hard not to notice most of the shutdowns have occurred at the “Korean-model reactors,” raising suspicions about design and engineering problems. The government inspectors should do their jobs better to find out what’s wrong with them.

Frequent shutdowns may have something to do with the “overwork” of reactors here. The capacity utilization ratio of Korean reactors hovers above 90 percent, compared with 60-75 percent for France, which also relies heavily on nuclear energy. In the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster, EU officials conducted more than 2,000 checks for about 300 days. Their Korean counterparts inspected only 27 items for just 41 days. Even the safety-conscious Europeans concluded 143 reactors had serious problems requiring repairs. We don’t remember seeing a similar report here.

Add to this the corruption pervading the virtual state monopoly as well as some officials’ loose work discipline ― some KNHP employees even took drugs at work ― then Korean consumers will need to rethink the government’s ambitious plan to raise the nuclear portion in its energy mix.

Considering the nation’s scarce natural resources and its industrial structure, still heavily dependent on manufacturing sector, it’s hard for Korea to shift to a nuclear-free country in the near future.

Still, that hardly means the nation should continue to let the KHNP remain in self-complacency unchecked by regulators true to their name. No one knows what would happen if all the problems ― imperfect equipment, loose discipline and low safety consciousness ― met with natural disasters or man-made tragedies like terrorist attacks.

As the old saying goes, coming events cast their shadows before. <The Korea Times>

news@theasian.asia