|
Rally against nuclear power in Sinop
|
INTRODUCTION
The idea of building a nuclear power plant in Turkey
was first put forward about 60 years ago. Akkuyu in Mersin Province and
Sinop have been the two places proposed for building a nuclear power
plant since almost the earliest days of the introduction of this idea.
Changing economic and political conditions led to the cancellation of
the nuclear power plant projects even if the cancellations were for
different reasons. Economic and political conditions have changed a lot
within the past 60 years in Turkey, but two issues have remained
unchanged: Turkey doesn’t need nuclear power plants to meet the
electricity demand of the country, and the number of those who say no
to nuclear power plants is higher than the number of nuclear proponents.
PEOPLE ARE AGAINST NUCLEAR
In a study conducted by Konda Research and
Consultancy in April 2013, the percentage of those who responded ‘no’
to nuclear was 63.4%. This percentage rose to about 80% after
Fukushima. Although the government has control over a substantial part
of the press, and media bosses have close relations with energy and
construction companies, the number of those who say no to nuclear is
not diminishing. It appears that even those who have voted for the
Justice and Development Party (AKP:
Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi), in power for 12 years, do not
support the nuclear energy policy of the government. This anti-nuclear
attitude can be seen more clearly in Sinop and Mersin. AKP won local
elections in 2009 in 45 provinces, 10 of which are metropolitan
municipalities. Other political parties were successful in 36 provinces
in total, 10 of which are metropolitan municipalities. Among the cities
which AKP lost, and it was also outflanked in the county
municipalities, are the two cities of Sinop and Mersin. The government
is not asking people whether they want nuclear power plants or not.
They also avoid coming face to face and discussing the issue with
anti-nuclear citizens or their political rivals. We have never
witnessed the minister of energy discussing the nuclear energy issue
with anti-nuclear citizens on a live broadcast or a panel discussion.
Therefore, the question of Turkey’s building a nuclear power plant is
far beyond a technical issue. We have a large democratic problem ahead.
AKP wants to ignore public opinion and build the nuclear power plants.
It is clear that this attitude will strike another blow against the
already staggering democratization process of Turkey.
The agreements Japan and the Russian Federation
signed with the Republic of Turkey show no sympathy to what people
think. Neither Sinop citizens nor the people of Mersin have complete
information about the content of these agreements. They are against the
nuclear power plant but nobody cares about them. Where will the nuclear
waste be stored? Who will inspect the power plants? Will there be an
independent inspection organization? Nobody answers such questions. In
taking a decision to build a nuclear power plant despite the will of
the people, the government commits a crime against democracy. Japan and
Russia are parties to this crime.
PROJECTIONS FALSE
The most important argument used for justifying the
building of a nuclear power plant in Turkey is the rapid increase in
electricity/energy demand. The projections made by the Ministry of
Energy and Natural Resources show that electricity demand will increase
at least 6.4% annually under a low scenario and 7.6% at the most
according to the high scenario. The disclosed actual numbers for the
past two years have been lower than even the lower scenario. What is
more, the reliability of these scenarios is highly controversial.
Turkish Electricity Transmission Corporation (TEIAŞ), in its prediction
made in 2005, stated that electricity demand would be 262 billion kWhs
under a high scenario in 2011. But Turkey’s actual electricity demand
in 2011 remained at 230 billion kWhs. It is impossible to reach this
number even by the end of 2013. TEIAŞ deviated from its 2005
predictions by 12 percent. These predictions were made on the premise
that Turkey would continue to develop at high rates, but the economy
has decelerated for the past couple of years. These predictions have no
credibility. We also know that the predictions mentioned above do not
take energy conservation and efficiency into consideration. The 9th
Development Plan of the Ministry of Development states that the
consumption of both general energy and electricity can be decreased by
20-25% thanks to efficiency practices carried out in buildings and the
transportation sector. It is particularly apparent that Turkey will not
need nuclear power plants if we will simply place emphasis on energy
conservation and efficiency issues.
WE DON’T USE ENERGY EFFICIENTLY
I should underline the fact that we face a
government which never considers questioning such an exaggerated
increase in demand, and ‘is surprisingly slow’ at taking several
crucial measures ranging from transmission line losses to energy
efficiency. Turkey uses two or even three times more energy than many
countries in Europe to produce the same product or service. Whereas a
tendency to use energy more efficiently is observed all over the world,
we witness almost no progress achieved in Turkey since 1990. 242 kgoe
(kilograms of oil equivalent) was used to generate 1,000 Euros of
economic growth in 1990, and now this number is 233. We face a country
which has done nothing to use energy more efficiently in the last 25
years. Even if this seems bad at first glance, it also indicates a
serious potential for energy conservation.
CLEAN ENERGY POTENTIAL
Another point on which the government is weak is
renewable energy sources. Everybody knows that Turkey is one of the
sunniest countries in Europe. Official figures show that the potential
is equivalent to 380 billion kWh. Considering that the electricity
consumption of Turkey is 240 billion kWh, using even a part of this
untouched resource would be enough to shelve the nuclear power plant
plans. The total installed power capacity of Turkey is above 60,000
megawatts (MW). The total power of photovoltaic panels used for
generating electrical power from the sun doesn’t account for even 10
MW. Other energy sources such as wind, geothermal, and biomass are
ready to be utilized. Only 2,700 MW of the total of 48,000 MW
economical wind potential has been brought into use. Even if we
don’t list lignite coal and hydroelectric potential, which
environmentalists view with suspicion, we can say that the electricity
demand of a nuclear-free Turkey will be easily met. Furthermore, it is
practical to keep in mind that Turkey is an earthquake country, where
control, inspection and transparency policies are highly
controversial.
After the Fukushima accident, Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdoğan stated “No investment is accident risk free. If so, we
shouldn’t use bottled gas at home, install natural gas pipelines or
have a crude oil line passing through our country.” Attempting to build
a nuclear power plant in a country where the prime minister compares a
nuclear power plant accident with a bottled gas explosion is just like
having an accident waiting to happen. The Black Sea region was the
region most seriously affected by the Chernobyl disaster in Turkey.
Today, whichever door you knock at in Sinop you encounter people inside
who have lost one of their relatives because of cancer. The people of
Sinop know nuclear energy is the actual reason for their pains and are
determined not to allow a new disaster to occur. Having heard the
decision of the agreement signed with Japan, the Anti-Nuclear Platform,
dozens of non-governmental organizations and political parties
assembled and set up a new organization, making a fresh start. The
people of Sinop who have recently fought against and stopped the
installation of a huge thermal power plant in the city say they
absolutely will not allow a nuclear power plant to be built there.
Return to
International Nuclear Cooperation page
Return to NIT 159 contents
