Since 1959,the adoption of nuclear power to achieve Indonesian electricity target has beenwidely debated. Ignasius Jonan, Indonesian Minister for Energy and MineralResources explains that Indonesia will find it difficult to achieve 23% energygeneration target in 2025, as Indonesia only has 6% electric generation in 2015.In addition, Indonesia has another target to reduce 41% greenhouse gasemissions since Indonesia signed Paris Agreement in 2016 (as cited in Effendi,2017). The issue of whether nuclear power should be adopted is an importantissue because it concerns environmental responsibilities and economicopportunities to prepare Indonesian future energy.
This essay will considerarguments for banning nuclear power and point to some of the weaknesses withthese views. It will then put forward the reason why the government shouldadopt this clean, safe, and effective reactor.Stuart White(2005), Director of the Institute of sustainable futures at University Sydney,contends that nuclear power is an ineffective way to reduce greenhouse gasemissions because the enrichment process of uranium generates a higher amountof emissions than gas power stations, which will take 10 years to payback.However, in TEDx Talks, Shellenberger (2016) shows that nuclear power makesonly a small contribution to greenhouse gases because it only produces a tinyamount of carbon. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change also provides datathat nuclear power only produces 12 grams of CO2/KWH compare to coal thatproduces 820 grams/KWH and solar panel 48 grams/KWH (as cited in Shellenberger,2016). Moreover, it is clear that nuclear power does not create methane, sulfurdioxide and nitrogen dioxide emissions (Bishop, 2006).Arif Fiyanto,head of the Climate and Energy Campaign at Greenpeace Indonesia asserts thatimplementing nuclear power in Indonesia can be a very dangerous project. Heclaims that Indonesia sits in the area which has a lot of possibilities to hitby natural disasters (as cited in Yap, 2016).
However, it is firmed by Cogswell, Siahaan, R, Ramana, and Tanter (2017)that since 1954 Indonesia has researched in order to find an appropriatelocation to develop nuclear power. By 1975, Indonesia had proposed 14 siteswhich are safe from natural disasters (Trajano, 2015). Yogyakarta, for example,although had been affected by earthquake and volcano eruption, still has awell-operation until now.Symon (2008)argues that implementing nuclear power is ineffective, due to the cost andpreparation of uranium oxide. Greenpeace (2017), claim that renewable energiesare becoming cheaper. They believe that renewable energy is the most effectivesource to supply future energy demand. However, in fact, by 2025 renewableenergy will only produce 8% of electricity (Effendi, 2017). It is clear thatalthough renewable energy is cheap, it will insufficient to supply energy forall Indonesian’s population in the future.
In addition, Mohamad Nasir,Indonesian minister of research, technology, and high education, states thatone nuclear reactor can produce electricity for about 5,600 MW (as cited inAstuti, 2017). It will fit with Indonesian electricity need which is estimatedabout 505.719 GW (“Kementerian Energi dan”, 2016). In the short calculation,Indonesia will only need 12 reactors to supply electricity in every part ofIndonesia by 2025.Inconclusion, this essay has demonstrated that currently, the implementation of fossilfuel as the main energy source is improper with Indonesia commitment in ParisAgreement 2016. In addition, using renewable energy is not a solution to fulfillIndonesian electricity demand in 2025.
Therefore, as Nasir points out, the timehas come to Indonesia to implement the regulation number 79/2014 aboutpreparing future energy and make a real contribution to combat global warmingby adopting nuclear power (as cited in Astuti, 2017).
