TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search results
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search resultsThe one condition nuclear power cannot ignore
When corruption is massive, pervasive and prevailing, the safety assumptions behind nuclear technology collapse.
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
Service resumed: The Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power station is seen in a picture taken on Aug. 5, 2024, in Kashiwazaki, in Japan’s Niigata prefecture. Japanese local authorities approved the resumption of the world’s largest nuclear plant on Friday, a crucial step in the effort to bring it back online following the 2011 Fukushima disaster. (AFP/Yuichi Yamazaki)
E
very technology has room for error except one. Nuclear power does not forgive mistakes. It does not bend to political pressure, procurement shortcuts or cultural habits.
That is why the first question in nuclear policy is not technological, it is ethical. Should any society marked by massive, pervasive and prevailing corruption ever attempt to build and operate a nuclear power plant? The answer is simple. It should not. Not until the culture around it is clean enough to meet the standard of discipline which nuclear safety demands.
Indonesia, where corruption remains rampant, has decided to go nuclear. State electricity company PLN’s business plan allocates two 250 MW nuclear plants in Sumatra and Kalimantan, with operation set for 2030-2032. However, the national roadmap targets a total capacity of 35 GW by 2060, a scale requiring over 30 land-based reactors.
Societies with weak governance often operate hazardous infrastructure like petrochemical plants and refineries despite the risks. This leads to a misleading conclusion: If these systems can operate, why should nuclear power be treated differently?
The difference is consequence. A chemical explosion or aviation failure, while tragic, affects a limited geography. Land remains usable, future generations do not inherit the damage.
Nuclear accidents break this boundary. They turn operational failures into long-lasting environmental consequences that can redraw maps and displace communities for generations.
This is not to suggest nuclear technology has no place in modern energy planning. Modular reactors may work for specific industrial uses where demand is stable.
