In South Korea, provincial areas are relying on nuclear power to survive

In some counties, local residents are organising campaigns to apply to host new nuclear reactors in an attempt to cope with economic and demographic decline. In return, municipalities receive subsidies and funds for infrastructure development. However, some associations fear that the concentration of power plants will increase the risk of accidents.

Seoul (AsiaNews) - Small municipalities in South Korea are seeking to host new nuclear power plants in an attempt to halt demographic decline and revive local economies.

On 26 January, Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power, a subsidiary of the public entity Korea Electric Power, published a call for tenders to identify new nuclear sites, inviting local authorities to submit bids to host two large reactors with a total capacity of 2.8 gigawatts and a small-scale modular reactor of 0.7 gigawatts. Interested municipalities must submit their applications by 30 March, attaching a resolution of consent from their respective local councils.

The initiative is in line with President Lee Jae Myung's decision to revive nuclear power to support the era of artificial intelligence, which requires enormous amounts of energy to power data centres.

In some areas, mobilisation began even before the official announcement, according to the Korea Times. In Ulju County, Ulsan, residents of the Seosaeng area have held meetings and press conferences to support the bid for the area, which already has two reactors in operation and two more under construction.

‘Our county meets most of the requirements for a new nuclear site: geological stability, access to water for cooling, connections to the electricity grid and operational safety,’ explained the promotion committee.

‘Public consensus is also an important factor, and Seosaeng residents have been living with nuclear power for some time and have the maturity necessary to assess the risks and benefits.’ Ulju County Council Chairman Choi Gil-young also expressed his support, saying that opposition at the local level would now be minimal and that residents ‘know first-hand the level of safety at the plants.’

Supporters of the installation of new nuclear reactors refer to the case of Yeongdeok County in North Gyeongsang Province. In 2011, it was designated as the site for a new power plant, but the project was cancelled in 2017 by then-President Moon Jae-in, who was opposed to nuclear power. Since then, Yeongdeok has become a symbol of rural depopulation: the population has fallen from over 41,000 to around 33,000. Today, local authorities are preparing new surveys among residents because, if there is support, they intend to launch a campaign to attract the power plant.

In a local referendum in 2015, over 90% of participants opposed the project. Now, some local officials have pointed out, fears of economic and demographic decline outweigh concerns about nuclear power. ‘We will only know for sure after conducting a new survey, but I believe support for the initiative will be quite high,’ they said.

Municipalities hosting nuclear plants receive a range of economic subsidies and tax benefits, such as extraordinary funds and investments in roads, welfare, schools and health services. Ulju, for example, has received 118 billion won (approximately £70 million) and a commitment of 10 billion won per year for 60 years, in addition to funds paid directly to residents by Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power. For many areas, these resources represent one of the few opportunities to finance long-term public investment and avoid depopulation towards large cities.

Gijang County in Busan and the city of Gyeongju have both announced their willingness to host new modular reactors, which are considered more flexible and modern and a “green” response to the climate crisis.

However, there has also been some criticism. Some associations have called for the new projects to be halted, pointing out that the Seosaeng and Gijang areas are already densely concentrated with reactors and that further expansion would increase the risks in the event of an accident.