The case for nuclear

Cape Town - Government funds for the development of new energy technology should be divided fairly between different technologies and not focus solely on projects such as the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR).

This is one of the issues that first emerged in a series of meetings with players in the energy industry. The meeting was convened by Minister of Energy Dipuo Peters.

On Tuesday Peters met interested parties in the nuclear power industry, and was informed on critical issues requiring attention - such as the rising costs of the PBMR project and allegations of a lack of transparency.

Although players opposed to nuclear power, such as non-governmental organisations and environmental groups, were in the minority, their objections were noted. These include opinions such as that nuclear power is too expensive and will bankrupt South Africa, and that it is too small and specialised an industry which cannot contribute much to job creation and economic development.

Tristan Taylor of Earthlife Africa pointed out that that there was currently no community representative on the national nuclear regulator's board, although this was a legal requirement.

Officials of the Department of Energy assured the meeting that a new board would be selected by December 1, and that this lapse would then be corrected.

Peters said an audit would be conducted into the PBMR company.

Nuclear power is not more important than other sources of electricity. It is ANC policy that sources of energy should be diversified.

Nelisiwe Magubane, acting director-general of energy, says the minister - and not Eskom - will decide on the type of plant for the next power station.

An earlier announcement that a third coal-fired power station close to Medupi and Kusile was envisaged had been, according to her, uninformed.

The decision will take into account South Africa's long-term scenarios for mitigating climate change, as well as other issues.

Academics said that aspects of the Nuclear Regulator Act need to be reviewed.

Mariette Liefferink, chief executive of the Federation for a Sustainable Environment, pointed out the inconsistencies in legislation dealing with radioactive mine waste. While the National Water Act defines it as radioactive mine waste, the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act and the Environmental Management: Waste Act treat it as a "resource".

Dr Kelvin Kemm, a nuclear physicist, said that nuclear power was cost-effective. As an example he mentioned France, which derives 80% of its electricity from nuclear power. Nuclear power fuel costs can be controlled, unlike the volatile prices of oil and coal.

- Sake24.com

For more business news in Afrikaans, go to Sake24.com.