[ad_1]
Pelindaba Nuclear Research Center, west of Pretoria, South Africa, photographed on July 10, 2012. The center was used by the apartheid government to research and build nuclear weapons in the 1970s. It is now used to make medical isotopes. (Photo by Gallo Images / The Times / Alon Skuy)
The 2019 Integrated Resource Plan (PIR) indicates that a nuclear construction program ‘is a long-term no-regret option.’ I do not agree and consider that a newly built nuclear program is the exact opposite, and very high risk.
The National Energy Regulator of South Africa (Nersa), has issued a consultation paper Y asked for comments, comments and responses from the public to a determination by the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy, in terms of Section 34 (1) of the Electricity Regulation Act 2006, to acquire 2,500 MW of new nuclear energy in South Africa.
the ministerial determination was submitted to Nersa for consideration and approval, which is a necessary step before the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE) can issue a request for proposals to nuclear suppliers following an open, transparent and competitive procurement process.
I am opposed to the new nuclear power in South Africa, and this is definitely no because I am ideologically against nuclear power or nuclear technology per se, but for solid and pragmatic reasons and the absence of a valid business case, which includes, among other factors:
- The high cost of capital / interest during construction and development costs of the owner;
- The long planning, authorization, acquisition and construction times of more than a decade; SAW
- The inevitable cost overruns and cost overruns associated with complex mega-projects;
- The constructive and operational inflexibility of nuclear energy in an electrical system that increasingly needs flexible generation capacity; Y
- Above all, the need to commit to a single supplier country, supplier company, technology and design over a period of 100 years, including construction, operation and decommissioning.
This ministerial determination comes at a time when the world of energy and electricity is undergoing rapid change, when the prices of flexible and renewable generation technologies are plummeting, when new energy storage technologies are emerging, when the future of large-scale centralized generation is changing and when the demand for electricity through long-distance transmission grids is decidedly uncertain and in decline.
The Integrated Resource Plan (PIR) 2019 indicates that aThe uclear building program “is a long-term, no-regrets option.” I do not agree and consider that a newly built nuclear program is the exact opposite: a very high risk and great regret option. This is not the time for extremely expensive 100-year commitments.
Therefore, I urge thinking people to oppose the new nuclear power in South Africa, because clearly this is not a national priority, and a new nuclear acquisition cannot prevent the current electricity crisis from turning into a catastrophe in the world. course of the next decade. DM
Written comments on the ministerial determination of 2,500 MW of new nuclear power in South Africa should be emailed to Nersa at [email protected]. The deadline for written comments is Friday, February 5, 2021, but in general, Nersa also accepts written comments after the deadline. The dates of the public hearings on the ministerial determination will be announced by Nersa shortly.
Chris Yelland, OUTA Energy Advisor and CEO of EE Business Intelligence.
