Nuclear as an energy resource can be useful for its low cost, low emissions and for countries to develop a self-reliant and independent energy supply.<\/p>\n
This is according to nuclear energy experts, speaking during a panel discussion about nuclear energy at the PowerGen and DistribuTECH Africa 2016 conference, held in Sandton on Tuesday 19 July 2016.<\/p>\n
\u201cNuclear is the cheapest and most environmentally friendly option for Africa,\u201d said Viktor Polikarpov, vice president of the sub-Saharan Africa region of Russian nuclear firm Rosatom.<\/p>\n
African countries are facing a trilemma when it comes to energy generation. This includes the security of supply, and the impact on the environment and the economy, he explained. \u201cThe cost of electricity generated by nuclear is cheapest compared to coal,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n
Nuclear power has the potential to bring about sustainable development across industries and have a positive socio-economic impact by creating job opportunities and developing skills in communities, he said. Nuclear power generation also adds benefits in other fields such as medicine, isotopes, radiation and water desalination.<\/p>\n
\u201cBy 2050, the total capacity of nuclear power plants will double,\u201d said Polikarpov. A lot of countries are expressing an interest in nuclear programmes, added Oliver Bard, nuclear project director of EDF South Africa.<\/p>\n
This is because power is imperative for macro-economic development. \u201cThere can be no human development without efficient access to power,\u201d he said. Nuclear energy sources can provide power 20 years and beyond. It is also \u201cone of the solutions\u201d to diversify a country\u2019s energy mix.<\/p>\n
Countries are also looking to nuclear energy as an independent solution for supply, making them more self-reliant and less dependent on other countries for energy, he explained.<\/p>\n
Opportunities in Africa<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cAfrica is not new to nuclear and nuclear is not new to Africa,\u201d said Polikarpov. There are currently eight countries building nuclear energy infrastructure and South Africa already has a nuclear power generating plant at the Koeberg Power Station in the Western Cape.<\/p>\n Nuclear, should be an efficient way to tap base load needs, for the growing energy demands of Africa\u2019s growing population, and economic growth, he said.<\/p>\n \u201cSouth Africa has a strong situation to lead development of nuclear in Africa,\u201d said Bard. The country has the infrastructure, industry and skills. Building a nuclear programme will give momentum for the process across the continent, said Bard.<\/p>\n The Koeberg Power Station has been operating for 32 years, added David Nicholls, Chief Nuclear Officer at Eskom. The cost of operating the station for a year comes to 20c\/KWH. This is as much as Eskom pays for coal, to make coal-fired power, he said. The problem with existing coal-fired power stations is that as they get older they become more costly to maintain, and they yield poorer performance.<\/p>\n The case against nuclear <\/strong><\/p>\n Hartmut Winkler, Physics Professor at the University of Johannesburg said that it was important to reconsider nuclear energy as a source for power generation. Among his reasons was safety and he listed the disasters in Chernobyl and Fukushima. \u201cWe can\u2019t guarantee it will happen, but we can\u2019t guarantee that it won\u2019t,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n The disposal of nuclear waste was also questionable. Waste is currently buried in Vaalputs in the Northern Cape. This should be reviewed, especially considering transportation to these sites, he said.<\/p>\n Winkler made a case for other sources of renewable energy such as solar and wind instead. \u201cThere has been a rapid cost decrease in renewable energy technology, especially photovoltaics. Solar energy is no longer expensive,\u201d he said. The construction of these renewable energy power stations also happened quickly and they operate efficiently, he added.<\/p>\n The cost of building infrastructure for a nuclear power plant should also be considered. This is linked to the cost of the loans and interest repayments for funding the plant as well as possible deconstruction costs, said Winkler. The cost to provide 9600MW of nuclear energy comes to an estimated R1 trillion, this is equal to governments annual expenditure. \u201cNo project of this magnitude is affordable,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n \u201cProjects of this scale require the support of the population,\u201d he explained. More transparency is needed for citizens to trust that the best nuclear deal is chosen. Public trust has already been eroded by the Shiva uranium deal, he said.<\/p>\n Among the issues impacting public support were earlier reports that suggested Rosatom was selected as a preferred supplier. Rosatom, the State Atomic Energy Corporation of Russia, has been involved in the industry for 70 years. It has more than 160 enterprises, 155 000 employees and a global presence in 40 countries. The company has 44 backlogged power plants, worth more than $110 billion.<\/p>\n News24<\/a><\/p>\n The true cost of South Africa\u2019s nuclear programme<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\nMore on energy<\/h3>\n