[ad_1]
Experts have voiced concern over the government’s plan to procure 2,500 MW of nuclear energy, warning that the high construction cost and time frame are irrational considering South Africa’s energy position.
Electricity Minister Kgosientsho Ramokgopa announced on Tuesday, 12 December, that South Africa will soon begin the procurement process for around 2,500MW of nuclear energy.
The Department of Mineral Resources and Energy will issue a request for proposals to procure nuclear power in March 2024, drawing the attention of analysts to the cost and viability of the decision.
Daily Investor reported that energy analyst Chris Yelland believes the government’s new plan to use nuclear energy would not ensure energy sovereignty and would do little to address the country’s energy crisis within the next 10 years.
Yelland pointed out that nuclear energy faces a number of challenges, including high-level nuclear waste, extended construction periods, significant costs, and time overruns.
Department of Energy Deputy Director-General for Nuclear Zizamele Mbambo said the first of the new units will likely be operational in 2032 or 2033 – which is 10 years away.
The estimated cost of building a nuclear reactor of this size is around R250 billion.
“I am not against nuclear on ideological grounds, and I certainly don’t write off nuclear technology as part of the future solution,” Yelland said.
“But right now and for the next 10 years, it’s not part of the solution. And we have to look to other solutions. 10 years is a long time in the current world, and things can be very different in 10 years’ time.”
Yellend further highlighted that this plan would not ensure the country gains energy sovereignty.
“It actually places us firmly in the hands of overseas high-technology nuclear industry developers. Not just in the now, but going forward,” he said.
Rather than focusing the country’s resources on nuclear power, Yelland suggested it uses some of its natural resources, “of which we have an abundance”. Yelland said this includes wind, solar, battery energy storage, pumped water storage, and other technologies that can be delivered much more quickly and reliably.
Yelland’s concerns are not alone, as Nersa noted that the opposition to the minister’s proposal from other stakeholders included:
- Alignment with the IRP 2019 – the Minister’s determination is not aligned with the IRP 2019. However, a new IRP for 2023 is imminent.
- Invalidity of the baseload term – the concept of baseload is no longer valid in today’s modern power systems.
- Availability of cheaper alternatives – the availability of cheaper, renewable energy and the fact that the country cannot afford the project at present.
- Environmental concerns – the waste-disposal facility at Vaalputs produces radioactive waste and harms the environment and the people dwelling there.
- Need for a flexible, decarbonised grid – The demand for electricity can be met by a mix of renewable energy technologies, storage, and demand-side management, excluding nuclear due to its high cost.
Read: Eskom is closing the taps
[ad_2]
Source link