Nuclear deal drifts closer in a cloud of unknowing
Highlights several points to ponder as South Africa sets off on a costly journey with many questions still unanswered
ENERGY Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson’s announcement in parliament two weeks ago that the government will issue a “request for proposal” on a new nuclear construction programme this week means that, at long last, the South African nuke race can start.
To say the national narrative on nuclear tends to be negative is to understate the case. Most South Africans have one or all three of these reactions: ý It will bankrupt us; ý It already has a distinctly Russian whiff of corruption about it; and
That minister is a bit odd, isn’t she?
To start with the third point, let me state upfront that my friendship with Joemat-Pettersson started 23 years ago, at the University of the Free State in Bloemfontein, and endures to this day.
She is a warm, funny, personable, well-meaning, wellspoken, extremely bright and intelligent South African with an excellent academic background including university lecturing experience, whose drive and understanding of systems helped the Northern Cape outperform all other provinces when she was its MEC for education.
So why has she made such a complete mess of the nuclear new build opportunity?
How did the former political superstar become a poster girl for the clueless, shady Zuma cabinet?
The fact is that Joemat-Pettersson lacks coherence on nuclear matters and has not been transparent and truthful with us, the taxpayers who must fund the project. She has left too many questions unanswered, which has sullied the outlook for any thinking South African, who would be foolish not to wonder what she is trying to hide. To wit:
Periodically, the International Atomic Energy Agency publishes a report on the atomic energy capabilities of its member countries. The last time it assessed South Africa’s record on aspects such as nuclear capability, safety record, nuclear power management, nuclear waste management and so forth was in 2013. REACTION CALLED FOR: An aerial view of Koeberg nuclear power station 30km north of Cape Town
Other countries publish their IAEA reports on the internet. Not us. Our government hides our country’s report from us. Keeps it under lock and key.
The ducking, diving and fibbing about this report by the minister, her department and, yes, the Presidency, must be seen to be appreciated.
Two attempts to secure the information through Promotion of Access to Information Act applications by DA MP Gordon Mackay have failed. They were turned down because the government claimed it was in the national interest not to publish what should surely be — and in other jurisdictions is — freely available.
Word on the street is that South Africa scored very poorly on nuclear safety aspects. Are the facts in that report perhaps being hidden in the interest of an embarrassed government?
The Integrated Resource Plan of the government is hopelessly outdated and useless in practice.
Is there an updated, feasible plan, one of the very few yardsticks citizens have to measure the validity, respectability and feasibility of government’s purported energy plan? If so, what is its founding pretext?
In the national budget for the current financial year, only R200-million is allocated to nuclear, and it is very specifically earmarked for international cost analysis research. No public feedback has ever been given on the findings of this, if any.
What is the amount South Africa is ready, willing and able to spend on nuclear new build, and how will it be financed, especially given the heightened cost of borrowing thanks to a bickering, divided cabinet?
Experts project the cost of nuclear new build to be between R600-billion and R1.7-trillion, depending on variables such as the extent, timing, location and technology.
For instance, energy demand and economic growth have both slackened in what is essentially a chicken and egg argument — one makes the other happen, with cause and effect muddled by interdependence of process. This has consequences for the amount we should be spending on procuring new electricity capability.
The location of every intended new nuclear power plant is also important. If, for instance, we build next to Koeberg, we save money because the ocean is cold and the infrastructure and expertise already exist. If we build at Thyspunt, near Cape St Francis, everything needs to be created, the water is warmer and the community is opposed.
Why is no feedback provided to us — the citizens of this country who must finance it either through tax contributions or opportunity cost — of the details around the nuclearrelated discussions our government has had with the Russian, French and Chinese governments?
Why are the Russians so frustrated with the lack of progress? Why are their expectations so high?
Why do they tell South African journalists on the fringes of international conferences that the deal with them is all but sealed? Why is it in the national interest to deny those who are paying for all those lovely Moscow trips the details of what our money is being spent on?
And finally, to top it all: the Department of Energy was supposed to brief the parliamentary oversight committee on Wednesday and Thursday last week.
On the agenda was an update on the tabling of legislation (at least six pieces of urgent legislation are inexplicably stuck in cabinet) as well as updates on the gas utilisation master plan, the biogas strategy, the national electrification master plan, the liquid fuels master plan, the problems at the Central Energy Fund including the sale of strategic oil reserves, the nuclear new build plan, the radioactive waste disposal plan, the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, the solar heating programme and the renewable energy programme.
With no real explanation, this incredibly important oversight meeting was cancelled the night before it was supposed to take place.
No doubt the ministry and Department of Energy, the ANC and the opposition will blame one another and create even more excuses for not keeping us informed.
The truth is that they are all to blame, and so are we, if we allow them to continue. This mess is playing out right before our eyes. If we allow ourselves to be kept in the dark, and possibly be robbed blind because none of the parties can muster the will to act decisively, the joke will be on us.
We are to blame if we allow them to continue