Nersa’s nuclear solution approval meets opposition
THE National Energy Regulator of South Africa's (Nersa's) decision to back the process for Eskom to procure 2 500MW of nuclear energy has been met with some opposition.
Nersa at the weekend announced that it concurred with Mineral Resources and Energy Minister Gwede Mantashe's determination to procure the new nuclear energy generation capacity, which is subject to suspensive conditions.
“Nersa received the draft determination for the procurement of 2 500MW generation capacity from nuclear technology on 6 August 2020,” Nersa said.
“In line with the dictates of the National Energy Regulator Act, 2004 (Act No 40 of 2004), the Energy Regulator made its decisions after following a public participation process, which included inviting written comments and public hearings to solicit comments from interested and affected stakeholders.
“All the comments from stakeholders were analysed and taken into account when making the decision.”
The suspensive conditions include that Eskom must take technological developments in the nuclear space into account; and that a demand analysis aimed at matching the envisaged load profile post 2030 be drawn-up.
The Koeberg Alert Alliance (KAA), which has been vocal in its opposition to the decision, said there was broad agreement that new nuclear power was the most expensive form of electricity generation.
The group's Peter Decker also raised questions about Koeberg's ability and reliability to be able to implement the process.
“Eskom has said the new steam generators would be R20 billion, but the cost of the refurbishment contract is unknown,” Decker said.
“It also appears the steam generators purchased from China do not fit Koeberg, and need to be modified.
“Eskom has not released a study showing what the cost of electricity from Koeberg will be once all these expenses are taken into account.
“In addition, Eskom is infamous for projects running overtime, three times over budget, and then exploding due to poor maintenance procedures, as happened at Medupi.
“This is not an organisation one wants running a modern nuclear plant, let alone one designed in the 1960s and built in the 1970s,” Decker said.
The Southern African Faith Communities' Environment Institute and Earthlife Africa Johannesburg also previously raised concerns over the move, saying while public hearings were an opportunity to better understand the implications and potential impacts of installing a new nuclear power station, it seemed to have become a “box-ticking exercise”.