Think before you ‘nuke’

WHETHER or not to stake South Africa’s future on nuclear energy is a hard question to answer. In an era in which the consequences of climate change are being driven home, those who see nuclear as a “clean” energy option seem to have the inside track. Of course, it is not as clear-cut as that. A number of things could go wrong with nuclear, of which cost is the most obvious. Consensus is that it would cost R1 trillion, which would place huge stress on our gross domestic product, especially in the light of the country’s recent downgrading to junk status by ratings agencies Standard & Poor’s and Fitch. But not everyone sees it like this. In 2016, Phumzile Tshelane, the chief executive of the Nuclear Energy Corporation of SA, suggested South Africa could build nuclear power stations to produce electricity more cheaply than any other place on Earth.

The biggest problem, however, with nuclear is safety. And when things do go wrong, they go horribly wrong. For instance, the nuclear meltdown at Chernobyl in the Ukraine in 1980 caused the deaths of almost a million people. And the area around the plant will never be used again.

Today, more than 440 nuclear reactors are in operation worldwide, with 60 in the planning stages. A major accident at any of them could be catastrophic.

Of course, more reactors also means a need for more places to dump waste.

In a 2006 report, the Department of Minerals and Energy said that at the nuclear research facility at Pelindaba, near Hartbeespoort Dam, waste had been placed in an excavated hillside.

At the Koeberg nuclear power station, high-level waste, made up of spent fuel assemblies, is stored on-site in rocks under water. From time to time, these rocks are repacked to cram in more.

According to the report, by 1999 Eskom had provided R1.16billion to manage the spent fuel and for the eventual decommissioning of the power station. By 2010, no plan had been devised for the final disposal of high-level radioactive waste.

We are pleased the Western Cape High Court has stopped the construction of a second nuclear power station, not necessarily because we are against the use of nuclear energy, but simply because the cost and paucity of answers to crucial safety questions need further scrutiny.

The court action has given everyone breathing space to further examine the energy sources that best suit South Africa. We urge the various interest groups to use this opportunity.