Kenya Electricity board fights back to defend nuclear electricity project

Tuesday, February 25, 2014 – 00:00 — BY SUSAN MUHINDI

http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/article-156617/board-defends-nuclear-electricity-project

THE Kenya Nuclear Electricity Board now wants the court to dismiss a petition seeking to stop the government from establishing a nuclear power plant in the country.

DG Kenya

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano meets with

Kenya’s Deputy President William Ruto. (Photo: Kenyan Nuclear Electricity Board)

Image source:http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/2013/dg-kenya-namibia.html

In a new application, the board argues the case is based on falsehood and misrepresentations and ought to be struck out. It also wants the court not to restore the petition which had already been dismissed owing to the petitioner’s absence in court.

In the case, Dr Kitur Joseph wants the court to suspend the ongoing feasibility study of the nuclear energy production pending the determination of his case. He says the project is not properly informed and the court should declare that due to the grave risk of nuclear disaster and environmental impacts of nuclear power production, Kenya should instead pursue clean, safe and renewable sources of energy. Kitur is a regional manager for the Livestock Institution in Africa.

He claims that the government is in the process of carrying out feasibility and self-assessment study for nuclear power production in the country without fully acknowledging greater risks involved in the nuclear energy. Kitur wants the court to direct the committee to publish all information regarding the project.

February 26, 2014 - Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized

3 Comments »

I am an engineer with many years of experience in the nuclear field, both in design and construction. I feel that properly designed and constructed nuclear plants are the best energy source if we are to combat global warming. That said, a nuclear plant in Kenya would be a disaster waiting to happen. I have spent a lot of time in that country, have many friends there and am helping to educate a number of young people there so I have seen first hand the attitudes related to things necessary for constructing a safe nuclear plant. Their culture shows a complete disregard for safety. Corruption is rampant so any kind of quality control program would be a complete sham. There is no enforcement of laws. There are probably no more than a handful of welders (if any) in the country capable of making nuclear grade welds and if they could get the welding done there is probably on one that could perform the dye checks, do the radiography or even read the x-rays. My simple test would be that when they figure out how to get the smoke belching diesel trucks off the road they can start thinking about a nuclear program.

Comment by John parker | February 26, 2014 | Reply
- Many thanks John for your most interesting comments. Your view is certainly supported by the facts.
  regards sean
  
  Comment by arclight2011part2 | February 26, 2014 | Reply
If we are to combat global warming. An engineer would know nuclear reactors run at a lower temperature for safety. Neutron embrittlement and other stuff. Since they run cooler their thermal efficiency is lower. They make up for this by producing more BTUs. Each megawatt hour represents 20% more BTUs to the cooling tower. Tech heads crave and remain blind to their bias. The problem is global.

Comment by kmcloren | February 26, 2014 | Reply