Eskom admits trying to dodge procurement procedures for nuclear deal, Business Tech By Staff WriterApril 21, 2017 State power utility, Eskom, says that earlier reports made by the Democratic Alliance about trying to dodge correct procedures for nuclear procurement are partially true, but stressed that it is only looking for exemption from certain areas of the process.
Earlier this week, the DA alleged that Eskom had made a direct application to the National Treasury chief procurement officer, Schalk Human, asking to be exempted from the prescribed procurement procedures for the new nuclear power acquisition.
The party stated that this was done in an apparent bid to accelerate the nuclear new build programme, “in a move that would mean that the country’s biggest ever procurement deal would not be subject to due diligence and correct procedures”……….
As indicated in the original report by the DA, it appears that the political party will fight the rushed process.
DA shadow minister of energy, Gordon Mackay, said that the exemption is ‘significant’ and would mean Eskom is embarking on the country’s single biggest public procurement – without fully assessing associated risks and consequences for South Africa’s economy.
“All state entities are bound by specific procurement standards and requirements. These processes are vital to ensure the effective, efficient and transparent acquisition of goods and services by the State and its entities. If procurement standards cannot be met – procurement should not commence,” Mackay said.
“The DA is strongly opposed to the nuclear deal and will continue to pursue all avenues to scrutinise every process involved and to ultimately put a stop to a deal that will enslave future generations of South Africans.”https://businesstech.co.za/news/energy/171505/eskom-admits-trying-to-dodge-procurement-procedures-for-nuclear-deal/
April 22, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Africa |
Leave a comment
The applications are for exemptions from the rules governing government procurement as set out in the Public Finance Management Act.
Eskom chief nuclear officer, Dave Nicholls, told Business Day that much of the work on the nuclear procurement had been done before the promulgation of the regulations over the last year.
He reportedly said Eskom wanted Treasury to assure it that the work already done would be seen as compliant with regulations, to avoid having to start the process from scratch.
He said there was nothing untoward with the applications.
“We believe the work that has already been done is adequate and is equivalent to what Treasury is asking for,” he told the paper.
DA energy spokesman Gordan Mackay told Business Day the party objected to any “unacceptable” attempts to rush through the procurement process.
April 22, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Legal, South Africa |
Leave a comment
Science strikes back: anti-Trump march set to draw thousands to Washington Scientists are ditching their labs for the streets in a mass protest against the Trump administration’s war on facts, but will the effort resonate with skeptics? Guardian, Oliver Milman 18 Apr 17, On Saturday, thousands of scientists are set to abandon the cloistered neutrality of their laboratories to plunge into the the political fray against Donald Trump in what will likely be the largest-ever protest by science advocates.
The March for Science, a demonstration modeled in part on January’s huge Women’s March, will inundate Washington DC’s national mall with a jumble of marine biologists, birdwatchers, climate researchers and others enraged by what they see as an assault by Trump’s administration upon evidence-based thinking and scientists themselves.
The march is a visceral response to a presidency that has set about the
evisceration of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and many of its science-based rules, the
dismissal of basic climate change tenets by the president and his appointees and a proposed budget that would remove
around $7bn from science programs, ranging from cancer research to oceanography to Nasa’s monitoring of the Earth.
Many scientists at federal agencies, concerned their work may be sidelined or censored for political purposes, will take the unusual step of publicly damning the administration.
“It’s important for scientists to get out of the lab and talk about what’s important,” said Andrew Rosenberg, who spent a decade at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and is now at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “You don’t check your citizenship at the door when you get a PhD. No one would tell an architect they can’t have a view on HUD [the Department of Housing and Urban Development]. That would be nonsense.”
Rosenberg said younger scientists, in particular, are increasingly rejecting a stance of studied silence when faced with what they see as threats to their profession…….
The march now has dozens of people grappling with the logistics of the DC march and more than 500 companion events around the world. More than 100 organizations have lent their support, including the institutional heft of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the world’s largest general scientific organization, and the American Geophysical Union.
April 19, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AFRICA |
Leave a comment
In the Sahara, a Little-Known Nuclear Wasteland, “There’s nothing nuclear in what I do. It’s just rocks we dilute into powder.”, Catapult, Hannah Rae Armstrong Apr 12, 2017 Activist Azara Jalawi lives with her mother, a nomad; her daughter Amina, who watches Mexican soap operas and dates a local human trafficker; her son Doudou, nicknamed “Slim Shady,” and a lean girl, probably a slave, in the town of Arlit, Niger, a mining hub of about forty thousand set deep within the Tuareg Sahara, a slow-baking proto-Chernobyl, a little-known nuclear wasteland.
Around Arlit, prehistoric volcanoes and petrified forests rise from the sand. Beneath it lie the skulls of giant crocodiles who preyed on dinosaurs a hundred million years ago. Within the rocky plateaus are havens like the oasis at Timia, where orange, grapefruit, and pomegranate groves ripen and flower in the desert. For forty years, the French nuclear-energy giant Areva has mined uranium here, and milled it into yellowcake, the solid concentrate that is the first step towards enriching uranium for nuclear fuel or weapons. Three miles outside the town, fifty million tons of radioactive tailings—a waste byproduct containing heavy metals and radon—sit in heaps that resemble unremarkable hills. In strong winds and sandstorms, radioactive particles scatter across the desert. “Radon daughters,” odorless radioactive dust, blanket the town. Public health and the environment exhibit strange symptoms of decay—mysterious illnesses are multiplying; grasses and animals are stunted. The people of Arlit are told that desertification and AIDS are to blame. ………..
Living atop an open-pit uranium mine has made the people ill, in ways they do not understand. Breathing radioactive dust, drinking contaminated well water, and sleeping between walls stitched from radioactive scrap metal and mud, the people tell stories to fill the gaps in their knowledge. ………
At her brother Doudou’s high school, funded by the mining company, students are told not to do drugs or set things on fire. Teachers tell Doudou nothing about the contaminated well water he consumes daily. At lunch on my first day in Arlit, I ask nervously about the source of the water in a chilled glass bottle on the table. “Don’t worry, it’s the well water,” they assure me. “We drink it all the time.” I learn later that well water readings reveal contamination one hundred times beyond the World Health Organization’s threshold for potable water.
………. a dim awareness of the contamination risks was just beginning. Almoustapha Alhacen, a yellowcake miller and environmental activist, recognizes himself on the cover of a 2012 book I’ve brought with me: “Being Nuclear: Africans and the Global Uranium Trade.” He is the man wearing a gas mask and gloves. “The problem with Areva is it never informed people that radioactivity exists and that it is dangerous,” he says. An NGO called the Commission for Independent Research and Information on Radioactivity (CRIIRAD), created by a French EU deputy after the 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe, equipped him with a device and trained him to take readings. Once, he recalls, he saw a pregnant woman eating mud next to the road that leads from the mine to the town. This road is often tamped down with clay from the mines, and the tires that cross it regularly give it a fresh, invisible wash of radon. Almoustapha took a reading there and found radioactivity twenty-four times higher than the safe level. At markets selling scrap metal used for building houses, and at the community taps where people draw water, he took readings that were off the charts.
“Arlit was built around uranium. And humanity needs uranium,” Almoustapha says, speaking quickly and with rage. “But what happens next for us, when the uranium runs out, Areva leaves, and we are left with 50 million tons of radioactive waste?” As an activist, he ponders the future and the environment with seriousness. But these become abstract concerns before the fact of his job, which he needs right now. In a white turban and sunglasses, with sequined leather jewelry adorning his chest, he protests: “There’s nothing nuclear in what I do. It’s just rocks we dilute into powder, powder we dilute into liquid. It’s just mechanics, like for any car.” …….
If any state benefits from the distraction counter-terrorism provides from these underlying issues, it is France. Insecurity shields the mines from environmental scrutiny. Threats justify deepening militarization, an ongoing erosion of Nigerien sovereignty and independence. And the French mines still face no real obstacle to radiating the radiant desert. In fact, they’re expanding. A new mine—Africa’s largest—is being built near Arlit, at a site called Imouraren. There, a “security belt” encircles 100,000 acres, marking the land off limits to nomads.
https://catapult.co/stories/in-the-sahara-a-little-known-nuclear-wasteland#
April 14, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
environment, Niger, Uranium, wastes |
Leave a comment
The resolution takes forward multilateral negotiations on complete nuclear disarmament.
States started negotiations on nuclear disarmament in 1946, a year after the atom bombs were dropped on Japan. But the talks faltered as the Cold War warmed up.
Fearing that the spread of nuclear weapons would make those states that had them even more reluctant to give them up, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was negotiated and entered into force in 1970.
The treaty was the first building bloc on the road to a world without nuclear weapons. It prevented states that didn’t have nuclear weapons before 1968 from acquiring them. And it prohibited states that had nuclear weapons from providing other states with them.
The non-proliferation obligation of the treaty has been exceptionally successful. Nuclear weapons have spread to only four other states since its inception. Today there are nine states with nuclear weapons: the original five, namely the US, Russia, the UK, France and China. The other nuclear armed states are India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea. They are not members of the nonproliferation treaty.
The non-proliferation obligation of the treaty should be seen in the context of Article VI of that treaty, requiring all its members – including the five original nuclear weapon states – to negotiate in good faith general and complete disarmament of nuclear weapons, in other words, to negotiate a world without nuclear weapons.
This is the disarmament obligation of the treaty. Unfortunately, it stated no deadline for these negotiations. This legal loophole has been used by the nuclear weapon states to delay giving up their arsenals.
In fact, the treaty is disingenuously interpreted to suggest that the five original nuclear weapon states should be allowed to have these weapons, but not any other states. Continue reading →
April 12, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
2 WORLD, Reference, South Africa, weapons and war |
Leave a comment

Rigorous review process needed for SA nuclear deal http://www.iol.co.za/news/opinion/rigorous-review-process-needed-for-sa-nuclear-deal-8625269 | 11 April 2017 New Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba has the rubber stamp of approval out that Pravin Gordhan kept locked away, writes Lauren Hermanus.
The day before Ahmed Kathrada passed, on 27 March, now ex-Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan was recalled from an investor roadshow. In shock, we all asked ‘why?’ Our president knew the answer but he wasn’t in a talking mood. After Gordhan’s axing the rand took a dive and so did our nerves. Overnight the nuclear expansion programme and the South Africa-Russia procurement deal that’s been looming since 2013 became an imminent reality.
It took the debutant Minister of Finance Malusi Gigaba only hours to declare that the energy system has stabilised in South Africa and that it was time to unite to stimulate “investment, create new jobs, increase productivity and raise incomes”. Perhaps he got his notes from Eskom CEO Matshela Koko, who claimed just a few months ago, “The successful execution of the new nuclear build programme will not only fuel GDP growth, but could alleviate levels of unemployment in SA.”
In keeping with the vacuous tone of pro-nuclear discourse to date, these statements lack supporting evidence and analysis. How will it boost unemployment? How many jobs will it deliver? How does this compare with jobs in renewables and what are the relative returns on investment and payback periods?
During a recent press conference in Pretoria, Minister Gigaba said that no formal decision has yet been taken, but nuclear-based energy generation would be implemented to ‘diversify our energy mix’ based on ‘what the country can afford’ and that the process would be managed at a pace and scale our fiscus can handle.
Okay Minister, but take into consideration that our fiscus is already struggling to handle housing, social grants, higher education and public health. It has not yet handled water management infrastructure upgrading (just to make it real for the middle class), and if it can handle nuclear, we certainly have not been told how, and over what time period.
Gigaba has the rubber stamp of approval out that Gordhan kept locked away. And this is a problem, because the numbers we saw from the government-sponsored CSIR are very worrying and indicate that we should be investing in renewables instead.
What is Gigaba’s plan?
Conservative estimates put the cost of nuclear construction at $50 billion. Given the scale of the 9,600MW nuclear programme, it would be wise to draw on our experience with other large-scale energy infrastructure investments to learn some valuable lessons and check our assumptions. The almost 4,800MW coal-fired Medupi has fallen behind schedule, and while estimated at R69.1 billion in 2007, stood at R195 billion in June of 2016. So, what happens when the nuclear deal, large as it is, goes even a little off course, which nuclear builds typically do? How will we pay for that? What is Gigaba’s plan?
If the nuclear deal goes ahead, the much-beleaguered Eskom will conduct the procurement process and secure the necessary finance. It bears repeating that a loan by Eskom ultimately falls to the public purse to pay. Eskom, already weighed down in debt and scrambling to pull in payments from defaulting municipal clients, cannot afford to fail. National Treasury will not let it, as its success is critical to the survival of our economy. A bad bet on nuclear is a bad bet on our behalf, and when the need for fiscal triage arises, we will pay for it through increasing electricity prices, and tax funds diverted from other urgent priorities. Additionally, the integrity of Eskom’s procurement processes was called into question in the State of Capture Report. We should reasonably require that no massive procurement is undertaken before the extent of financial mismanagement is publically determined and transparently addressed.
The need for nuclear is the most fundamental concern
Any energy investments made must be deemed absolutely necessary before adding to Eskom’s indebtedness and our national debt. The 2010 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) that Gigaba used to justify nuclear was replaced by a 2013 update that called for only around a third of the nuclear capacity of its predecessor. Now, four years later, it is unclear that we need any nuclear at all.
2013, we will recall, was also the year that, against the Department of Energy’s (DoE) official position, a nuclear transaction was first designed and taken into talks with Russian service providers the following year.
While Cabinet pushes for nuclear, local governments pull in a different direction. Municipalities like Nelson Mandela Bay (well before they went DA) and the City of Cape Town have identified renewables as engines of local economic development, inclusive of local manufacturing opportunities, the holy grail of our industrial policy. In fact, many municipalities are pursuing localised renewable energy, which is at odds with a national nuclear expansion strategy. Mayor Patricia de Lille announced earlier this year that she would take the Minister of Energy to court over the right to buy energy directly from REIPPPP power producers without having to go through Eskom.
It will not be the only court case requiring the attention of the recently appointed Minister of Energy, Mmamoloko “Nkhensani” Kubayi. The nuclear deal is already the subject of a Cape High Court case, for allegedly failing to meet the standards of parliamentary review and public participation required for an investment of this scale.
Reframing the debate
The bare facts of the nuclear deal have been obscured by political rhetoric and false opposites. There is now an urgent need to unearth points of common concern between actors that may have very different views on how our energy sector should be structured.
Something must be said that has not often been said. You do not need to believe that REIPPPP (South Africa’s Renewable Energy IPP Procurement Programme) is the future of the South African energy sector to oppose this deal. REIPPPP is one possible tool. But you can equally argue for an Eskom-led renewable energy strategy, building on their already growing portfolio of wind and solar investments. You could argue for further municipalisation of the energy sector, for localised, small-scale energy generation and the use of residential and commercial microgrids. I happen to be pro a combination of all of the above, aimed primarily at keeping energy affordable and accessible for all.
This nuclear deal must be opposed because it makes no economic sense. It appears to benefit private interests against the public good, it may bankrupt the country over the coming decades and it will likely leave us with an overcapitalised energy sector. Moreover, like Gigaba said, our energy system is stable for now, and there is no reason to rush on nuclear. Let’s talk numbers and put this investment through the appropriate rigorous parliamentary and public review processes of our hard-won democracy.
Being opposed to the nuclear deal does not make you a racist, a classist, anti-ANC, pro-DA, pro-EFF, pro-privatisation or anti-transformation. It is a valid, evidence-based position that can be held by a range of different actors, some terrible and some not so terrible. Consensus building to create coherent policy and strategy in a pluralistic and contested political space is the point and prize of democracy.
Minister, give us, the people of South Africa, policy, finance and energy experts, NERSA, Eskom, Municipalities, the DOE and all interested parties, the chance to flex our democratic muscle and apply our minds, and through contest and collaboration we will develop a national energy plan so thorough as to eclipse the draft 2016 IRP and support the economic development of our beloved country with our best knowledge, experience and collective intelligence.
* Lauren Hermanus is a sustainable development specialist and Strategic Director of the Massive Small Collective, focused on urban resilience, energy innovation and equity.
April 12, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Africa |
Leave a comment

Eskom: SA has not signed nuclear deal http://northglennews.co.za/106808/eskom-sa-not-signed-nuclear-deal/ The power utility has not received any formal proposals from potential supplier SOUTH Africa has not signed any nuclear deal, Eskom recently said. Responding to last week’s media reports alleging that a nuclear deal has been signed, Eskom reiterated the remarks made by National Treasury that no deal has been signed.
“Eskom expects to issue a full Request for Proposal (RFP) to the open market once the Request for Information (RFI) has been assessed and the relevant approvals have been obtained,” said Eskom Chief Nuclear Officer, Dave Nicholls.
Nicholls said the power utility has not received any formal proposals from potential suppliers and has not signed any power plant procurement agreements.
“Eskom has not undertaken any pre-qualification assessment to date related to the potential respondents to a potential RFP,” he said.
South Africa plans to introduce 9 600 megawatts of nuclear energy to the grid in the next decade.
“The funding model of the project will be determined by the response received from the markets once bidders have responded to the RFP. This will also be done at a pace and scale that government can afford,” said the department.
April 12, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Africa |
Leave a comment

‘R1 trillion nuclear deal will guarantee SA junk status’ http://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/r1-trillion-nuclear-deal-will-guarantee-sa-junk-status-8565844 9 April 2017 ANA Reporter Cape Town – It is an undeniable fact that South Africa cannot afford, and does not need, government’s planned nuclear energy deal, the Democratic Alliance said on Sunday.
Media reports on Sunday that the nuclear deal was going full-steam ahead were extremely concerning and would essentially guarantee that South Africa would be downgraded by more ratings agencies and make recovering from this status even more difficult, DA spokeswoman Natasha Mazzone said.
Fitch Ratings stated in no uncertain terms on Friday that a key driver behind the decision to downgrade SA’s long-term foreign currency debt and long-term local currency debt to “BB+”, or “junk status”, was that “Eskom has already issued a request for information for nuclear suppliers and is expected to issue a request for proposals for nuclear power stations later this year.
The Treasury under its previous leadership had said that Eskom could not absorb the nuclear programme with its current approved guarantees, so the Treasury will likely have to substantially increase guarantees to Eskom”.
Just days before, S&P Global also downgraded South Africa to sub-investment level – “junk status”. Mazzone said the DA would ask public enterprises portfolio committee chairwoman Dipuo Letsatsi-Dub for an urgent meeting of the committee to ensure that Parliament, as a key oversight body, would fully interrogate all aspects related to the nuclear deal.
“The undeniable fact is that South Africa cannot afford, and does not need, the nuclear deal. Indeed, international ratings agencies agree and this deal has been repeatedly cited as a cause for great concern and a key factor in downgrades not only for Eskom, but the country as a whole.
“These downgrades have already and will continue to have a devastating effect on our economy. Jobs will be lost and the cost of living will increase, which will hurt the poor,” Mazzone said.
Earlier on Sunday, City Press reported that a confidential document reveals that South Africa’s nuclear-build programme kicks off in earnest in June when Eskom issues a formal request for proposals from companies bidding for the estimated R1 trillion contract.
The nuclear deal – for which Russian company Rosatom was widely considered to be the front runner – was, according to senior National Treasury officials, “directly related” to President Jacob Zuma’s axing of finance minister Pravin Gordhan and his deputy Mcebisi Jonas, the newspaper reported.
“It is well known that Gordhan was against the project as he said the country couldn’t afford it.Eskom will be issuing a request for proposals in June and that really is the beginning of procurement. Gordhan had to go because he was going to block it again,” a senior official reportedly said.
The internal Eskom document dated three days before Gordhan and Jonas were axed revealed a tight timeline for the programme that would see four plants built to provide 9600 megawatts of electricity to the country.
After the request for proposals was issued in June, the deadline for bids was September, for evaluation in December. The winning bidder would be decided in March 2018 and the contract signed between December next year and March 2019, City Press reported.
The document also revealed that most of the major nuclear contracts would be implemented through “turnkey” procurement, which Treasury officials were concerned about.
“While Treasury allows for turnkey procurement, we know that it is often used to hide corruption. Companies that are asked to deliver turnkey projects are accountable to themselves. They appoint whoever they like, however they like,” a senior official reportedly said.
Turnkey projects were when a single company was appointed to manage and deliver an entire project. The management company became responsible for appointing all contractors and service providers. This was different from an open tender that was spread over a range of different contractors appointed by the state, City Press reported.
April 10, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, politics, South Africa |
Leave a comment

ZUMA’S CABINET RESHUFFLE OPENS DOOR FOR SA NUCLEAR DEAL, EyeWitness News, 1 April 17 Hartmut Winkler is professor of physics, University of Johannesburg.This article first appeared on The Conversation.
South Africa has just witnessed a game-changing Cabinet reshuffle with the firing of five ministers and several deputy ministers. This included the Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan and his second-in-charge Mcebisi Jonas.
The three ministries with the most critical impact on the energy sector have all been affected, significantly increasing the chances of the country opting for a highly controversial nuclear energy programme. Continue reading →
April 3, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Africa |
Leave a comment
‘Gigaba has signed nuclear deal, we are Russia’s slaves’ http://citizen.co.za/news/news-
national/1474986/gigaba-has-signed-nuclear-deal-we-are-russias-slaves/, Charles Cilliers , 1 Apr 17, Vytjie Mentor has thrown her weight behind an allegation that includes the ‘revelation’ that Zuma’s nephew is set to make billions.
A little-known ANC member and part-time lecturer at the University of KwaZulu-Natal put 
Facebook users into a tailspin on Sunday evening when she took to the platform to declare that she had knowledge that the new finance minister, Malusi Gigaba, has already signed off on a new nuclear deal.
Sibusisiwe Mngadi, who lists as among her occupations being a part-time lecturer at the University of KwaZulu-Natal Pietermaritzburg and an area manager at the Msunduzi Municipality, wrote: “The Nuclear Deal deadline was last night. Guess whose signature is on the paper? The new Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba.” She alleges the deal will benefit President Jacob Zuma’s controversial nephew Khulubuse Zuma to the tune of R50 billion by his company being given the contract to build nuclear plants.
“Mission Nuclear done and dusted. Guess whose company is in charge of building the nuclear plants?
“Khulubuse Zuma is the SA holding company for the Nuclear plants. The next 20 yrs Khulubuse Zuma will be making more than 50billion. Congratulations, mission accomplished.”
She did not reveal what her source for this allegation was and many of her followers questioned whether she was properly informed or telling the truth.
Many pointed out that it was highly unlikely the new finance minister would have been able to sign off on such an important deal (the most expensive in South African history) after being in the job for just one day. Update: Treasury in an official statement later said that the new finance minister had signed no such documents and there were no documents ready to sign. Gigaba is yet to even occupy his office at Treasury.
Mngadi explained that she had not joined the struggle against apartheid and been jailed only for this to happen to her “beloved ANC”.
It is understood that President Jacob Zuma and the Gupta family have been pushing hard for government to sign off on a trillion-rand deal with Russia’s state-owned nuclear company Rosatom.
The former finance minister, Pravin Gordhan, and his predecessor, Nhlanhla Nene, were in no hurry to sign off on any nuclear agreements with Russia, or anyone else. Many analysts have concluded that both were axed due primarily to their opposition to any hasty conclusion of such a deal with Russia.
When Nene was axed in favour of Des van Rooyen in 2015, there were similar allegations that Van Rooyen had hurriedly signed off on the nuclear deal (he was in office for just four days), but these rumours turned out to be baseless.
Former ANC MP and party whistleblower Vytjie Mentor repeated the allegation about the deal being signed, though it’s not clear if she sourced her allegations from Mngadi or verified them independently.
She wrote: “Gigaba signed the nuclear deal last night. It will be R6 trillion with over-runs. All South Africans are now officially slaves of the Russians, and thus will be the case for the next 100 years.”
Mngadi’s post has already been shared nearly 700 times, with it also going viral on WhatsApp and Twitter.
Mentor has thrown her weight behind a group of South Africans calling for the observance of #BlackMonday by wearing black tomorrow in support of the call for Zuma to step down.
April 3, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
secrets,lies and civil liberties, South Africa |
Leave a comment

Treasury shoots down nuclear deal allegations http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/treasury-shoots-down-nuclear-deal-allegations-20170402 Jenna Etheridge, News24 Cape Town – National Treasury on Sunday set the record straight on news that was circulating on social media of a nuclear deal allegedly signed by incoming Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba.
ANC member Sibusisiwe Mngadi had alleged on Facebook earlier on Sunday that “the nuclear deal deadline was last night” and that Gigaba had signed it.
She also alleged that President Jacob Zuma’s nephew Khulubuse Zuma would benefit from nuclear plants being built.
“Khulubuse Zuma is the SA holding company for the Nuclear plants. The next 20yrs Khulubuse Zuma will be making more than 50billion. Congratulations, mission accomplished,” she alleged on the post.
Mngadi listed her occupations as a researcher and part-time lecturer at University of KZN in Pietermaritzburg, and an area manager at Msunduzi Municipality.
Some of her followers asked her for proof to support her claims. She replied that people should do their own digging, alluding only to a “parliament document that was signed yesterday”.
Former ANC MP Vytjie Mentor also entered the fray on her personal Facebook profile page, seeming to support the allegations.
“Gigaba signed the Nuclear Deal Last night. It will be R6 trillion with over-runs. All South Africans are now Officially slaves of the Russians, and thus will be the case for the next 100 years,” Mentor alleged.
National Treasury issued a series of tweets on the matter on Sunday night. “The Minister arrived (on) Friday and has not yet gone beyond boardrooms where he met management and later had a telecon with rating agencies,” the treasury account stated.
“He is formally occupying his office tomorrow and will have a briefing meeting with the outgoing Minister Pravin Gordhan in the morning. There are no documents of deals ready for signature on nuclear. Therefore the reports are misleading and mischievous.”
Gigaba’s spokesperson Mayihlome Tshwete also took to Twitter to say he had signed “not a single thing”, not even to sign off for the printing of his business cards. He said Gigaba had not even received any documents from the Director-General.“Sadly, we must now release a statement to deny fake news, then the story will be about the denial,” he lamented.
In government’s updated Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2016, which is still under discussion, it intends to add 20 385MW units of nuclear power to the national grid, Fin24 reported.
This will make up approximately one-third of South Africa’s total generation mix.
On December 20, 2016, Eskom, which has taken over from the Department of Energy as owner and operator of the proposed nuclear build programme, issued a Request for Information (RFI) for the procurement of nuclear energy. Comment is currently open for the Request for Proposal (RFP) until April 28.
The RFP is expected to be issued to the market place by the middle of the year and in 2018 Eskom and the Nuclear Energy Corporation SA (Necsa) will choose their preferred bidders and negotiate and finalise contracts.
April 3, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, politics international, South Africa |
Leave a comment

Gordhan said to have spooked Russian connection on nuclear deal http://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/gordhan-said-to-have-spooked-russian-connection-on-nuclear-deal-8459357
2 April 2017 Staff Reporter Johannesburg – Former finance minister Pravin Gordhan said the masses should be worried when top ANC officials admitted that they didn’t know where a decision was made.
Professor Njabulo Ndebele said the country was in a “deep political and moral crisis” characterised by power and greed.
Zuma’s spokesperson Dr Bongani Ngqulunga said the president was not involved “in the planning of the memorial service and in the cancellation thereof. Any impression created that the president cancelled or ordered the cancellation is erroneous and unfortunate.”
Meanwhile, while Gordhan was doing the presentations in London there was a gentleman called Chenkov who kept on asking many questions about South Africa. He wanted to know if the South African government was looking at developing nuclear energy. Gordhan quickly quashed the idea of nuclear and repeatedly confirmed that the South African government would never develop this energy.
Chenkov had no further questions. After the presentation Chenkov called someone and spoke in Russian but whoever he was speaking to was not impressed and angrily dropped the phone.
It is believed that this person immediately called President Jacob Zuma and threatened him that if he did not immediately trigger the process of changing the finance minister and sign the nuclear deal, as commission had already been paid, he would be taught a lesson.
A shaken Zuma immediately called the minister back home. “You obviously know what happened!”
April 3, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, politics international, Russia, secrets,lies and civil liberties, South Africa |
Leave a comment
Eskom on nuclear charm offensive, IOL.co za.31 March 2017, Siseko Njobeni Johannesburg – Eskom, the designated procurer for South Africa’s new nuclear build programme, has gone on a charm offensive and recently commissioned a study that has shown the multibillion-rand benefits of its Koeberg nuclear power station.
Eskom yesterday released the results of a KPMG study that looked at Koeberg’s socio-economic impact in the Western Cape and South Africa in the period between 2012 and 2025.
Although Koeberg, which is Africa’s only nuclear plant, has been producing power into the national electricity grid since the mid-1980s, nuclear still battles with social acceptability in certain quarters in South Africa and internationally.
The government’s plans to go ahead with the nuclear build programme has consistently run into opposition on environmental and affordability grounds.
“Economic impact assessment of Koeberg does not provide answers to all the questions. But it adds context to the journey we are on and helps us to alter their philosophical views on nuclear power. It is meant to inform. For me what is important is not proving whether nuclear is preferable to coal or renewables to gas,” said Public Enterprises Minister Lynne Brown at the release of the report in Cape Town yesterday……..
Ironically, Eskom has recently been in the spotlight for its decision to decommission five of its power stations from 2020 because of, among others, lethargic economic growth and the addition of renewable energy from independent power producers (IPPs). http://www.iol.co.za/business-report/energy/eskom-on-nuclear-charm-offensive-8431033
April 1, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
South Africa, spinbuster |
Leave a comment
In South Africa, as Australia’s top pro nuclear propagandist, Ben Heard, is busy glorifying nuclear power, the nuclear free movement there is mobilising
SDCEA mobilises anti-nuclear community unity with
petition http://southlandssun.co.za/71218/sdcea-mobilises-anti-nuclear-community-unity-petition/ Local activists call for action. Erin Hanekom 22 Mar 17 COMMUNITY meetings have called for South Durbanites to take action against nuclear energy and for a referendum to decide the future of nuclear energy in the country.

The South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA) hosted energy meetings at ML Sultan St Marys Primary School on 2 March and the Austerville community hall on 6 March to educate and mobilise community on the proposed nuclear energy build.
“Citizens need to understand they have the power to refuse or accept the nuclear energy fleet proposed to be built in South Africa. Sustainable energy should be the main focus in this country not unsustainable and dangerous energy,” said a statement from SDCEA.
Among SDCEA co-ordinator, Desmond D’Sa’s topics of discussion was the importance of community unity against what he termed as unsustainable developments.
“This community has a history of environmental activism that has previously brought successful results. The communities of South Durban need to unite against this nuclear build as the proposal is to develop a fleet of these facilities along the South African coastline which will pose an enormous danger to people and marine life,” said D’Sa.
Economist in development studies, Dr Gerard Boyce spoke about the financial and environmental aspects of the nuclear deal.
The use of a referendum was discussed, calling for government to set up a public vote on the matter, leaving the decision in the hands of the people.
“The referendum will benefit citizens by putting people back at the centre of politics, create greater openness and transparency in nuclear dealings. It will ensure increase current levels of public participation and foster a
culture of participatory democracy. To sum up, it will be a creation of an active and engaged citizenry,” said Dr Gerard Boyce.
SDCEA environmental project officer, Noluthando Mbeje galvanised people into being part of SDCEA’s nuclear energy campaign, which has been waged for years and has included protests, community meetings and discussions with experts in the field, including Russian environmentalist, Vladimir Slivyak.
Outcomes of the meeting include the decision to garner at least 15,000 signatures on an anti-nuclear petition; research to be conducted on cancer statistics in South Durban; getting the youth involved; renewable energy programmes;education and meetings with municipal and national officials.
Petitions can be collected at the SDCEA offices and on social media.
March 24, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
opposition to nuclear, South Africa |
Leave a comment

Russia eyes deal to build Kenya’s sole nuclear plant, The Star, Kenya Mar. 14, 2017, By WEITERE MWITA @mwitamartin Russia has offered to design, finance and build Kenya’s proposed nuclear power plant.
A delegation from Russia will pitch tent in Nairobi for the regional nuclear energy conference which kicks off today.
Russia is seeking to strike a deal through its state-owned Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corporation. Kenya plans to set up four nuclear plants, with the first expected to be switched on in 2027.
On May 30, 2016, Rosatom signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Kenya to promote nuclear solutions, assist in training personnel, create public awareness, and design agriculture and medical solutions.
Rosatom regional vice president for Sub-Saharan Africa Viktor Polikarpov yesterday said the Moscow-based entity, through the government, is ready to support Kenya put up its plants on a Build–Operate–Transfer module or Private-Public-Partnership consortium.
Rosatom said it will borrow a loan through an intergovernmental agreement, with a repayment period of up to 25 years. The firm is the only reactor vendor in the world that can offer the nuclear industry’s entire range of products and services.
“We are currently providing the VVER-1200 (Water-Water Energetic Reactor) generation III reactor which is the safest in the world. We can offer the preferred solution to your government if given a chance,” Polikarpov told journalists…….
Kenya has also signed MoUs with China and South Korea but is yet to identify a developer for the project which could cost up to Sh2 trillion. The developer will be selected by the Kenya Nuclear Energy Board……http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/2017/03/14/russia-eyes-deal-to-build-kenyas-sole-nuclear-plant_c1523942
March 15, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Kenya, marketing, Russia |
Leave a comment