nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

“astonishing and reckless” – South Africa’s Energy Minister’s statement on nuclear deal to commence soon

exclamation-SmNews that nuclear deal will start by end-September is ‘reckless’, DA says http://www.bdlive.co.za/business/energy/2016/09/08/news-that-nuclear-deal-will-start-by-end-september-is-reckless-da-says  BY LINDA ENSOR,   ENERGY Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson’s shock announcement that the first phase of the nuclear deal is to commence by the end of September was both “astonishing and reckless,” DA energy spokesperson Gordon Mackay said on Thursday.

The minister announced in the National Assembly on Wednesday that a request for proposals for the nuclear build programme would be issued on September 30. The government has decided to build nuclear plants that will generated 9,600MW.

“Not only is the proposed nuclear deal the subject of litigation in the Western Cape High Court, but the announcement will add yet further fuel to the fire that will see SA’s international credit rating go up in smoke,” Mackay said.

“Critically, the minister’s decision to commence with the first phase of the nuclear new build programme, despite the fact that not a single document with regard to the deal has ever been presented to Parliament, is a blatant abuse of power.”

Mackay said Joemat-Pettersson’s announcement came before October’s tabling of the medium-term budget statement by Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan, and represented a “blatant attempt to bully the Treasury into to coughing up the trillions of rand required to fund this unaffordable pet project of President Jacob Zuma”.

He said the DA would demand that all documentation relating to the nuclear deal be made available to Parliament’s energy committee and tabled in the National Assembly.

The DA was in possession of a parliamentary legal adviser opinion, which requires ministers to provide all necessary documentation to portfolio committees, irrespective of their so-called sensitivity.

September 9, 2016 Posted by | politics, South Africa | Leave a comment

South Africa’s Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson maintains the secrecy on nuclear power procurement plans

secret-dealsflag-S.AfricaTina Joemat-Pettersson refuses to provide papers on nuclear plans, BD Live,  BY LINDA ENSOR,  06 SEPTEMBER 2016, ENERGY Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson has refused to supply the DA with a range of documents related to the government’s nuclear power procurement plans, saying they are privileged, sensitive state documents the release of which “could compromise the new build process”.

Another ground for her refusal is that the requested documents are also subject to the sub judice rule as there is litigation in the High Court in Cape Town in a case brought in October last year by Earthlife Africa and the Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute against the minister and President Jacob Zuma.

The two organisations which are attempting to stop what they say is a flawed and illegal, nontransparent nuclear procurement process, have requested the same information from the government.

The minister’s refusal was contained in a written reply to a parliamentary question by DA energy spokesman Gordon Mackay, who asked for copies of the proposal for the roll-out of new nuclear power plants as signed off by her; the Integrated Nuclear Infrastructure Review by the International Atomic Energy Agency; the terms of reference for the National Nuclear Energy executive co-ordinating committee, its communication and stakeholder engagement strategy and its phased decision-making approach to implementing government’s nuclear programme; and the designation of Eskom as the owner and operator of nuclear power plants in SA……..http://www.bdlive.co.za/business/energy/2016/09/06/tina-joemat-pettersson-refuses-to-provide-papers-on-nuclear-plans

September 7, 2016 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, South Africa | Leave a comment

South Korea keen to market nuclear reactors to Kenya

Buy-S-Korea-nukesKenya pens nuclear power deal with South Korea By Anthony Mugo, Citizen Digital2 September 2016 “……Kenya Nuclear Electricity Board (KNEB) penned a Memorandum of Understanding with the Korea Electric Power Corporation, (KEPCO), Korea Nuclear Association for International Cooperation (KNAIC) and the KEPCO International Graduate School (K-INGS).

This partnership deal will help Kenya to obtain important knowledge and expertise from Korea by way of capacity building, specialized training and skills development, as well as technical support for its intended nuclear power program……….This development comes as KNEB is gearing up for feasibility studies to identify potential sites for Kenya’s nuclear power plants as well as undertaking reactor technology assessment aimed at settling on the best option in terms of nuclear power plant model.

Keter has been leading a Kenyan delegation for a four-day nuclear power cooperation visit to South Korea which included a visit to Doosan Heavy Industries and Construction Company and the Kori Nuclear Power Plant Complex in Busan.

In May 2016 during the visit by president Park Gun-Hye in the country, the ministry of energy entered into an agreement with the Korea’s ministry of Trade Industry and Energy

The agreement facilitated the exchange of technical information, three specialists as well as training opportunities for Kenyans in Korea’s vast nuclear power industry……..Other than the agreement with South Korea, Kenya has previously signed nuclear power cooperation pacts with Russia, China and Slovakia. https://citizentv.co.ke/business/kenya-pens-nuclear-power-deal-with-south-korea-139655/

September 3, 2016 Posted by | Kenya, marketing, South Korea | Leave a comment

Russia flogging nuclear reactors to Ghana

nuclear-marketing-crapRussian-BearGhana, Rosatom in Talks Over Possible Future Nuclear Program,  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-01/ghana-rosatom-in-talks-over-possible-future-nuclear-program  Bloomberg, , 2 Sep 16 andrejvvuuren , Russia’s nuclear utility Rosatom Corp. said it held talks with Ghana to prepare for the future use of atomic energy in the West African nation.

Ghana is preparing to accept its first review mission from the International Atomic Energy Agency as it “may be expected to become one of the countries that makes use of nuclear power” in future, Rosatom said Thursday in an e-mailed statement.

Talks are ongoing between the parties over regulation, infrastructure, training and the construction of facilities which Ghana will require to implement its own nuclear power program, Rosatom said. A next round of talks will be held at the end of September.

September 2, 2016 Posted by | AFRICA, marketing, Russia | Leave a comment

Wind and solar the cheapest way to power South Africa

Wind, solar can supply bulk of South Africa’s power at least cost, CSIR model shows, Creamer Engineering News  22nd August 2016 BY: TERENCE CREAMER , There has been much discussion in recent months about the work done by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research Energy Centre into the role that renewable energy could play in South Africa’s future electricity mix. In an extensive interview with Engineering News Online, Dr Tobias Bischof-Niemz outlines the key findings of the research and unpacks the possible implications. The article follows:

The dramatic fall in the cost of supplying power from wind and solar photovoltaic (PV) plants has moved the global electricity supply industry beyond a critical “tipping point”, which leading energy scientist Dr Tobias Bischof-Niemz says is irreversibly altering the operating model, with significant implications for sun-drenched and wind-rich South Africa.

Instead of renewable energy playing only a modest and supportive role in the future supply mix, research conducted by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) Energy Centre shows that, having the bulk of the country’s generation arising from wind and solar is not only technically feasibly, but also the lowest-cost option.

“The notion of baseload is changing,” Bischof-Niemz tells Engineering News Online. Over a relatively short period, renewables have become cost competitive with alternative new-build options in South Africa, dramatically altering the investment case.

Until the large-scale global adoption of wind and solar PV, a phenomenon that has only really taken hold over the last ten years, generation technologies were not dispatched by nature. The objective was, thus, to use the assets as often as possible in order to reduce unit costs. Under such conditions, it made sense to first build baseload, such as coal and nuclear plants, and use these as much as possible, before deploying the more expensive mid-merit plants and the peakers, which acted as the ultimate safety net.

With the large-scale adoption of renewables (in 2015 a record 120 GW of wind and solar PV were added globally, more than any other technologies combined), the model is being turned on its head, particularly as costs have fallen, making them competitive when compared with alternative new-build options in many countries, including South Africa.

CSIR Energy Centre research goes so far as to suggest that it now makes sense, for cost reasons, to favour renewables generation over traditional baseload sources, and to supply any “residual” demand using “flexible” technologies able to respond to the demand profile created when the sun sets and/or the wind stops blowing.

This has been stress tested using a simulated time-synchronous model, integrating wind and solar data from the Wind Atlas South Africa and the Solar Radiation Data respectively. The outcome is reflective of South Africa’s impressive wind and solar resource base, with a capacity factor of 35% found to be achievable anywhere in the country – far superior to the 25% actually achieved in Spain and the 20% in Germany.

“On almost 70% of suitable land area in South Africa a 35% capacity factor or higher can be achieved,” Bischof-Niemz says, noting that a key finding is that South Africa’s wind resource is far better than first assumed.

“The wind resource in South Africa is actually on par with solar, with more than 80% of the country’s land mass having enough wind potential to achieve a 30% capacity factor or more. In addition, on a portfolio level, 15-minute gradients are very low, which makes the integration of wind power into the electricity system easier compared to countries with smaller interconnected areas. On average, wind power in South Africa is available around the clock, but with higher output in the evenings and at night.”

TECHNICAL & FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY

The unit’s research has gone further, though, testing the technical feasibility of supplying a theoretical baseload of 8 GW resulting in a yearly electricity demand of 70 TWh using a mix of solar PV (6 GW) and wind (16 GW), backed up by 8 GW of flexible power, which could be natural gas, biogas, coal, pumped hydro, hydro, concentrated solar power, or demand-side interventions. In such a mix, 83% of the total electricity demand is supplied by solar PV and wind, and the flexible power generators make up the 17% residual demand. The carbon dioxide emissions of this mix per kilowatt hour are only 10% of what a coal-fired power station would emit.

The economic feasibility, meanwhile, has been tested using the 69c/kWh achieved for wind in the fourth bid window of the Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme (REIPPPP) and the 87c/kWh achieved for solar. The flexible solutions to fill the gaps are assumed, “pessimistically”, to carry a cost of 200c/kWh.

Bischof-Niemz notes that 200c/kWh for flexible generation is a “worst-case” assumption, as is the assumption that any excess energy produced when solar PV and wind supply more than the assumed load is simply discarded and, thus, has no economic value.

The outcome shows that it is technically feasible for such a 30 GW mix to supply the 8 GW baseload in as reliable a manner as conventional baseload generators, while the economic analysis suggests that such a mix will deliver electricity at a blended cost of 100c/kWh. “Does it make sense to supply 8 GW baseload with an installed capacity of 30 GW? Yes, because it’s about energy, not capacity,” Bischof-Niemz avers………http://m.engineeringnews.co.za/article/wind-solar-can-supply-bulk-of-south-africas-power-at-least-cost-csir-model-shows-2016-08-22#.V8UXNQMApLs.twitter

August 31, 2016 Posted by | renewable, South Africa | 1 Comment

South Africa nuclear electricity company non compliant with govt rules on advertising

flag-S.AfricaEskom may re-advertise nuclear notices after noncomplaint E Cape notice http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/eskom-may-re-advertise-nuclear-notices-after-noncomplaint-e-cape-notice-2016-08-26 26TH AUGUST 2016  BY: TERENCE CREAMER CREAMER MEDIA EDITOR State-owned electricity utility Eskom may re-advertise notices relating to its NuclearInstallation Site Licence (NISL) applications for Thyspunt, in the Eastern Cape, and Duynefontyn, in the Western Cape, having acknowledged that a notice published in the Eastern Cape Provincial Gazette on August 8, failed to comply with the 30-day comment period prescribed in the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) Act.

Earlier Eskom had insisted that it had complied with the NNR’s prescribed processes, after Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (Outa) alleged that it was attempting to side-step public participation processes by publishing notices in provincial gazettes rather than the National Gazette, which had shortened the comment deadline to below the 30 days.

In a statement released on Friday, Eskom said it published NISL notices in ten newspapers in and around the two sites on July 29, as well as in the Western Cape Provincial Gazette.

However, the notice in Eastern Cape Provincial Gazette had been published on only August 8, which meant it failed to comply with the NNR Act’s prescribed 30 days for public comment.

Outa slammed the publication of the notice in the Eastern Cape Provincial Gazette and said the shortened comment period negated the “spirit and constitutional rights for the public to participate in decisions that affect them”.

Eskom said it was in discussions with the NNR to extend the comment period for interested and affected parties and indicated that it might re-advertise the notice in the Eastern Cape Provincial Gazette, as well as in the National Gazette to give more time for public comment.

“Eskom will communicate once the NNR has given a response,” Eskom said in a statement

August 27, 2016 Posted by | politics, South Africa | Leave a comment

African countries are the least compliant in implementing global nuclear security safeguards

safety-symbol-SmAfrica fails nuclear compliance http://city-press.news24.com/Business/africa-fails-nuclear-compliance-20160819 Godfrey Mutizwa2016-08-25 African countries remain the least compliant in implementing global nuclear security safeguards because of a lack of resources and know-how, making the continent vulnerable to terror groups.

Africa had by the end of last year on average implemented a third of the nuclear weapons safeguards required by the UN Security Council under its 1540 Committee, which oversees nuclear security globally.

That compares with 43% in Asia-Pacific, 83% in eastern Europe and over 90% in some developed economies, according to Professor Michael Rosenthal, an expert on the 1540 Committee.

While there were more than 1 000 nuclear sites around the world, only five of the continent’s 54 territories had nuclear sites, Rosenthal said, naming South Africa, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and the Democratic Republic of Congo, whose facility probably wasn’t working any more.

“I think it is certainly a big threat,’’ Rosenthal said at the 77th biennial International Law Conference held in Johannesburg this month.

“The priority is to have action plans and determine the potential, whether it’s nuclear, chemical or biological.”

One explanation for the low compliance rate was that, as the continent did not have many nuclear sites, governments did not feel compelled to divert scarce resources to a perceived threat, said Rosenthal.

The 1540 Committee, so called because it was set up to police the implementation of UN Resolution 1540, requires all UN members to commit politically that they will not provide any form of support to non-state groups attempting to develop, acquire, transport or possess weapons of mass destruction.

All member nations are required to enact laws and adopt domestic controls that prevent the development and spread of such weapons.

This was the only UN resolution that was obligatory for all member states and required members to “control borders to combat illicit trafficking”, Rosenthal said in his presentation.

A report presented by International Law Conference experts calls for legal and political commitments to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons, while allowing peaceful use.

South Africa, which runs two nuclear power stations generating about 5% of its output, plans to add 9.6 gigawatts of nuclear power by 2030, a project critics have said was too expensive at R80 761 per kilowatt.

August 26, 2016 Posted by | AFRICA, safety | Leave a comment

Critical documents missing – secrecy in South Africa’s nuclear negotiations

secret-dealsflag-S.AfricaJoemat-Pettersson to be quizzed on missing nuclear documents, Engineering News, Creamer Media,  
19TH AUGUST 2016 Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Petterssonwill be asked in Parliament next week to account for missing documents in a court case regarding the nuclear energy programme.

That is according to Democratic Alliance (DA) MP and shadow energy minister Gordon Mackay on Thursday, who sits on the energy portfolio committee in Parliament. He was responding to a claim on Thursday that government failed to disclose about ten documents in justifying its decision to enter into an intergovernmental agreement withRussia.

The claim was made by Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (Safcei) and Earthlife AfricaJohannesburg (ELA), who are challenging government in court to prove this nuclear agreement was not in fact a done deal.

Government wants to build about eight nuclear reactors to add 9.6GW of baseload energy in its drive to boost industrialisation in South Africa. However, many economists and pro-renewable energy advocates believe it is too expensive and unnecessary for South Africa, with some suggesting it would result in rating agencies downgrading the country to junk status.

“Parliamentary committees recommence next week and the DA will be asking the minister to account for the missing documents,” Mackay told Fin24.

“The DA remains deeply perturbed by the state’s lack of compliance in this case,” he said.

ELA’s Dominque Doyle said government continues to promise a fair and accountable process of nuclearprocurement, but its deeds do not live up to its promises.

“We need answers,” said Doyle. “Parliament should hold government accountable in a transparent manner.”

“Getting information out of government has been like pulling teeth,” said Safcei spokesperson Liz McDaid. “The case has been drawn out since October 2015, with government reluctant to provide the information necessary for a fair hearing.”

No nuclear deal, says minister

However, on Wednesday Joemat-Pettersson emphasised that there is no “nuclear deal”…….

Safcei and ELA said it was picked up that documents were missing while their legal team was reviewing a 700-page responding affidavit from government.

“Detailed analysis reveals the government has failed to disclose at least ten documents to which it refers when justifying its decisions to enter into a nuclear deal withRussia,”  it claimed on Thursday.

On August 4, they sent the department a letter requesting the missing documents, “as they are clearly relevant to the case … and we are still awaiting a response”.

The missing documents include:

1. The proposal to cabinet that the minister signed off for the roll-out of the new nuclear power plants;

2. The Integrated Nuclear Infrastructure Review by the  International Atomic Energy Agency;

3. The terms of reference for the National Nuclear EnergyExecutive Coordinating Committee;

4. The communication and stakeholder engagement strategy;

5. The phased decision making approach for implementing the nuclear programme ;

6. The designation of Eskom as the owner and operator ofnuclear power plants in South Africa;

7. The 2004 Bilateral International Agreement with the Russian Federation;

8. The May 2013 agreement between Russia and South Africasigned during the Brics summit meeting in Durban;

9. The invitation to attend vendor parade workshops sent to the Republic of Korea, the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the French Republic, the People’s Republic of China, Canada and the Kingdom of Japan; and

10. The list of topics each vendor country was requested to address relating to the invitation referred to in the previous point. http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/joemat-pettersson-to-be-quizzed-on-missing-nuclear-documents-2016-08-19

August 19, 2016 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, South Africa | Leave a comment

Drone crash into Koeberg Nuclear Power Station

drone-near-nuclear-plantDRONE CRASHES INTO KOEBERG NUCLEAR POWER STATION http://www.htxt.co.za/2016/08/10/drone-crashes-nuclear-power-station/  An small unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) – commonly known as drones – has crashed into the nuclear power station at Koeberg near Cape Town.

While it appears that no damage was done, South Africa’s drone regulations are clear: you are not allowed to fly drones over roads and you keep them at least 50 meters away from buildings.

According to Eskom, the drone not only flew towards and over Koeberg, but crashed into a building on site. Surprisingly, Eskom says that the drone pilot had his UAV returned to him after the incident.

“A drone crashed on the Koeberg site in contravention of the nuclear safety regulations and was returned to its owner without the investigation having been completed,” the parastatal said in a statement.

Eskom says that it has subsequently suspended the Koeberg safety officer as a precautionary measure ahead of an investigation. It also highlighted the dangers of flying drones close to government installations.

 “The matter has also been reported to the SAPS as Koeberg is a National Key Point,” it said. Eskom also revealed yesterday that it has suspended the Koeberg power station manager and the plant manager for an unrelated incident.

“Eskom has placed the Koeberg power station manager and the plant manager on precautionary suspension as a result of the distribution of documentation containing unauthorised facts and assumptions relating to Koeberg’s Production Plan and in particular, the steam generator replacement,” it said.

Eskom is this week facing strike action by 15 000 National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) members. In essence, it is illegal for any Eskom employees to strike, and NUM is protesting this.

“The decision to strike was taken at an urgent NUM Eskom national shop stewards council held at the NUM head office today. All 15 000 members of the NUM at Eskom will be fighting for the restoration of the right to strike at Eskom,” NUM said in a statement.

August 13, 2016 Posted by | incidents, South Africa | Leave a comment

South Africa at the crossroads – clean economic renewable energy or dirty uranium nuclear industry?

WHAT LEGACY DO WE WANT FOR SOUTH AFRICA? http://safcei.org/what-legacy-do-we-want-for-south-africa/

by  on August 2, 2016 In July we were excited to receive the news of a large-scale withdrawal of the uranium mining developers Australian Tasman Pacific Minerals Limited and Lukisa JVCo in the Karoo.

On 6 July they announced that they would withdraw their current uranium mining application and reapply for a much smaller area – in essence only 12% of the original application – and start the process at the beginning again. This we celebrated as an important step towards stopping uranium mining in its tracks, as well as nuclear down the line.

For, as Dr Stefan Cramer, who was instrumental in lifting the veil of silence on this new threat to the Karoo, points out, uranium mining is the dirty underbelly of the nuclear industry and where it all begins.

One must stop nuclear industries in (their) tracks because it leaves future generations with an immeasurable task and legacy. The best point to start is at the source, where the whole cycle of nuclear technology begins, and that is at uranium mining. Uranium mining is very much the dirtiest part of the entire industry,” he says.

Kim Kruyshaar writes on Green Audits that choosing between renewable energy and nuclear is about much more than just an energy option. Instead it is “a choice between two divergent socio-economic opportunities and the consequent legacies.” This rings even more true when one looks at the building blocks of nuclear energy.

Uranium mining will leave us with our iconic Karoo damaged for centuries to come and many people without a future or income as the jobs gained through uranium mining would in no way compensate for those lost in the agricultural, tourism and renewable industry businesses.

Mining will also deplete the already scarce water reserves of the Karoo and present serious health problems to all living beings there, as the radioactive dust can be carried for kilometres by winds.

Renewable energy in contrast presents us with a far brighter future that, very importantly, doesn’t contain a radioactive legacy. Far more jobs are created in the renewable energy industry than the nuclear industry ever can.

The speed in which renewable energy projects can be installed and the lower investment costs also make it highly attractive to a country like South Africa, where many people need access to energy now, not in 15 years time when a nuclear reactor would only come online.

Decentralising the power from Eskom and putting it into the hands of individuals and local companies would also only serve to empower South Africans and the economy. Nuclear energy would instead indebt us and future generations to a foreign company and leave us with the further enormous cost of decommissioning.

So it’s not simply a choice between two energy options, as Kim sums it up, it is a choice about what path we would like to take South Africa down.

What is needed to stop uranium mining and nuclear for good?

August 13, 2016 Posted by | environment, politics, South Africa | Leave a comment

Clever payment systems, such as Oxfam’s plan, could revolutionise Zimbabwe with decentralised solar energy

Affordable solar schemes light way to energy for all in Zimbabwe BY TONDERAYI MUKEREDZI HARARE (Thomson Reuters Foundation) Aug 8, 2016 – Innovative ways to pay for solar power systems could make clean energy affordable for many of Zimbabwe’s 1.5 million households that lack electricity, campaigners say. Zimbabwe produces only around 60 percent of the electricity it needs when demand is highest, and relies on costly imports to make up some of the shortage, particularly when drought hits hydropower facilities, as happened this year.

That means solar panels and other clean energy sources not connected to the southern African nation’s power grid are likely the cheapest and fastest way to bring electricity to those without it, say sustainable energy experts. “Only focusing on grid extension and increasing generation capacity will not allow us to attain energy access for all by 2030,” said Chiedza Maizaiwana, manager of the Power for All Zimbabwe Campaign.

To meet the internationally agreed goal, so-called “decentralised” renewable energy is “a critically needed solution”, she told the Thomson Reuters Foundation. “It is imperative that we create the opportunity for families and businesses to access (these) services rapidly and affordably,” she said.

Getting connected to the grid in a rural area can cost thousands of dollars, a huge obstacle when many people earn between $20 and $100 a month, said Ngaatendwe Murimba, a program officer for Ruzivo Trust, a non-governmental organization (NGO) working to improve rural energy access.

But families without electricity do pay for energy, buying firewood or charcoal – which drive deforestation – batteries, or polluting fuels such as paraffin……..

text-community-energyJonathan Njerere, head of programs in Zimbabwe for charity Oxfam, said that in Gutu district, 230 km east of Harare, his organization and others had helped set up a community-owned, self-financing solar energy scheme.

It has enabled more than 270 farmers to irrigate about 16 hectares (39.5 acres) of crops.

Oxfam gave the community solar equipment for irrigation and an initial batch of solar lanterns, which were sold to members. The proceeds were pooled in a savings and lending scheme, allowing others to join and buy solar products for home and business use.

Community funds are used to purchase solar equipment for sale to the public through energy kiosks, and the revenue is kept for repairs and relief in natural disasters.

Njerere said the program, assisted by 2 million euros ($2.22 million) from the European Union, had helped chicken farms, fisheries, tailors and shopkeepers acquire hire-purchase solar panels, so they can work in the evening as well as during the day.

Other entrepreneurs use the solar panels to sell mobile phone charging services for $0.20 a time………

Providing subsidized solar equipment would hugely improve uptake, Ruzivo Trust’s Murimba said. Communities are asking for free installation of solar systems, zero taxes on solar equipment, and government-accredited dealers who can provide them with quality solar equipment and technical support, he added.

One local company had to discontinue a popular package including a mobile phone and a $45 solar lamp. It sold some 400,000 lights to around a third of the country’s households, but they were poor quality, and many developed problems with no mechanism for repair or return.

In Harare, vegetable vendor Regina Meki, 40, uses a solar lamp she bought on credit to hawk her wares well into the night. Under a payment plan offered by a local solar company, she pays $1 a day for the $50 rented lamp, which has helped boost her monthly earnings from $70 to $120. “Solar energy has brought nothing but happiness to me, increasing my income. Besides payment for the equipment was easy on the pocket,” she said. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-zimbabwe-energy-solar-financing-idUSKCN10J0L3

August 10, 2016 Posted by | AFRICA, decentralised | Leave a comment

UK-Australian and French uranium companies polluting the “unpolluted” African States

uranium-oreUranium from Russia, with love, Ecologist, Nick Meynen 4th August, 2016

“………..the bigger issue should be that uranium mining is just a very dirty business that we didn’t clean up but source out. France used to have 200+ uranium mines but thanks to better care for environment and workers the last one closed in 2001. Instead, new ones were opened in places like Niger, Namibia and Malawi. In short: places where we can shift the real costs from uranium mining to the people and environment. As a matter of fact, CEOs in the business are quite frank about that. The former CEO of Paladin, John Borshoff, an Australian uranium producer who opened mines in Namibia, said that Canadian and Australian environmental norms are “over-sophisticated“. What he actually means is that in African countries you don’t need to pay much or anything at all to “protect” either your workers or the people living in the vicinity from dying from cancer due to exposure to uranium.

He’s just implementing the Lawrence Summers Principle. This ‘principle’ originates from a 1991 memo written or dictated by Summers whilst he was the World Bank’s chief economist. In this memo, he promoted dumping toxic waste in the Third World for economic reasons: “Just between you and me, shouldn’t the World Bank be encouraging more migration of the dirty industries to the LDCs [Least Developed Countries]? […] A given amount of health impairing pollution should be done in the country with the lowest cost, which will be the country with the lowest wages. I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that.”

The uranium sector squared up to that. But for how much longer will it get away with that?

Last time rebels in Mali came too close to the AREVA mines in Niger for comfort, France suddenly sent in their army. Under some humanitarian pretext. And if rebels don’t succeed in capturing these remote mines, the global environmental justice movement might just succeed in closing a couple of them down.

The legacy from uranium mining

Being part of that movement, I’ve had the ‘pleasure’ of making a toxic tour around a now closed uranium mine in Bulgaria. Massive amounts of toxic sludge were stored behind a weak dam that showed signs of distress after heavy rains caused a spill in 2009. Old EU money was still keeping the dam up but as we’re talking about radioactive waste, money will need to keep flowing to dam repairs for millennia to come.

Since 1992, when the mines closed, and for time immemorial, that will be public money. And that’s how it goes with uranium mines in places with weak or no legislation: short-term private profits followed by perpetual public losses. In Bulgaria the people are still lucky enough to be in the EU with at least some environmental regulations and EU money for environmental protections. The same goes for other EU countries like France, which has dozens of zombie mines: dead but still active. The US also has plenty more zombie mines. The lands of the Navajo Nation include over 500 abandoned uranium mines (AUMs) as well as homes and drinking water sources with elevated levels of radiation. Despite the fact that they stopped operating in 1986, new and related lung cancers, bone cancers and impaired kidney functions keep appearing.

But while EU and US now have enough safeguards to keep their own uranium safe under the ground, there’s nothing of that in Namibia or Niger. These two countries are rising players on the uranium market, both exporting their uranium to the EU. Niger has now produced more uranium than France ever did in it’s whole history. It’s here that UK-Australian and French companies are doing the dirty digging that destroys local environment and populace.

Three reports from the EU-funded EJOLT project deal with the environmental and social issues related to uranium mining. One deals with the impacts, one concentrates on a mine in Malawi and the third dwells on the examples of successful resistance to big mining in general.

Bruno Chareyron, a French nuclear engineer who authored most of these reports, has been carrying out toxic tours along uranium mines for the last two decades. That’s not always an easy job, with for example the police confiscating most of your measuring equipment upon arrival in Niger. Nevertheless, Bruno was able to measure that radioactive scrap metal from the mines and mills is sold on the market. Waste rocks from the mines were used to pave roads, build homes and even at the local hospital where the radiation was 100 times above normal. Piles of radioactive waste were left in open air, unprotected, next to two cities with a total population of 120.000.

The missing piece of the puzzle

Where is uranium in the whole debate about nuclear energy? It’s usually only mentioned when the industry says: uranium is only a tiny part of the total cost of our energy model, unlike the situation in the gas and oil industry.

Well, there’s a reason why it’s only a tiny part of the total cost and it’s called cost shifting.

Ecological economists have given names to processes witnessed in the uranium sector:accumulation by contamination, ecologically unequal exchange and ecological debt. More and more, people all over the world are coming together to resist against environmental justice.

Our EU and US based nuclear power is currently coming at the cost of poisoning people in Africa. But it begs the question: are we ready to face that reality?

This Author:

Nick Meynen is one of The Ecologist New Voices contributors. He writes blogs and bookshttp://www.epo.be/uitgeverij/boekinfo_auteur.php?isbn=9789064455803 on topics like environmental justice, globalization and human-nature relationships.

When not wandering in the activist universe or his Facebook pagehttps://www.facebook.com/nick.meynen
is dead, he’s probably walking in nature.   

@nickmeynen   http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2987988/uranium_from_russia_with_love.html

August 5, 2016 Posted by | environment, Malawi, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, politics international, Reference, Uranium | Leave a comment

Nuclear enthusiast Bill Gates again trashing renewable energy

Gates'-travelling-Wave-NuclBill Gates Again Dismisses Solar’s Value In Africa, Clean Technica July 22nd, 2016 by  Bill Gates, delivering the 14th Nelson Mandela Annual Lecture on the eve of Mandela Day, has again dismissed the potential global role of solar, and in particular the value it could have in solving energy crises in Africa.

In the long run, what Africa needs is what the whole world needs: a breakthrough energy miracle that provides cheap, clean energy for everyone,” Gates said on the 17th. However, Gates doesn’t believe that that breakthrough has been made in the form of solar.

In an interview with Tech Insider earlier this year in February, which saw the billionaire philanthropist discuss the need to bring electricity to the millions who do not yet have access to reliable grid-provided energy, Bill Gates dismissed the role of solar. Gates discussed the need for an “energy miracle” then as well. “You might say, well, aren’t people saying that about wind and solar today? Not really. Only in the super-narrow sense that the capital costs per output, when the wind is blowing, is slightly lower.”

Gates continued, saying that the reason solar and wind “still needs subsidies, and it can’t go above a certain percentage, is this intermittency — it changes the economics, particularly the requirement that the power company at all times be able to require power.”

Speaking last Sunday as he delivered the 14th Nelson Mandela Annual Lecture, Gates again dismissed the role of solar in bringing electricity to the millions throughout Africa who are without reliable access to electricity……

What’s disappointing is that, at every step along Bill Gates’ arguments, we find reason to disagree with his increasingly-outdated points of view. Integrating energy storage with wind and solar generation mitigates much of the intermittency concerns, while reliance upon fossil fuels such as coal in Africa rely on massive levels of infrastructure — infrastructure which simply doesn’t exist, and would cost billions to develop, in excess of the cost of developing large-scale renewable energy deployment. Already the levelized cost of electricity (LCoE) has seen to be decreasing for both solar and onshore wind, and in some parts of the world are already cost competitive with existing fossil fuel energy sources.

Bill Gates isn’t unable to access this information, so what’s driving his seeming intentional ignorance towards the potential benefits of renewable energy, and solar energy in particular, for providing widespread electricity throughout Africa? http://cleantechnica.com/2016/07/22/bill-gates-dismisses-solars-value-africa/

August 1, 2016 Posted by | AFRICA, renewable | Leave a comment

South Africa’s nuclear company Eskom urging government to freeze renewable energy program

propagandaIs Eskom building a case for nuclear power?, Business Day Live,   BY SALIEM FAKIR  JULY 28 2016, IT IS disconcerting that Eskom is advising the government to freeze a globally acclaimed renewable energy programme based on a perceived misunderstanding of the benefits of the renewable energy independent power producer (IPP) programme.

Eskom has justified its recent announcement not to sign further power purchase agreements with independent power producers with reasons that range from questions about the need for additional renewables and baseload IPPs, to improved operating performance, its large-scale new build programme, and protecting consumers from higher prices by not buying additional capacity.

Yet, the renewable energy programme is regarded as highly successful, and it delivers a wide range of benefits at the best prices given that it is a buyer’s market.

Eskom’s own 2016 financial report states that wind and solar are now cheaper than coal-generated electricity. The Treasury has stated that 92 renewable energy programme projects have attracted R193bn in private sector investment, totalling a contribution of 6,327 MW of capacity to the national grid. The total projected value of goods and services to be procured from broad-based black economic empowerment suppliers is put at more than R101bn.

Investment in renewables accounted for 85.8% of total direct foreign investment in SA in 2014. A Council for Scientific and Industrial Research report revealed that wind energy produced net savings of R1.8bn in the first half of 2015 and was also cash positive for Eskom by R300m.

The net savings can be attributed to avoiding diesel and coal fuel costs, as well as the economic costs of load shedding. Renewable energy in total generated a net benefit for the economy of up to R4bn. Renewable energy production has cut 4.4m tonnes of carbon dioxide.

At a policy level, the government has indicated that renewable energy has to be ramped up. The country’s energy vision and the National Development Plan call for a greater mix of energy sources and a greater diversity of IPPs in the energy industry, with the 2010 Integrated Resource Plan’s vision calling for 17,800 MW of renewable energy to be in place by 2030.

Internationally, SA is a signatory to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) global climate change agreement to keep planet emissions beneath 1.5°C by honouring carbon emissions reduction targets.

Legally speaking, Eskom is a buyer of electricity, with the Department of Energy procuring capacity in line with ministerial determinations. The government’s commitment has been laudable. It is worrying that Eskom seems to wish to erode this………..

It seems Eskom is building a case for nuclear and this is the real reason behind the freeze on further renewable procurement. There is no guarantee that the proposed large nuclear new build programme will be cheap, considering that Medupi and Kusile are proving to be more expensive than some renewables. We would urge pragmatism and prudence on their part.

• Fakir is the head of the policy and futures unit with the World Wide Fund for Nature in SA. http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/2016/07/28/is-eskom-building-a-case-for-nuclear-power

July 29, 2016 Posted by | politics, South Africa | Leave a comment

Pro nuclear propaganda revs up in South Africa

propagandaWhy Eskom’s Brian Molefe is pumping up the nuclear propaganda
The issue of relative costs is an area in which Eskom likes to play fast and loose with facts. Molefe, for instance, loves to talk about the relative cheapness of nuclear power Rand Daily mail CAROL PATON
26 JULY 2016 “……..As Eskom prepares to roll back the rise of independent power producers (IPPs) and lay the basis for the nuclear build, the propaganda war is going to be critical. This is because, on the facts alone, Eskom’s central argument — that SA’s energy future is a straight choice between variable and unreliable renewables and reliable base load nuclear — is nonsense.

What SA needs to do to break Eskom’s stranglehold

Even before Eskom’s letter to Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson drawing the line under the IPP programme surfaced last week, Molefe and Eskom’s head of generation, Matshela Koko, have been pushing this line. As SA can’t have more coal plants because of its commitments to reduce emissions, and as renewable energy is available during the day, when it’s not really required, the only solution lies with nuclear power.

This is a misrepresentation of the choices available. A great deal of technical work and international experience has shown that the next round of large investments SA should be making should be in gas. Unlike renewable energy, nuclear energy or a coal-fired power station, gas can be switched on and off to provide peaking power. The turbines need to turn only when you need them. With large discoveries in Mozambique, investing in gas is the logical next step. The CSIR has done detailed work on this and has put forward a third option to the baseload debate: to use gas and renewables — now by far the cheapest — in concert to create baseload power.

The issue of the relative costs of the technologies is another area in which Eskom likes to play fast and loose with the facts. Molefe, for instance, loves to talk about the relative cheapness of nuclear power. Koeberg — built in 1985 and long since paid for — supplies energy at R0.43/kWh. This should be compared with solar thermal power — the only renewable energy technology that can store energy — he says, the cost of which ranges between R2/kWh and R6/kWh. It’s a ridiculous comparison. In the absence of an agreed-on and updated Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) that would provide an authoritative view on the relative costs of the technologies, the CSIR’s Energy Centre calculated the following in 2015: new nuclear power is projected to cost at least R1/kWh, but very likely more; new coal R0.80/kWh — it is now much higher at about R1; wind R0.60/kWh and solar R0.80/kWh.

A new draft of the IRP by Eskom’s technical modellers — that has been sent back to the drawing board by the Department of Energy — has suggested that the overnight cost (capital cost excluding interest) of building new nuclear power would be $6 000/kW. The department reckoned on about $4 166/kW.

These are not numbers Eskom is likely to use in the public debate.  Eskom, in particular Molefe, has a talent for spinning a good story. After less than five months in the job, he made the startling and completely untrue statement that Eskom’s plant performance had improved vastly. At that point, Eskom’s plant performance was still in decline. More recently, in May, he insisted at a news conference in Parliament that Eskom’s ability to meet demand had nothing to do with lower-than-anticipated demand. This too, turned out not to be true, with Eskom’s own demand curve showing real decline over 2015.

These are perhaps minor skirmishes with the truth. But getting the nuclear build on track is a far bigger fight. Expect Eskom to pump up the propaganda war. — Business Day http://www.rdm.co.za/business/2016/07/26/why-eskom-s-brian-molefe-is-pumping-up-the-nuclear-propaganda

July 28, 2016 Posted by | South Africa, spinbuster | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »