We’re Going Nuclear

Why it’s good news
by Nick van der Leek

"The amount of uranium needed to supply electricity for a family of four for a lifetime would fit into a beer can."*

The government plans to build 24 pebble-powered nuclear generators (Business Times article by Brendan Boyle). Eric Erwin, Minister of Public Enterprises is determined that the plans are not stymied by environmentalists.

The company formed to make this happen, PBMR is a multinational, with the government being the majority shareholder, and local Jaco Kriek as the Chief Executive. Recently I watched an interview on SABC with Freek Robinson, where he defended the use of nuclear technology, saying a small lump of uranium is equivalent (in terms of energy) as 400 tons of coal. He also pointed out that the energy demands of the country are in the South, around Cape Town, and our coal deposits are situated at Richards Bay – right on the other end of the country.

It’s useful, before debating the efficacy of nuclear energy, to recognize to vital points.
One. Yes, nuclear power requires massive start-up investment. Billions will be needed to finance this project. But the machine you have at the end of the day is a tireless Ferrari (belching energy), as opposed to a muscular, but somewhat outmoded thoroughbred racehorse (who tires easily, and the stabling is a lot messier).

Two. Pollution and safety aspects. In one sense, nuclear power is much much cleaner than coal burning power stations. It can also be argued (and I am a proponent of this approach) that we cannot afford to burn coal any more, the atmosphere is too polluted as it is (see my article 10 Years to Climate Collapse) which means nuclear is our best alternative. Nuclear power stations are safe in the sense that a franchise has been developed that works.

The downside in terms of nuclear power stations is the waste product. It is radioactive and will remain so for 10 000 generations. It has to be stored somewhere where there is no leakage, no chance of Earthquakes or being ruptured by terrorist attack or war or the passage of time. Given how we humans war against each other, and accumulate waste, and the extent to which larger and larger parts of the planet are made sterile and lifeless, this is of grave concern. I hope PBMR will demonstrate a containment strategy that all communities can believe in.

The well known writer (quoted above) on alternative energy, James Kunstler (www.kunstler.com) also points out the following: "Nuclear power may be all that stands between what we identify as civilisation and its alternatives...What distinguishes modern life most from premodern life is our access to electricity, and especially liberal, regular supplies of it."

Now the main reasons why I support this initiative is that it is high time South Africa (and many other nations in the world) go into high gear in terms of developing alternative sources of energy (beyond fossil fuels). France gets about 70% of its electrical energy from Nuclear Power, and the rest of the world is very far behind. For some time I have felt that we need a massive development in energy infrastructure, right now, if we intend to cope with the energy austerities that lie ahead.

It’s very likely that in the future, any and all sources of oil (whether in solid or liquid form) will have to be used first as fuel. This depends on a scenario where we have an alternative energy source to power our homes. South Africa, as a whole, gets most of its electrical power from burning coal, and other countries like the USA are no different. That needs to change and quickly.

Nuclear Power is an investment that pays off in the long run, in terms of cost. If we can master containment. And if we can guard against sabotage.

It’s possible that our children will live in a world with bluer skies than we’ve seen. In the meantime, there is a great deal of work to do, and work needs to be conducted, both here and abroad, at a frenetic pace.

*Quoted from The Long Emergency, a brilliant book by James Howard Kunstler