Exodus from PBMR hints at return to
conventional nuclear plan
The resignation of Jaco Kriek, CEO of the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) company on 8 March follows some years of uncertainty in government policy, technological maturity, and a funding cut.
After six years with the company, Kriek said he wanted to explore other opportunities in the energy industry, but did not hint at his immediate plans. He will continue to assist some PBMR activities for the next few months.
General manager of nuclear compliance assurance at PBMR, Dr Alex Tsela, has been appointed acting CE until a permanent replacement for Kriek is identified.
Kriek's departure coincides with prospects of retrenchment of 600 staff.
PBMR spokesperson Tom Ferreira said government had not withdrawn its support, but “indicated they would decide in August where nuclear energy fits into South Africa's energy generating future, after which there is still potential for government funding and backing from other investors”.
Ferreira added; “Times are hard, but we are not a sinking ship”.
Staff members hope to find work at Eskom, Nuclear Energy Corporation of SA (Necsa) or nuclear engineering companies like Lesedi Nuclear Services. A small number of staff, with specific expertise, will be retained at PBMR.
Algerian and USA clients
Despite a recent memorandum between PBMR and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), and current negotiations with the Algerian government to supply nuclear technology, SA government seems to be pursuing more conventional nuclear technology to expand its current nuclear energy programme.
PBMR has also submitted a bid to the USA Department of Energy to supply a new generation nuclear plant.
Nuclear 1 revival
According to Andrew Kenny, an independent energy consultant, South Africa urgently needs to chart a course for its nuclear energy industry. Expansion of the current nuclear energy capacity of South Africa is 'not negotiable', and Kenny welcomes recent discussions on the resumption of plans for Eskom's Nuclear 1 power station, which government had abandoned at the end of 2008.
The recent draft environmental impact report (EIR) for Nuclear 1, to be built at Koeberg Power Station, or Bantamsklip, or at Thyspunt, has brought stern criticism from environmental groups like Earthlife Africa, Coalition Against Nuclear Energy (CANE) and Greenpeace. They argue that government is not following a proper consulting process, while the SA public should consider whether they need a second expensive nuclear power station while alternative sources of energy are available, such as solar and wind.
But Nuclear1 is by no means a done deal. Nelisiwe Magubane, director general of the Department of Energy, has indicated that although the government is committed to nuclear power, the role of nuclear power would only be revealed in the revised integrated resources plan, IRP2, to be announced by mid year.
For now, SA's energy course is uncharted.
* Amelia Broodryk is a researcher at the Institute for Security Studies in Pretoria.
PBMR out: Conventional nuclear plan in
Exodus from PBMR hints at return to conventional nuclear plan
The resignation of Jaco Kriek, CEO of the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) company on 8 March follows some years of uncertainty in government policy, technological maturity, and a funding cut.
After six years with the company, Kriek said he wanted to explore other opportunities in the energy industry, but did not hint at his immediate plans. He will continue to assist some PBMR activities for the next few months.
General manager of nuclear compliance assurance at PBMR, Dr Alex Tsela, has been appointed acting CE until a permanent replacement for Kriek is identified.
Kriek's departure coincides with prospects of retrenchment of 600 staff.
PBMR spokesperson Tom Ferreira said government had not withdrawn its support, but “indicated they would decide in August where nuclear energy fits into South Africa's energy generating future, after which there is still potential for government funding and backing from other investors”.
Ferreira added; “Times are hard, but we are not a sinking ship”.
Staff members hope to find work at Eskom, Nuclear Energy Corporation of SA (Necsa) or nuclear engineering companies like Lesedi Nuclear Services. A small number of staff, with specific expertise, will be retained at PBMR.
Algerian and USA clients
Despite a recent memorandum between PBMR and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), and current negotiations with the Algerian government to supply nuclear technology, SA government seems to be pursuing more conventional nuclear technology to expand its current nuclear energy programme.
PBMR has also submitted a bid to the USA Department of Energy to supply a new generation nuclear plant.
Nuclear 1 revival
According to Andrew Kenny, an independent energy consultant, South Africa urgently needs to chart a course for its nuclear energy industry. Expansion of the current nuclear energy capacity of South Africa is 'not negotiable', and Kenny welcomes recent discussions on the resumption of plans for Eskom's Nuclear 1 power station, which government had abandoned at the end of 2008.
The recent draft environmental impact report (EIR) for Nuclear 1, to be built at Koeberg Power Station, or Bantamsklip, or at Thyspunt, has brought stern criticism from environmental groups like Earthlife Africa, Coalition Against Nuclear Energy (CANE) and Greenpeace. They argue that government is not following a proper consulting process, while the SA public should consider whether they need a second expensive nuclear power station while alternative sources of energy are available, such as solar and wind.
But Nuclear1 is by no means a done deal. Nelisiwe Magubane, director general of the Department of Energy, has indicated that although the government is committed to nuclear power, the role of nuclear power would only be revealed in the revised integrated resources plan, IRP2, to be announced by mid year.
For now, SA's energy course is uncharted.
* Amelia Broodryk is a researcher at the Institute for Security Studies in Pretoria.
[www.minerschoice.co.za]