PUBLICATION STORE SUBSCRIBE

South Africa to liaise with vendor countries to implement energy plan

The South African government has signed agreements with vendor countries to develop its Nuclear New Build Programme and has concluded the pre-procurement phase of the programme.

As part of expanding the nuclear new build programme and developing a sustainable energy mix, the energy department of the South African government has conducted a series of vendor workshops with seven countries namely Canada, China, France, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the USA. These nations use technology that is similar to South Africa, such as the pressurised water reactor nuclear technology, which can be seen at the Koeberg Nuclear Power Plant in Western Cape.

The South African government has signed Inter-Governmental Framework Agreements (IGFA) with Russia, China, France, USA and South Korea, while agreements with Canada and Japan are at an advanced stage and will be completed soon, said government officials.
According to the agreements, each country can contribute to and engage with South Africa’s nuclear new build programme.

Energy-Resource
Attend the seminar here

 

An official from the South African energy department said, “The government continues to make significant progress in its engagements with various prospective nuclear vendor countries as part of the process towards the implementation of the expansion of the nuclear new build programme, as required for energy security based on a sustainable energy mix. The National Development Plan enjoins us to do thorough investigations on various aspects of the nuclear power generation programme before a procurement decision is taken. These policy prescripts are meant to add 9,600MW of electricity to the national electricity grid and ensure that we keep the lights on in a sustainable manner.”

Over the last six months, 80 South African nuclear experts have carefully analysed each technological offering for the vendor countries during the pre-procurement phase. At the end of the process, every vendor country presented unique proposals to implement the nuclear new build programme, which will support the government’s decision to develop a transparent, fair, cost effective and competitive procurement process for selecting a strategic partners to implement the programme.

The procurement process will be presented for approval by the Energy Security Cabinet Subcommittee and endorsed by the Cabinet, with the aim of getting the first unit commissioned by 2023 and the last unit by 2030.

Source: African Review


Follow Alive2Green on Social Media

TwitterFacebookLinkedInGoogle +

Alternatives to drive SA’s energy mix for optimum development

The raging debate over the suitability of nuclear energy is typical of South Africa’s flawed approach to energy policy. We are driven by desperation to consider alternatives rather than being proactive and acting strategically to optimise outcomes.

The Eskom debacle has forced the government to consider other options such as gas in addition to nuclear – just like the sale of state assets is driven by the need to bail out Eskom rather than economic policy. Invariably, we ask the wrong questions and then proceed to provide the most precise answers to them.

The strategic energy policy question is not whether nuclear energy is better than renewable energy or vice versa. The question is: what is the optimal energy mix for South Africa that will best address our economic development challenges? Any optimisation problem relies on the formulation of the objective function and the constraints imposed on it. While some are fuzzy on the objective function, they seem clear that we can either have nuclear, wind or solar, and nothing else.

My argument is that there are other alternatives to be considered in the energy mix. Firstly, the strategic envelope for the analysis of our energy policy should be the Southern African Development Community (SADC), not the Republic of South Africa, given that there are significant energy sources outside South Africa, with South Africa being a massive energy sink. The DRC has hydro energy resources, Botswana has coal resources, Mozambique and, to a lesser extent, Namibia have significant natural gas resources. It is also unclear why our own coal resources are not in the future energy mix, given our relative size to massive coal burners such as China and India.

Back to the objective function: what do we want to achieve through our energy policy? The goals of an energy policy should include competitively priced energy, energy security, supply stability, minimal environmental impact, employment creation, and positive transformative impact on the overall economy. One could use the current energy mix as a base case to compare alternative mix options, including all the energy sources mentioned above.

We have not even considered importing Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) as an alternative or local hydraulic fracking. We could divert all our thermal energy demand to LNG and simultaneously use LNG to provide feedstock to the PetroSA GTL plant. That would reduce our electricity demand and also make sure we sweat an existing investment at the Mossgas plant.

At face value, it seems a nuclear plant investment will have less positive transformative effect on the overall economy.

We need a breath of fresh air in this energy policy debate. This is too important an issue for South Africa’s future to be driven by sector specific interests.

Source: IOL


 

Energy-Resource

Book your seat here.

Join the discussion here.


Follow Alive2Green on Social Media

TwitterFacebookLinkedInGoogle +