Subscribe

R10bn nuclear project scrapped

Paul Vecchiatto
By Paul Vecchiatto, ITWeb Cape Town correspondent
Johannesburg, 17 Sept 2010

After more than 10 years and R10 billion spent, government has pulled the plug on the Pebble-Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR), before costs escalate to R30 billion, says public enterprises minister Barbara Hogan.

Hogan announced the move to Parliament yesterday, describing it as a difficult decision, but that it was no longer worthwhile for government to invest in the project.

“As a consequence, the scale and size of the company is being drastically reduced to a handful of people, with the focus being on the retention of its intellectual property, and of certain skills, and the preservation of its assets,” Hogan said.

The PBMR was started in 1999, with the aim of developing a new form of nuclear power generation, also known as Generation IV, meaning that it was still in the research and development phase.

According to the PBMR Web site, pebble-bed modular reactor is a helium-cooled, high-temperature reactor (HTR). It says that, although it is not the only HTR currently being developed in the world, this project is on schedule to be the first commercial scale HTR in the power generation field.

“Very high efficiency and attractive economics are possible without compromising the high levels of passive safety expected of advanced nuclear designs,” its Web site states.

The idea was to use this technology to replace the aging Koeberg nuclear power plant, located in Cape Town, and possibly build a second plant elsewhere in the country.

Hogan's predecessor, Alec Erwin, championed the PBMR project especially after state-owned power generator Eskom ran into maintenance issues three years ago that caused power outages in several parts of the country.

Controversy surrounded the project from the very beginning, with criticism coming from several quarters about its viability and the fact that the German government had rejected this technology even though it had been initially developed in that country.

Shareholders of PBMR are Eskom, the Industrial Development Corporation and US group Westinghouse.

No anchor

Hogan said the PBMR has not been able to secure an anchor customer, or another investment partner, and that it had been hit hard by Westinghouse withdrawing from the US Next Generation Nuclear Plant programme, in May.

She also stated that, should SA embark on a nuclear build programme in the near future, it would not be using pebble-bed technology.

Democratic Alliance public enterprises shadow minister Manie van Dyk said he welcomes Hogan's announcement, as it has been his party's standpoint for several years.

“We, as a country, should stick to the knowledge and technologies that we know best and suit us best,” he said.

Van Dyk said the 800 or so people employed by the project, many of whom are highly skilled, would not necessarily be lost to the country.

“Those people can be reallocated to a number of research institutions or other projects where their skills and knowledge could be put to good use,” he said.

Earthlife Africa, an alternative energy advocacy group, welcomed the decision, but was concerned, saying that government has spent almost R7.419 billion (80.3% of the total amount of R9.244 billion allocated) on the project.

“We call on the Minister to conduct a full audit of the PBMR company by the auditor-general. Furthermore, Parliament should conduct a full and transparent investigation. We hope that government will learn from this tragic and wasteful experience,” the group said in a statement.

Earthlife said the money spent on the PBMR could have been better utilised in the health and education sectors.

“Such waste of taxpayers' money must not be experienced again. We, therefore, urge government to refrain from building any other nuclear reactors in the future.”

Share