The nuclear path is unsustainable

1. The nuclear path is unsustainable David Fig Cape Town International Convention Centre 21 June 200

2. 1. Reviving an untenable industry • In the US no new orders for reactors since 3 Mile Island • Since Chernobyl most European countries have made no new orders • Many countries have reversed their reliance on nuclear (Germany, Sweden, Italy, etc.)

3. 2. South Africa – some history • SA’s uranium industry developed by US & UK to feed their bomb programmes (1950s, 60s) • SA developed its own fuel cycle to feed civilian reactors (1970s, 80s) • In practice the developments masked a secret process of making weapons of mass destruction (1970s, 80s)

4. 3. Waste • Koeberg’s waste – low & intermediate level stored in drums at Vaalputs, Namaqualand; -- high-level waste stored on site • Pebble bed waste to be stored on site for many years • No long term solution yet for high-level waste – need to insulate it from the environment for 10 x 24 400 years (half-life of Plutonium) • No national policy (August 2005?)

5. 4. Safety • Transportation of enriched uranium, pebbles, and eventually waste, as never before on our road system • Most municipalities en route will have no evacution or clean-up facilities • The “inherently safe” reactors have attracted doubts as to their safety

6. 5. Massive cost • The PBMRs have attracted little foreign investment, in fact a large US utility, Exelon, has pulled out of the project • Recent figures indicate that the first stage of development & commercialisation require the use of R14,8 billion of public funds

7. 6. Carbon positive • Despite statements to the contrary, the nuclear fuel chain ADDS carbon emissions to the atmosphere • Methodologies for assessing emissions use the cradle-to-grave approach, not simply what comes out of the reactor

8. 7. Security • From experience the nuclear industry requires huge secrecy and security around it, to avoid radioactive material falling into the wrong hands • An elaborate security apparatus will be entrenched in safeguarding each reactor, each transport of nuclear materials • The establishment of a security state flies in the face of initiatives to entrench our fragile democracy

9. 8. Regulatory dimension • The public will need to have confidence in our national nuclear regulators • The regulatory authorities will need to demonstrate their independence and objectivity • It is a major setback to public trust to appoint a former official of the PBMR company as the head of the national nuclear regulator • The Minister should take immediate steps to end this “revolving door” approach and to rebuild public trust in the regulator

10. 9. Fair assessment • The Cape high court in November ruled that the Environmental Impact Assessment on the Pebble Bed demonstration reactor was flawed in that the DG’s Record of Decision had not taken the views of interested and affected parties fully into account

11. 10. Alternatives exist • Huge reductions in carbon emissions can be achieved through energy conservation • An array of renewable energy resouces exists and can be commercialised to greater effect • These will produce more jobs and a more democratic set of approaches to bulk energy provision

12. Verdict • Let’s move towards a more sustainable energy future, with no dangers of radioactivity, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, no requirement of entrenching a security state, and more popular control over our energy sources

13. Thank you! davidfig@iafrica.com