Mantashe: SA will get nuclear at a cost it can afford

Trilkop

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2015
Messages
525
#1
South Africa will get nuclear energy at a cost the country can afford.

That was the message of Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy Gwede Mantashe during his department's budget vote debate in Parliament on Thursday.

"To say nuclear energy is too expensive is misleading," he said. "The approach to South Africa's energy sector should be one of balancing all the different sources together."

He acknowledged that the Koeberg nuclear power station near Cape Town is "getting on in life". Government, however, plans to extend the nuclear power station's life span.

"Nuclear use goes well beyond just the use for energy. Part of it can also be used for cancer treatment," said Mantashe. He is of the opinion that SA should even look into establishing a state-owned pharmaceutical company.

"Koeberg is generating the most cost-effective energy in SA today. Nuclear is efficient. At the same time, we must talk of an energy mix for the country."

Good governance is another aspect he emphasised in his speech. He wants to improve governance so that SA's energy sector can be strengthened.

"We must ensure stability and long-term it is very important to have good governance. Without good governance we cannot do risk management," said Mantashe.
https://www.fin24.com/Economy/mantashe-sa-will-get-nuclear-at-a-cost-it-can-afford-20190711
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
20,001
#4
Unfortunately I agree with the old Goat.

What the leftist tards in this country don't understand is that we have to give away most of our electricity to an unpaying public. Which completely rules out the option of renewables and solar.
 

ambroseg1

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
9,995
#6
Unfortunately I agree with the old Goat.

What the leftist tards in this country don't understand is that we have to give away most of our electricity to an unpaying public. Which completely rules out the option of renewables and solar.
If every house can generate its own electricity through solar, how does that rule solar out?
 

ambroseg1

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
9,995
#12
I (and I guess millions of other households) don't have the R150k plus lying around to convert my house to off grid solar.
Why can it not be subsidised? Why through the economies of scale can it not be bought with massive discounts? They fitted solar geysers to just about every RDP house and house previously disadvantaged area for heavens sake.
 

Trilkop

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2015
Messages
525
#15
Unfortunately I agree with the old Goat.

What the leftist tards in this country don't understand is that we have to give away most of our electricity to an unpaying public. Which completely rules out the option of renewables and solar.
I disagree with him.

Problem is, there are still enormous costs involved in building the infrastructure. Although cheaper to run, the costs are still very high in generating and distributing electricity. You still need a paying public to cover these costs, and not just a small minority group to cover the expenses.

So, where you have a public not willing to pay for electricity, there should not be any electricity in that country at all. That is how things work. South Africa is heading that way too.
 

Milano

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 7, 2004
Messages
11,397
#17
"Koeberg is generating the most cost-effective energy in SA today. Nuclear is efficient. At the same time, we must talk of an energy mix for the country."
Would not be surprised to learn that Mantashe failed to build in the massive end-of-life decommissioning costs.

Also "at a cost it can afford"? How many corners need to be cut in terms of safety to achieve that?

20 to 50 percent needs to be allocated for self-enrichment before the project could even commence.
 

LCBXX

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
10,334
#19
The only thing wrong with evolving our electricity generation from coal to nuclear is the accompanying corruption that the process with be embroiled with. The "nuclear deal" that was/(is?) on the Zuma table would've literally placed South Africans in debt to Russia for at least 3 generations.
 

lived666

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
8,559
#20
Unfortunately I agree with the old Goat.

What the leftist tards in this country don't understand is that we have to give away most of our electricity to an unpaying public. Which completely rules out the option of renewables and solar.
Not necessary true, just required out the box thinking.
Regarding the unpaying public, pity they weren't given solar solutions and pulled off the grid.

For example if instead of wasting so far 330 odd billion on the failed Medupi and Kusile power plants, btw some estimate the costs at 500 billion, but lets stay with 320 billion, use those funds to offer free solar solutions to nonpaying townships.

What a pity, we could have offered free renewable energy to over 2 million households and taken them off grid but instead we sitting with 2 hyper inflated failed coal power stations.
 
Top