NAMIBIA SHOULD THINK OF NUCLEAR POWER AS A SOLUTION TO THE LOOMING POWER CRISIS
By Cde. Veikko Nekundi

A few weeks ago, NAMPOWER announced that it planned to increase the price of electricity by about 35% of which the nation objected, but eventually the ECB approved an 18% increase. Against this background the SPYL has done thorough research on the matter and is inclined to advise as follows:

Namibia has been producing uranium since 1975 when the Rossing mine near Arandis was opened. Currently Namibia is ranked fourth biggest producer of uranium in the world, after Canada, Australia and Kazakhstan. Regrettably all the uranium we produce is destined for the foreign markets. Although the current ranking whereby Namibia stands at number 4 is only based on the production from two mines, Rossing and Langer Heinrich, experts maintain that Namibia’s future potential as a uranium producing country is unquestionable.

According to the World Nuclear Association, 30 countries operate some 435 commercial nuclear power reactors to produce their electricity. Namibia is nevertheless conspicuously missing from this list of 30 countries. France and Lithuania, which are missing from the list of major uranium producing countries, ironically rely on nuclear energy for three quarters of their power. USA, which only contributes 2.5% to the world’s current uranium demand, ironically has a total of 104 nuclear power reactors.

Some of the advantages of using nuclear power are as follows:

Like any other source of energy, nuclear power also has its own pros and cons. As nuclear power is not dependent on fossil fuels, the amount of pollution is comparatively less, but at the same time any damage or malfunctioning in the plant can trigger hazardous effects on the surroundings.

Not being dependent on fossil fuels is perhaps the biggest advantage of nuclear power. Power plants which burn coal like the NAMPOWER Van Eck in the Northern Industry highly pollute, which makes them hazardous for the environment. More importantly, the fuel used in nuclear power generation is much more efficient and found in abundance. Large reserves of uranium are spread in many parts of the world. Scientific estimates suggest that the rate at which the fossil fuels are being used today, their reserves are bound to become empty by the end of this century. Nuclear power is the best example of efficient power generation owing to the fact that the amount of fuel needed is very less and the power generated is immense. To demonstrate this, 1 ton of uranium produces more energy than 1 million tons of coal.

Those who criticize the possibility of using nuclear power in Namibia have traditionally advanced the following arguments, as disadvantages:

Most of the nuclear power disadvantages are related to safety measures. Loss of coolant water in the reactor can lead to overheating and eventually trigger meltdown. This can lead to fuel seepage in the ground, thus triggering disastrous effect on the surroundings. The byproducts of this process remain radioactive for thousands of years and cause radiation harmful for living beings. These harmful radiations can lead to disorders such as cancer, radiation sickness and genetic mutation. Although chances are rare, a possible nuclear power disaster can create havoc in miles, in areas around the plant. There have been some such examples in history. The Three Mile Island, 1979 in USA and Chernobyl Tragedy in Ukraine, 1986 are best examples of tragedy that can happen. The nuclear power plants also have possible threat from terrorist activities. Other than these, international relationships also play a major role in nuclear power generation.

I now hereby wish to address these negatives in the Namibian context.

Firstly, in Namibia we are blessed with a vast, remote Namib Desert. This presents us with the opportunity of building the power plant away from residential areas. The uninhabited Namib Desert also provides the rare opportunity for dumping high –level radioactive waste material. This is not only due to its remoteness but coincidentally the main rock type in this desert is granite, which is known for its suitability as a storage rock for hazardous waste material. In fact some foreigners have contemplated requesting the Namibian Government to allow them to use the Namib Desert as a dumping site for their radioactive waste material at a fee. That is how good our Desert is.

Therefore some of the arguments advanced by critics for nuclear power do not really apply to our country. As a matter of strategy, we don’t necessarily have to build the nuclear power plant in a town but at any other suitable spot, as long as we would be able to connect it to the national electricity grid. Some of the nuclear power plants like Chernoby in Ukraine, which exploded in 1986 due to poor maintenance, were poorly planned judging from their proximity to the residential areas.

Similarly the uranium enrichment process which has proven to be controversial, does not apply to Namibia. Uranium is enrich is considered to be controversial because if one can enrich uranium for electricity generation, then one will be capable of producing a nuclear weapon since it is produced through the same enrichment process. In our case, our uranium can be enriched elsewhere. Large commercial enrichment plants are in operation in France, Germany, UK, Netherlands, USA and Russia with smaller plants in countries like China and Japan. This means of all 30 countries that have nuclear reactors, only about a third of them are involved in uranium enrichment. This illustrates my argument that we don’t necessarily have to be involved in the controversial enrichment process, to be able to use nuclear energy.

In conclusion I would like to argue that while some top leaders in the Namibian Government might be willing to see nuclear power generation in Namibia, the trio NAMPOWER, the Ministry of Mines & Energy and the National Energy Council have failed the nation by ignoring this viable option for years. There is simply no reason why Namibia cannot build a nuclear power plant because after all, the electricity we import from Cape Town is generated by the Koeberg Nuclear power station in that town. My investigations have revealed that South Africa which has far less uranium reserves (around 1% of the global output) compared to Namibia is in the process of building more nuclear power plants. So, what is the actual reason why we Namibians cannot have our own? Some people have argued that because Namibia does not have its own nuclear experts, it should not look at nuclear energy as an option. This is nonsense because experts can be hired and with time, these experts can train Namibians to take over their operations at a later stage. Even some countries with exceptionally advanced technology like China are using foreign companies to build and run their nuclear power stations. For example Areva, the leading French nuclear giant, has several contracts to build nuclear reactors in China as we speak. The Koeberg nuclear power station which was constructed between 1976 and 1985 here in our backyard is actually a design of Areva NP, then known as Framatome. Therefore nobody in the world is self-sufficient and the issue of us not having nuclear experts should not be used as an excuse.

Having considered all the facts available to me I am totally convinced that there is no reason why we as a country cannot build a nuclear power plant in order to address the power crisis in which we find ourselves. It is also a fact that our major industries like mining are set to grow in the near future, which means the demand for power will also grow. Since some sources of power like coal, gas, hydro, solar, wind, etc, do not have the same power generation capacity as uranium, we should consider uranium as first priority for addressing our national power needs.

In the same vein, NAMPOWER, NEC and the ministry of Mines and Energy should think out of the shell and become more visionary for the sake of the nation. Because in their current thinking level, the nation will have to expect annual price increases.

Veikko Nekundi
SPYL Secretary for Economic Affairs