Skip to main content

Namibia Wants to Develop Nuclear Energy

From mineweb.net:
The Namibian government is planning to exploit its rich uranium deposits to commercially generate electricity to achieve self-sustenance in power generation, as shortages loom in 2007, although how it is going to achieve this without any current nuclear power plant plans seems obscure. Namibia is now southern African region's largest producer of uranium, and is the 6th largest world producer.

Namibia imports 45% of its energy requirements from South Africa. Electricity demand peaks at 500 MW, but Namibia can only supply 393 MW if it runs its four power stations at full capacity with South Africa making up for the shortfall. South Africa has indicated that in 2007 it would not be able to meet the region's requirement due to growing demand in the country.
Thanks to Lowem Public Web Log for the link.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments

robert merkel said…
Hmmm...good luck to them, but with such a small total electrical demand it would seem that the currently available nuclear plant designs really won't meet their needs.

The South African PBMR, or perhaps the even smaller designs proposed by our friend Mr Adams, would be much more appropriate in the context of a developing nation.
Dave Liddell said…
With a lead time of anything up to 15 years for feasibility, design, approvals etc, this proposal is not going to provide any answers in the short term.

PBMR is a promising technology, but won't be available for some time.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…