Getting Ready for Nuclear Energy in Africa

When developing countries consider nuclear energy, it can give one pause. Not because such countries are inherently incapable of grasping and implementing the technology but because the technology could be beyond their current developmental level. If a country has barely met its electricity needs up to now, it would not seem to have the infrastructure necessary to introduce thousands of megawatts onto its grid. That’s an uncomfortable statement, but also an uncomfortable feeling, and it’s worth testing – and it is getting tested.

This year, the IAEA will, for the first time, conduct Integrated Nuclear Infrastructure Review missions to Nigeria, Kenya and Morocco - three countries which are considering introducing nuclear power.

These are review missions by international experts who help countries assess the status of their national nuclear infrastructure. They are part of the comprehensive package of assistance which the IAEA provides to help ensure that even the most challenging issues in introducing nuclear power can be successfully dealt with, Amano said.

Yukiya Amano is the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

In fact, Amano makes it clear that developing countries may benefit by entering the arena now rather than earlier:

"The IAEA, with 163 Member States, brings together countries with advanced nuclear power programs and what we call 'newcomers'. This sharing of knowledge and experience means newcomers are not condemned to repeat the mistakes of pioneers," he said. "They can benefit sooner from the shorter construction times, more profitable performance, and higher safety levels of today's best plants. There may be potential for smaller countries to cooperate regionally on nuclear power projects which might be too expensive for any one of them on its own."

---

I was curious about this topic because South Africa is calling attention to its 50th anniversary of nuclear energy, and Amano’s comments about it struck me as especially on-point.

“Access to electricity is essential for development," he said. "The number of countries interested in nuclear power continues to grow, despite the Fukushima accident. ... Many countries see nuclear power as a stable and clean source of energy that can help mitigate the impact of climate change.”

One always sees the second two points – “stable and clean” – but not the first – at least not enough – and it’s especially important especially in Africa, though not only in Africa – “Access to electricity is essential for development.” That’s an absolute truth in the modern world and not owned by the nuclear energy industry – it applies to all generators.

Though neither of these articles mention it, developing countries are caught in a tough position, wanting to build out their electricity infrastructure but under pressure not to add to the world’s carbon dioxide output. We’ve seen this play out at various COP conferences, where countries have butted heads over the seemingly incompatible issues of carbon emissions and economic development. That’s where nuclear energy (and renewable energy, too) comes in.

---

South Africa’s history with nuclear energy is as mixed as its history is in every other respect – the story of South Africa is very disturbing until fairly recently – but this detail struck me:

Nuclear medicine produced at South Africa's Pelindaba research site — generated by the SAFARI-1, water-cooled research reactor — is used in about 10 million medical procedures in more than 60 countries every year, saving millions of lives.

That’s true and has been for years – Pelindaba has been key to the development of nuclear medicine on the continent and remains an important producer of molybdenum-99, which is used in many medical procedures. And, we should mention, South Africa has had two reactors steadily putting out electricity for the last 30 years.

---

With South Africa having led the way, I think Amano’s position on nuclear energy is unassailable. “Access to electricity is essential for development.” And Africa is finding its way to nuclear energy.

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog