Russian environmentalist Vladimir Slivyak, representing the NGO Ecodefence, recently visited South Africa to spearhead a campaign raising awareness about the dangers of nuclear energy, Cape {town} Etc reports.
Also read: Former SA teacher to be extradited on multiple abuse charges
Slivyak played a crucial role in exposing secret details of a proposed 9.6GW nuclear deal between Russia and South Africa under former President Jacob Zuma.
Despite former Finance Minister Nhlanhla Nene’s resistance to the R1 trillion deal, which he deemed the ‘largest public investment program’ in the country’s history, he was removed from Cabinet by Zuma.
In 2017, civil society groups Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (Safcei) and Earthlife Africa Johannesburg succeeded in blocking the deal through the courts.
Slivyak told News24 that his activism was sparked by witnessing the significant errors in his own country’s nuclear program.
‘I see a lot of people suffering from these mistakes, and I feel I have to speak the truth to people in other countries, to try to prevent them [from] doing the same mistakes,’ he said.
Russia’s 1986 Chernobyl disaster, caused by a flawed reactor design and operational errors, resulted in 31 immediate deaths and exposed millions in Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine to radiation.
‘The funds required to kickstart a new nuclear build, I believe, would be better invested in more cost-effective and sustainable energy solutions like solar and wind farms (with battery storage), which can be developed and brought online much quicker.’
‘This will better serve South Africa’s urgent need for electricity that can be generated almost anywhere, at a more affordable cost and while simultaneously combating climate change,’ said Slivyak.
Slivyak opposes extending nuclear reactor operations, citing increased accident risks with age.
He argues that shutting down old reactors is safer, despite the industry’s preference for longer operation due to lower costs.
‘At the end of the lifetime, you can get cheap energy from a reactor. For a new one you have to spend a lot of money, you have to invest deeply and then you have to wait at least for a couple of decades or more to get your investment back.’
The National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) recently extended Eskom’s Koeberg Unit 1 operation for another 20 years, under 29 conditions that could lead to licence revocation if not met, according to Chief Nuclear Officer Keith Featherstone.
Koeberg’s Unit 1 has operated safely for 40 years, a common practice for nuclear plants worldwide.
Eskom has invested in safety upgrades, including a delayed steam generator replacement for Unit 1 and a new generator for Unit 2, expected to be operational by October.
NNR’s Ditebogo Kgomo stated that public concerns about health, safety, and the environment were addressed in the licensing and safety conditions for Koeberg Unit 1.
Eskom’s application met safety regulations. However, Francesca de Gasparis of Safcei argues that not all public and expert comments were considered in the regulator’s decision.
‘From our perspective, as an environmental watchdog – we believe that this decision was based on inadequate information, and coupled with inadequate time for proper, meaningful public consultation, in terms of the quality and the load of information that was provided. We will be looking at this matter further.’
A major public concern was the NNR’s failure to require Eskom to install a core catcher—a structure designed to contain molten core material in a meltdown and prevent environmental contamination.
Core catchers are standard in generation 3 reactors, while Koeberg has generation 2 reactors.
Eskom denies that Koeberg’s lack of a core catcher affects its safety.
Eskom stated that South African nuclear standards, guided by the National Nuclear Regulator and the IAEA, require periodic safety reviews every 10 years. These reviews confirm Koeberg’s severe accident management aligns with international norms.
Eskom added that while many plants lack core catchers, Koeberg’s basemat can contain nuclear fuel in a meltdown.
Analysis indicates the basemat is thick enough to prevent failure.
Also read:
Fight involving players and parents tarnishes Cape schools derby
Picture: Misha Jordaan / Gallo
