Shutting down the Koeberg Nuclear Power Station is the only sensible choice due to safety concerns.
This is according to Dr Tristen Taylor’s report for the Heinrich Böll Foundation, titled ‘Koeberg’s dangerous lifetime extension’, which argues against extending the facility’s operational lifespan due to safety concerns.
Also read: CoCT conducts safety drills at Koeberg in case disaster strikes
The Koeberg Nuclear Power Plant is located 30 kilometres north of Cape Town.
It was built in 1976 by French company Framatome, based on the same design as 18 other reactors in France that are now extending their operational lives.
However, the reactors in France are being upgraded as per the latest nuclear power station standards. As reported by Radio 702, one of these upgrades includes a ‘core catcher,’ which mitigates the consequences of a core meltdown.
While Koeberg’s 1.8GW generation is crucial to Eskom’s power generation supply, the state-owned facility is in trouble.
Koerberg is nearing the end of its 40-year designed lifespan. Construction of Unit 1 was completed in 1984 and Unit 2 in 1985. Due to this, Koeberg’s two 900 MW reactors will have to shut down in July 2024 unless the South African National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) grants Eskom the requested 20-year extension on its operating licence.
This is while France is extending its reactors for only 10 years.
Explore Cape Town and its surroundings with these incredible car deals for under 100k. Find car listings here.
Dr Neil Overy, Research Associate in Environmental Humanities South at the University of Cape Town, says the plant will not receive the necessary upgrades. ‘Eskom is saying we don’t need that here,’ he told Radio 702.
Overy cites several reasons for this, including that Eskom is bankrupt. ‘Treasury isn’t going to push any more money its way and there’s a desperate need to keep the lights on, so loadshedding is an issue.’
‘I also think the issue of not having to decommission Eskom from this year onwards, which is an enormously expensive undertaking, also plays into the application for a long-term operational plan. You can basically kick the issue down the road,’ he added.
In terms of the risks involved, Overy says a major accident at Koeberg is unlikely. ‘But that doesn’t mean there hasn’t been a meltdown or a partial meltdown every decade (…) since we started using nuclear power.’
He adds that there were no less than 22 non-compliances recorded during a safety drill in November 2022, such as ineffective decontamination.
‘A major accident may happen at Koeberg or even a medium-level accident. Part of the problem is not just the power station itself. The emergency planning (if there is an accident) is also not up to standard.’
His sentiments are substantiated by Taylor’s report, which notes that no regulator in the world today would approve the building of a new nuclear plant of the same design as Koeberg, as it is not as safe as modern facilities.
‘To be clear, Koeberg is not of the same design as Chernobyl or Fukushima and as such one cannot and should not directly compare the plants,’ the report states.
‘However, this does still mean that a major accident could happen: the causes and chain of events leading up to such an accident would be, due to the design and type of reactor, different at Koeberg.’
Furthermore, the report underscores the impact that unplanned outages due to ‘accidents and other safety issues’ at Koeberg have had on the national grid, which resulted in increased loadshedding.
‘More could happen if the long-term operation goes poorly. Without a rigorous safety programme and the necessary upgrades done at the highest standard, the life extension would probably lead to the very same situation it is trying to avoid: less electricity for the national grid.’
Cape {town} Etc discount: Looking for things to do in the city, at half the price? Get exclusive offers here.
Also read:
Koeberg’s Unit 1 has been synchronised to the grid after a year-long outage
Picture: Eskom
