South Africa could have at least ten more nuclear power stations within two decades if Eskom has its way, according to the utility’s chief executive, Jacob Maroga.
He told journalists at a briefing in Cape Town on Thursday that in the face of global warming, nuclear power was the ”next big viable alternative” to coal.
Eskom’s board had made a strategic decision that a significant component of South Africa’s power should come from nuclear generation.
It had decided that by 2025, up to 20 000MW should be generated by conventional Koeberg-style nuclear plants.
Koeberg’s two generating units put out a total of 1 800MW.
Maroga said the output of the proposed plants could vary from the 900MW of one Koeberg generator to 1 600MW.
He agreed this would mean at least ten new plants.
Eskom was hoping to have a decision by the first half of next year on what could be a fleet of plants, representing a critical mass of business that would enable a supplier to commit resources to the project.
The utility has already approved plans for a second nuclear power station, and the environmental impact assessment for this has started.
Five potential sites, one in the Eastern Cape, and the others along the Western and Northern Cape coast, have been identified.
Maroga said nuclear plants had to be close to large quantities of water, which in South Africa meant on the coast, and sea temperature also played a role in deciding where they would go.
Nuclear power was ”the most viable technology” to avoid carbon-dioxide emissions.
Storage of highly radioactive spent fuel was an issue, and South Africa would follow developments around the world for the latest thinking.
He said South Africa’s electricity consumption, which stood at 20 000 MW in 1994, reached 36 000MW last week.
Eksom had already approved a R150-billion capital-expansion programme over the next five years.
He said tariffs would have to reflect this jump in spending, and Eksom was engaging the national electricity regulator on a tariff ”path” that would allow South Africa to remain internationally competitive.
South Africa was currently 30% lower than its next global competitor Australia, and Eskom believed that while this gap would close, South Africa would still keep its position as cheapest in the world. — Sapa