Green groups warn of risks, including soaring upfront costs, the history of construction delays and budget overruns
Forestry, Fisheries and Environment Minister Dion George has upheld the 2017 decision granting Eskom environmental authorisation to construct and operate a proposed new nuclear plant in the Western Cape.
The minister’s decision, announced on Friday, came after he resolved under section 43(6) of the National Environmental Management Act (Nema), to dismiss the appeals from various environmental organisations, and confirm the environmental authorisation to Eskom for the planned 4 000 megawatt power station in Duynefontein. The proposed project is adjacent to the existing Koeberg facility.
George said that he had carefully reviewed the environmental impact assessment report, as well as the independent peer review conducted for the project.
“In the end, my decision was made in respect of the principles of [the Act] … and with full appreciation of the environmental, social and economic considerations involved,” the minister said.
The original decision to grant the environmental authorisation was made in October 2017.
Various appellants challenged the decision, submitting appeals that ranged from comprehensive and detailed submissions to shorter, individual objections.
George’s decision does not automatically grant Eskom permission to begin with the construction or operation of the nuclear power station. The state-owned power utility is still required to obtain several additional statutory authorisations before proceeding in accordance with section 24(7) of Nema.
“As per section 24(7) of [the Act], the granting of an environmental authorisation does not exempt an applicant from complying with any other applicable legal requirements or obtaining permits from other competent authorities,” noted George.
These authorisations include a nuclear installation licence from the National Nuclear Regulator; approval from the National Energy Regulator of South Africa; water use licences from the department of water and sanitation; as well as other relevant approvals such as those from the minister of mineral and petroleum resources.
George emphasised that the protection and preservation of the country’s environment is non-negotiable. He said his department supports the country’s transition to a cleaner, more sustainable energy future “where inclusive growth, job creation and poverty reduction are central”.
Makoma Lekalakala and Liziwe McDaid, who won the 2018 Goldman Environmental Prize for their work on using the courts to halt a controversial South African and Russian government nuclear deal in 2017, voiced strong objections to the nuclear plant’s approval.
Earthlife Africa is considering George’s decision, as well as its next steps, said Lekalakala, the director of the non-profit environmental organisation.
“Our concerns include the length of time taken to conduct the environmental impact assessment and to make the appeal decision,” she said.
“We are also deeply concerned about the affordability of nuclear power, particularly the high upfront capital costs, the risk of construction delays, and the cost overruns that have been experienced worldwide.”
In addition, there has been no assessment of the socio-economic impacts of a major beyond-design-basis nuclear incident, nor of the generation of long-lived high-level radioactive waste for which no final disposal solution yet exists, she said.
McDaid, the strategic lead of the Green Connection, another non-profit, agreed.
“In recent months, we’ve seen a strange fascination with nuclear power, particularly with unproven and non-commercially viable technologies like SMRs [small modular reactors],” she said.
“We are in the middle of a climate crisis, and we should be using our abundant natural resources, such as solar and wind, which can be built quickly and deliver affordable power to homes. Nuclear is expensive, and, like other large projects, is plagued by long delays.”
Nuclear power also carries significant risks, requiring costly additional regulation, “and there is always the possibility of an accident”.
“Even after 40 years of operation, South Africa still has no proper plan for managing toxic nuclear waste — a huge problem that is often ignored in discussions about this dangerous technology … Right now, in the absence of an inclusive, people-centred energy plan, it appears that vested interests are driving individual projects without public consensus.”