It’s time to debunk the myths that continue to dog nuclear energy

A nuclear power plant. 

Photo credit: File | AFP

Five years from the goals set in Vision 2030 of transforming into the Silicon Savanah, debates on how to power it should be approaching the resolution to invest in a diversified energy mix with a reliable consistent thermal source at the centre.

To its credit, the Least Cost of Power Development Plan (LCPDP) acknowledges the need to meet the capacity it projected will rise from 2,919 MW as projected back in 2021 to 8,870 MW by 2041 the role assigned to be played by renewables and the use of the Levelised Cost of Electricity (LCOE) are the giant roaches in the pudding therein.

The circus the Lake Turkana Wind Power Plant (LTWP) has degenerated into should have debunked the LCOE that justified it by now. Most of its inputs like cost of land were arbitrary and, considering our history, left significant room for mischief.

The Energy Act, 2019 tries to legislate that burning charcoal (under the moniker “Biomass”) for electricity production is renewable.

Giant tech businesses like Meta, Google, and Huawei turning to nuclear power should have by now given pause to those of us who still subscribe to the hoary myths that have dogged nuclear technology for decades.

The computational load when training large language models like ChatGPT translates into vast energy demands per installation that are at par with entire countries like Rwanda’s 332MW.

Along with the lifting of moratoriums by the world’s biggest banks on financing nuclear power projects, Microsoft restarting a reactor at Three Mile Island (TMI) nuclear plant in Pennsylvania, USA, the very site of that famous accident in 1979, is testament to the current shift in paradigm.

Nuclear’s safety record has also been validated by the revisions downwards of the total number of casualties of the Chernobyl disaster (1986) to the current tally of 120 people dead and zero excess cancer cases among the residents of Pripyat.

This, however, didn’t stop Germany from prematurely shutting down their fleet in the ill-fated “Energiewende.”

The irony is it all was the abandonment of emission goals as it restarted its ancient coal plants and turned to imports from neighbouring France where 56 nuclear reactors provide over 70 percent of its electricity.

The bulk of this fleet of French reactors were built in the Messmer plan of the 70s with 32 reactors being built in 11 years to mitigate damage from the Oil Shock.

The disruption of fossil fuel supply from Russia as war rages on has made it clear that the path to deindustrialisation, bankruptcy, debilitating black outs and increased greenhouse gas emissions is paved with energy policies that call for 100 percent reliance on solar panels, windmills and Lithium-ion batteries.

Westinghouse being bankrupted by the 2 AP1000 reactors it failed to deliver on time at Vogtle in Georgia, USA and the excruciating crawl the construction of the EPR at Hinkley Point C in the UK has ground into, hint at the risks that come with investment in nuclear projects in our modern age.

However, zooming out we notice that in contrast to westerners, KEPCO (South Korea), CNNC (China) and Rosatom (Russia) are doing just fine. The Koreans were on schedule building 4 APR 1400 reactors at the Barakah Nuclear Plant on the Persian Gulf despite the pandemic.

Though Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) compete against the conventional types in countries that already have nuclear plants, regardless of the technology (Water cooled, Gen-III+ or Gen IV) they will compete with dirt cheap fossil fuels.

The promised economic viability from mass production will only apparent after several tens or even hundreds of iterations of each reactor.

Thus, even with desalination, provision of process heat and hydrogen production, it is unlikely that our Silicon Savanah’s first nuclear reactor will be a First of a Kind (FOAK) SMR.

Even then nuclear power ticks the boxes of decarbonisation of the urgent economic growth that needs to happen while addressing the energy, food and water nexus as the effects of anthropogenic climate change become apparent.

It must play a central role in the Silicon Savanah’s quest to secure an economically viable, diverse and environmentally sustainable energy mix to convert its Vision 2030 from a dream into a reality.

The writer is a nuclear and quantum engineer. He also sits on BRICT Young Expert Group 

PAYE Tax Calculator

Note: The results are not exact but very close to the actual.