1. Philip Lloyd Energy Institute Cape Peninsula University of Technology
The state of readiness for New Nuclear Build Programme: The role of various stakeholders
Philip Lloyd
Energy Institute
Cape Peninsula University of Technology
Forum September 2013

2. What Stakeholders? The manufacturing industry
The construction industry
Government
Financial services
Power transmission and distribution
The media
The general public
Education and training
The environmental industry
Forum September 2013

3. Manufacturing
It is almost certainly capable of supporting an extended programme
However, if there were to be only one or two plants, it is doubtful if the investment necessary to meet nuclear standards would be justified
In which case we would have to import
For three or more plants, there would be significant job creation long-term
Example of French programme, which has seen over long-term jobs created
Forum September 2013

4. Construction Ready and probably capable
Some skills shortages (e.g. welders)
Probably adequate capacity
Not limited by number of plants
However, performance would almost certainly improve with several plants
Forum September 2013

5. Government Basically well-positioned
Presidential level oversight
Most of the governance structures in place and effective
E.g. National Nuclear Regulator
Support structures in place
E.g. NECSA
Energy planning reasonably sound
Forum September 2013

6. Financial institutions
Almost certainly adequate capacity
However, very limited experience in nuclear industry
Certainly able to support procurement of capital goods (both international and local) and construction
Great uncertainty about role in overall programme
Forum September 2013

7. Transmission and distribution
Considerable investment probably required
Because nuclear programme will involve large generating units at coast
But investment would have been required in any event to cope with growing demand
Resolution of ISMO question required
Forum September 2013

8. Media Need information
Present lack of understanding of drivers for nuclear power
News value of disasters such as Fukushima overshadows positive aspects such as long-term control of costs, reliability of supply
Poor understanding of true nature of hazards
Forum September 2013

9. General public Widespread “not in my back yard”
Concern about costs and safety
Concern about long-term waste
Some areas of positive response to a nuclear programme
Recognition of ‘low-carbon’ opportunity
Recognition of need for base-load power
Forum September 2013

10. Education and training
A reasonable pool of skills
As a result of PBMR
However, by the time the programme is rolling, it will be ageing
Some tertiary institutions involved already in training next generation
Presence of Koeberg and its spin-off industries a great plus
Forum September 2013

11. The environmental industry
Sees programme as a possible cash cow
Some NGO’s already have lobby groups in place
Accent on the perceived negative aspects of nuclear power
E.g. waste disposal, severity of accidents
Downplaying need for base load, low-carbon contribution
Forum September 2013

12. Conclusions
The International Atomic Energy Agency has a programme “Energy Indicators for Sustainable Development”
Applying their tests to the constraints identified in this assessment suggests our chances of a successful programme are good.
It helps to remember that 67 nuclear reactors are under construction right now
Forum September 2013

14. THANK YOU FOR YOUR KIND INVITATION!
Forum September 2013