Nuclear physicist Dr Kelvin Kemm was so incensed with DA shadow minister Kevin Mileham’s “political propaganda” on BizNews TV last week, he insisted on setting the record straight. This the globally respected engineer does in forceful fashion in this interview where he addresses popular (mis)perceptions about nuclear power being corrupt, expensive and outdated. Kemm spoke to BizNews editor Alec Hogg.
Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.
Watch here
Relevant timestamps from the interview
- 00:00 – Introductions
- 02:18 – Concerns about nuclear technology
- 07:13 – Legitimate concerns vs vested intrest
- 12:25 – Oil & gas producers being reliant on nuclear power
- 15:32 – Concerns about Cost Overruns and Corruption
- 22:01 – Conclusions
Listen here
Edited transcript of the interview by Alec Hogg with Dr Kelvin Klemm
___STEADY_PAYWALL___
Alec Hogg: In this episode of Undictated, we delve into the nuclear landscape with contrasting perspectives. Last week, Kevin Mileham labeled the proposed nuclear plant as state capture mark two. Today, we have Kelvin Kemm, chairman of Stratek Global, presenting a different viewpoint.
Calvin, welcome back. Following Kevin Mileham’s interview, you challenged the narrative, suggesting inaccuracies and “pork pies.” Let’s start from the beginning, where public perception of nuclear often associates it with corruption, high costs, and a disconnect from global energy trends favouring renewables.
Nuclear’s future is questioned, especially when considering advancements in nuclear fusion, as highlighted by Dr. Kimberly driving the innovations at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The concern is whether nuclear plants, deemed expensive and potentially burdensome on national debt, could become obsolete amidst the evolving landscape of energy investments in renewables.
You’re more versed in these matters than I am, and I’m sure these concerns have crossed your mind as well.
Kelvin Kemm: There’s misinformation fuelled by decades of anti-nuclear propaganda, well-funded by various sources. The nuclear sector lacks adequate PR efforts due to a focus on technology investment, and communication is often constrained within corporate structures. Addressing corruption allegations, there’s no evidence of corruption in South Africa’s nuclear dealings. Accusations regarding agreements with Russia were misleading; they were part of a technological platform alignment, not a secret purchase agreement.
Legitimate concerns often arise regarding nuclear’s cost, as I encounter people at events who challenge me based on misinformation. South Africa’s scientists and engineers estimated that 650 billion rand would cover the construction of three nuclear power stations, each 50% larger than Koeberg, over a span of 10 to 15 years. However, the anti-nuclear lobby distorted this, presenting it as a one-time expenditure, causing unnecessary alarm.
Comparatively, the total expenditure on wind and solar equals the cost of a single, larger nuclear power station than Koeberg. The decision to invest in renewables has resulted in minimal output and ongoing load shedding. Emotion often drives these decisions, but we need to focus on reality rather than fictional narratives. Mr. Mileham, while well-intentioned, lacks technical understanding and has made scientific errors in his statements.
Nuclear stands out as the cheapest, safest, greenest, and most sensible energy option globally. Existing nuclear power stations, designed in the 1970s, are still operational, with Koeberg set to extend its lifetime by another 40 years. France’s nuclear embrace since the oil crisis of 1973 has proven successful, with over 70% of its electricity coming from nuclear sources at significantly lower prices than Germany, which heavily invested in wind and solar.
Germany’s pursuit of reducing carbon dioxide through renewables has not succeeded, and they now burn more coal than South Africa. France, once cautious due to anti-nuclear sentiment, is returning to nuclear energy. The European Union’s recognition of nuclear as green further supports its viability, prompting European leaders to advocate for nuclear solutions. Gwede Mantashe, South Africa’s energy minister, has long championed nuclear as a realistic alternative to coal, emphasizing a gradual transition based on the benefits of nuclear energy.
Regarding the timeline for nuclear projects, the assertion that it takes 10 to 12 years is incorrect. In South Africa, we can construct a nuclear power station in five or six years. Claims by individuals like Mr. Malem, who extended the timeline, are not accurate. The UAE successfully connected their fourth nuclear reactor in seven years, demonstrating that with the right conditions and funding, South Africa can achieve a similar feat.
Addressing concerns about corruption and cost overruns, the 650 billion rand estimate was for producing 9,600 megawatts, not the 2,500 currently discussed. It’s essential to recognize the potential for interference, both politically and legally, which can disrupt project timelines. With proper funding and minimal interference, we can have a large nuclear power station operational in five or six years, offering more electricity reliability than wind and solar alternatives.
Alec Hogg: Shifting to another perspective, Andre Dorado’s book highlights past projects marred by corruption and cost overruns. Given this history and public skepticism, especially under the current government, how does proposing another major project, like a nuclear power station, address concerns about potential corruption and overspending? The Hitachi story serves as a cautionary tale.
Kelvin Kemm: The 650 billion rand estimate aimed at producing 9,600 megawatts, not the 2,500 currently discussed. I met with André De Ré and found him closed-minded to nuclear considerations. The issues at Madupi and Kusili were largely due to external interference rather than inherent engineering flaws. South African engineers faced challenges with subcontractors and foreign interference, hindering their ability to execute projects efficiently.
South African engineering has a proven track record, building coal-fired power stations, Cecil, and Richards Bay Harbor simultaneously in the past. The construction of soccer stadiums for the World Cup and hosting the first-ever Indian Premier League (IPL) cricket in India within four months further underscores the capabilities of South African engineers as proficient project managers. The key is to trust our engineers, provide them with the job, and avoid unnecessary interference, which incurs additional costs.
It’s frustrating when people question the competence of nuclear professionals, implying we don’t understand regulatory processes, waste management, or other critical aspects. The reality is, we are well-versed in these areas, with Koeberg serving as a testament to our expertise. South African nuclear experts are respected globally, and the portrayal of incompetence is unjust. Moving forward with nuclear is the right decision, and the public will appreciate it when we achieve the most cost-effective electricity.
Regarding cost calculations, we approach it like a mortgage, ensuring the electricity cost doesn’t exceed that of coal. The HTMR 100 small modular reactor is a world-leading model designed to meet this criterion. We aim to build it in Pretoria and distribute it across the country without the need for water cooling. From day one, the goal has been to match or undercut the cost of coal power, and our calculations have consistently aligned with that target.
Unfortunately, decision-makers often rely on inaccurate calculations from non-experts rather than consulting nuclear professionals. It’s crucial for people to have faith in South African experts, just as they trust other specialised professionals. The nuclear field in South Africa is not only competent but also sought after globally.
Alec Hogg: Responding to concerns about distrust, I believe the issue lies more with politicians than nuclear experts. Dr. Kelvin Kim’s perspective, as the chairman of Stratek Global, provides valuable insights, emphasising the need to trust but verify information.
Read also:
- Bankrupt ANC tapping Russian cash via Mossgas, Nuclear deals – Mileham
- Russian deals and unchecked nuclear plans are nothing more than energy sector state capture – Kevin Mileham MP
- Nuclear Innovation: The key to South Africa’s ‘Greener’ energy future – Ivo Vegter
