You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

South Africa Abandons Planned Nuclear Power Plant - Too Expensive - SF Chronicle [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:18 PM
Original message
South Africa Abandons Planned Nuclear Power Plant - Too Expensive - SF Chronicle
Advertisements [?]
In a blow to South Africa's efforts to reduce reliance on cheap, polluting coal, the state electricity company said Friday it could not afford to build a planned new nuclear power plant. Eskom said it had ended the bidding process between the EPR consortium led by Areva of France and the N-Powerment consortium led by Westinghouse of the United States because of the "magnitude of the investment."

It was estimated that the pressurized water reactor would cost more than 100 billion rands ($10 billion) — the largest single investment in Eskom's history. Construction was due to start in late 2010 to complement the sole existing nuclear power station at Koeberg near Cape Town.

South Africa relies on its big domestic reserves of coal for nearly 90 percent of its energy needs, but is increasingly concerned at the environmental impact of this, given that Africa is expected to bear the brunt of global warming.

Eskom and the government announced the nuclear expansion program last year at the height of crippling energy shortages that brought rolling blackouts to much of the country and temporarily closed the vital gold mining industry. The government said it supported Eskom's decision and that the projected fall in energy demand associated with the global downturn should ease supply pressure. It said it was still committed to exploring the use of nuclear energy to cut reliance on coal but at a more reasonable cost.

EDIT

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/12/05/financial/f042145S68.DTL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC