If the government decided to proceed with its nuclear build programme it would be a head-in-the-sand commitment to an outdated technology that is unable to compete with the cost of renewable energy and offers nothing more in terms of reliability and predictability.
This is the conclusion drawn from an interview with US energy expert Angelina Galiteva who sits on the board of governors of the California Independent System Operator Corporation (which runs the grid and establishes the energy markets) and who chairs the World Council for Renewable Energy. She is visiting SA to give talks and to hold discussions with metropolitan councils and regulators.
Her visit precedes the imminent adoption by the Cabinet of the government’s Integrated Resource Plan and Integrated Energy Plan which, once finalised, will lay down the framework for the development of energy capacity and the share that the various energy sources will contribute to the total mix.
Her views are in sharp contrast to those of Eskom group executive for generation Matshela Koko, who argues in a series of newspaper articles that the new nuclear build programme is necessary so that SA can have a reliable base load source of energy, which he argues cannot be provided by renewables.
Galiteva laughed this off, saying these old arguments about unreliability were trotted out by US utilities in the beginning of the renewable energy programme and at each time the renewable targets were raised.
"That story does not fly any more. It has been proven," she said. "No one can argue with economics" because renewable energy was by far the cheapest.
However, embarking on the high-percentage renewable energy route required regulatory courage. California, the fifth-largest economy in the world, has successively outstripped its renewable energy goals. It is now aiming for 50% by 2030, excluding hydropower and individual rooftop generation.
"We are very comfortable that we are going to reach this goal. We have the technologies to do it and this is the best and lowest-cost source of energy, as well as the most environmentally friendly," Galiteva said.
The peak of California’s electricity consumption is about 60,000MW, just about double SA’s 32,000MW.
"Flexibility is what counts, not base load. Nobody cares about base load any more," Galiteva said. "Renewables can provide enough. You need to have very flexible resources.
"Renewables may be variable but they are highly predictable. You know the sun will shine and you know the wind will blow and with good forecasting data you can predict it quite accurately. So what if it is variable? It is actually more predictable than having a centralised power station going out of business."
Southern California shut down a nuclear power station because it was uneconomic and the last one in the state, with a capacity of about 2,000MW, will close in 2024 because it is not needed for system reliability and is not economic.
From 2020, all new homes constructed in California will have to produce their own electricity, which Galiteva said adds resiliency to the grid and allows for islands of power in the event of a natural disaster
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.