13
Comments
GreenPeace South Africa says 'NO' to Nuclear Power and Lodges a Complaint. |
---|
by Rosa Domingos | 30-05-2019 21:08 1 |
Environmental group Greenpeace has lodged a formal complaint with the Public Protector and South African (SA) Human Rights Commission after the ministry of energy refused to release the Integrated Nuclear Infrastructure Review (or INIR for short)(Alfreds, 2012). The activist organisation wants to examine the review which was commissioned to investigate whether SA was ready to build additional nuclear power stations. Credit: Shayne Robinson - Greenpeace SA On may occasions, I have read that Greenpeace has been fighting against the notion of building nuclear stations in South Africa. So the Ministry of Energy not releasing the review is very suspicious, even in my opinion. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (or IAEA for short), there are 19 criteria that a country must meet before construction on a nuclear facility can go ahead(Alfreds, 2012). These include issues of waste, financial capacity and safety of the operations of the proposed nuclear facility. "These criteria clearly show that South Africa lacks the capacity to build new nuclear power stations. We have neither the money nor the skills to develop nuclear power. So the question is: Why would the department share the document with the IAEA but not share it with South African civil society? What has the government got to hide?" said Greenpeace Africa energy campaigner Ferrial Adam. Those are relevant questions... (Alfreds, 2012). Anger According to the IAEA, a nuclear facility must also have a clear plan for safety and emergency workers in the event of a crisis and the site has to pass scrutiny on insulating the public from possible nuclear radiation(Alfreds, 2012). Greenpeace has long campaigned against nuclear power in SA and the organisation has become particularly vocal after the earthquake and tsunami disaster in Japan that caused a nuclear incident at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. Japan shut down nuclear power stations and evacuated residents living in a 20km radius from the plant, but public heartbreak turned to anger when details of corruption of Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) officials emerged(Alfreds, 2012). The South African government through state-owned entity Eskom (is a South African Energy Supply Giant) is under pressure to secure electricity supply which is under severe strain during winter, but plans are in place to commission both coal and nuclear power stations. Minister of energy Dipuo Peters has publically supported the expansion of nuclear energy, despite objections from environmental groups. "The continued secrecy and lack of engagement with civil society will lead to poor governance and corruption as we have already witnessed in the arms deal. The issue of transparency is a critical one," said Adam(Alfreds, 2012). The organisation plans to seek legal opinion of the rejection of the Protection of Access to Information Act request (Alfreds, 2012). The mere fact that they are not issuing out the review put them in a place where the Ministry will be legally implicated, and I commend Greenpeace for being adament throughout the whole ordeal. Reference list: Alfreds,. D. 2012. https://www.news24.com/Green/News/Greenpeace-lodges-nuclear-complaint-20121119. November 19, 2012. |
|
13 Comments
Greetings Rosa
I hope you are doing well
Thank you so much for this report
Keep writing
Green cheers
Regards
Sus
Posted 15-03-2020 16:43
Hey Kushal!
Thank you for reading and commenting!
Rosa
Posted 21-06-2019 17:02
Hello Rosa
Thank you for your report about South Africa saying no to nuclear power. I can remember my mun conference where we had a debate on weapons of mass destruction and how impactful the nuclear power and had passed the resolution with not to use it by any countries.
Green Cheers from Nepal :)
Keep writing great reports.
We are eager to read more reports from you.
Regards,
Kushal Naharki
Posted 17-06-2019 05:04
Hi Mentor Louis!
Thank you for not only reading, but commenting as well. Truely, nuclear energy is clean...but it would be catastrophic if something were to happen where lives were lost or even worse, where their offspring manifest the mistakes of their predecessors.
But I am thankful that organisations such as Greenpeace are going out of their way to ensure that that does not happen.
Warm regards,
Rosa
Posted 03-06-2019 20:26
Hi Rosa,
Thank you for writing about nuclear power issue in South America. Nuclear energy is a very environmentally-friendly but at the same time, It also contains some drawbacks. I hope that we can use nuclear power more carefully and control the facilities tightly. Good work.
Louis Mentor
Posted 01-06-2019 00:09
Hey there Asmita!
How are you?
Yes, I also believe that the negative consequences of initiating nuclear energy is far greater than the positive. This mandate has been pushed by what Japan went through witht he atomic bombing in WWII and in the tsunami event of 2004. We need to make it clear to our national authorities that such things should be a wake up call of how dangerous nuclear Energy can be.
Thank you so much for reading Asmita! I really appreciate the time you and everyone else took for reading and moreover commenting!
Sincerely,
Rosa
Posted 31-05-2019 14:30
Hi Mentor Wonhee!
I do believe that greed is the primary reason that they Ministry has withheld the review for such a long time. Though nuclear power does pose no threat to the air quality, it has a great effect on the environment and humans with regards to its toxic waste. I have confidence in that Greenpeace will lead a successful operation.
Thank you for reading and commenting Mentor!
Yours sincerely,
Rosa
Posted 31-05-2019 14:26
Greetings Eco-Generation!
I do believe that we have learned a great deal from what Japan went through. I just think that because it has happened a while back and also that South Africa is not in an active tectonic plate, this makes investors and government think that they can try to venture nuclear in our country in the first place.
Also, I think it may also because we do have a nuclear generating station in Koeburg and they see that it has not had any bad issues so far.
I generally think that one nuclear station is a nuclear station in excess. They should not be built at all, regardless of the the economical factors/advantages tied to them.
Let's hope that Greenpeace wins this battle, once and for all!
Thank you reading and commenting on my report Eco-Gen!
Sinerely,
Rosa
Posted 31-05-2019 14:21
Thank you Lohita for reading! I too hope that they win this battle.
And thank you for commenting!
Posted 31-05-2019 14:09
Hello Rosa sis
Nuclear power though generates high aminpunt of energy it has lots of adverse effects on human, animals ecosystem in overall. There are lots of examples as you included. Today, Hiroshima is backward in comparison to other places due to the nuclear bombing there that happened in world war.
Thank you so much for this wonderful report.
Green cheers
Posted 31-05-2019 13:20
Hello Rosa
Thank you for sharing this nuclear power issue in South Africa with us. Among many alternatives of fossil fuels, nuclear energy is the most popular energy as it generates clean electricity without carbon dioxide emission. However, radioactive waste from nuclear power plants can threat human??s lives and cause enormous environmental pollution when they are not treated properly. Thus, as Greenpeace has insisted, I wish human greed will not cause any other tragedy. Thank you for all your time and efforts taken in this report. : )
Wonhee Mentor
Posted 31-05-2019 10:55
Greetings Rosa,
Surely, building a nuclear power plant is a tough decision because it can be dangerous to both humans and the environment. Past events in Japan has taught lessons that this is a rather serious matter. We hope the best for Greenpeace and applaud them for doing a great job in trying to secure our environment.
All the Best,
Eco Generation
Posted 31-05-2019 08:53
Thanks for the nice report, wishing Greenpeace great success in your efforts.
Posted 31-05-2019 03:35