Nuclear body responds to judgement

Koeberg nuclear power station

According to a statement by Necsa, the judgement is a set back, but certainly not a derailment as many commentators are repeating. Caution and good sense should apply until all the implications are fully understood. “The court has ruled on an administrative process. The court has not ruled on the wisdom, or otherwise of nuclear power. A false impression has been created that this judgment is anti-nuclear. It is not and comment to that effect is premature and regrettable," Dr Kelvin Kemm, chairman of Necsa says.

The nuclear industry in South Africa operates to the highest global business and ethical standards and applies world best practice to planning and operational procedures. To suggest that those working within it adhere to anything less is at best inaccurate and a great disservice to a highly professional body of experts, a Necsa statement says.

“There are many misunderstandings and false perceptions around nuclear and the public is often fed misinformation about the costs, benefits, safety and South Africa’s long-term energy requirements.

“One positive aspect of this ruling is that it presents the opportunity for the facts and truth to be fully aired and debated so that rational people can think and decide on realities not hearsay. The anti-nuke lobby has had the platform to themselves not least because the nuclear industry has been quiet.

“This will change. Necsa and the nuclear industry intend to step up efforts to put the facts before the court of public opinion and to present a balanced and evidenced based case for nuclear energy as the right energy option for South Africa,” says Kemm.