How to Solve the Energy Needs of the Poor
Note: Since nuclear energy will feature in our discussions and I am a retiree of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it is proper to state on the onset that I am embarking on this project, on my own behalf as a concerned citizen of Sub-Saharan African (SSA).
Introduction
For our discussions, let us first refer to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 2005 report that shows that the poorest countries are in SSA, where the first goal (to halve between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less than one dollar a day), got worse when the data for 2001 are compared to those of 1990. The number of people living in extreme poverty in the period studied (1990-2001) dropped in all UN-demarcated areas, but increased in SSA, where the very poor are getting poorer with an average income sliding slightly from $0.62 to $0.60 a day.
Let us also be guided by the fact that the rate of consumption of electricity in a nation is a measure of its standard of living. Hence the huge imbalance between the rich and poor nations can be quantified by the differences in their respective electricity consumption.
Therefore energy needs in SSA should be recognized as a fundamental issue, which calls for a massive injection of a reliable and abundant supply of electricity at affordable cost to accelerate the poverty eradication. That is achievable when our energy-mix includes principally hydro, gas and nuclear, with nuclear playing the leading role. It will be shown in our discussions that nuclear energy is dependable and environmentally benign energy source that can be used to produce abundant power at affordable cost necessary to sustain our economic growth.
But nuclear energy remains controversial issue, and its merits are shrouded in myths and fuelled by misconception and misinformation. Hence an attempt will be made to allay people’s apprehension and make them, if possible, a little bit nuclear literate so as to have a better informed judgement on issues pertaining to nuclear in this era of nuclear energy.
The main aim of our discussions is to compare the performance of all energy sources used for electricity production to bring out the merits of nuclear energy. We would like to bring our message to the attention of:
• The policy-makers and the general public in SSA to be open-minded about nuclear energy and well informed about its merits. That is necessary for our governments to get the political will to take the initial steps towards nuclear energy.
• The donor nations and the financial institutions to coordinate their concerns and solemn pledges to tackle with concerted efforts, in a “Marshall plan” like manner, to find solutions for the chronic energy needs in SSA on sub-regional basis.
• Areeva, Westinghouse, Mitsubishi, General Electric and the other nuclear vendors to have a closer look at the electricity market in SSA, where up to 100% of the meagre power generated in several SSA nations is from oil.
• Diverse NGOs and prominent individuals, such as Bob Geldog and Bono, who are genuinely concerned about the plight of the poor in SSA to take a closer look at the merits of nuclear energy in their quest of making poverty a history..
Tables and figures that are used in our discussions are from the public domain, and from very competent sources, such as the Third Assessment Report of the Inter-governmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC), the ExternE Project of the EU-15, the Energy Information Administration, the Environmental Protection Agencies (EPA) and several scientific institutions. Other sources include the World Energy Council (WEC) and the International Energy Association (IEA). The views of certain eminent individuals, namely, Dr. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of the Greenpeace, Dr. James Lovelock, a British environmentalist, and Mr. Ted Turner, the founder of the CNN also give credence to our analysis.
It must be underpinned that the positive stance on nuclear energy of Ms.Loyola de Palcio and Mr. Spencer Abraham, who held respectively the energy portfolio for the EU and the US, the two leading economic giants in the world with access to all types of energy sources. On that account, they were so well positioned in energy affairs that their words should carry extra weight. For instance, Mr. Abraham said in London in August 2002 that: “Nuclear plant is safer, more reliable and less expensive than ever, and should be part of the world’s fuel mix.” He went on to add that: “Nuclear power plants, which now account for 20% of US electricity generation, emit none of the pollutants associated with burning fossil fuels and provide an energy supply that is abundant and affordable”.