An Uyo-based non-governmental organisation, Policy Alert, has asked the
federal government to rethink its decision to establish nuclear power
plants at Itu Local Government Area of Akwa Ibom State and Geregu in
Ajaokuta local government area of Kogi State.
In a statement issued in Uyo, weekend, the group described the proposal as
“cost ineffective, ill-conceived, environmentally unfriendly, and a
monumental disaster-in-waiting”.
The Nigerian Atomic Energy Commission (NAEC) recently announced that it
had entered an agreement with Rosatom of Russia to cooperate on the
design, construction, operation and decommissioning of its first nuclear
facility in 2025 to produce 1,200mw of electricity with plan to increase
installed capacity to four nuclear plants producing a total capacity of
4,800 megawatts by 2035.
But in the statement signed by its Acting Executive Director and Head of
Programmes, Tijah Bolton-Akpan, the NGO said that the federal government’s
plans did not conform with international standards* guiding the
implementation of civil nuclear programmes across the globe which impose
collective safeguards and serve as a check on the quality, health and
environmental safety of the proposed projects.
“The projects will put several communities and the lives of millions of
people at risk. The government is also not clear on its plans to address
civil liability issues in line with the Vienna Convention on Civil
Liability for Nuclear Damage. In a country like Nigeria with a poor track
record in the management of power infrastructure across the country, we
have every reason to be disturbed” the statement said.
It also noted that “the process is shrouded in secrecy and appears bent on
bypassing procurement rules as details of an agreement entered with
Russian company Rosatom since 2012 have since not been made public. After
throwing billions of dollars at the power sector over the years with
little or nothing to show for it, investing a whopping $ 80 billion in
nuclear energy at this time to solve the problem can only amount to a pipe
dream, especially if the process for doing so is faulty. Besides, nuclear
energy is globally recognized for not being economically competitive as
capital costs remain very high, cost and timeline overruns are common, and
the relatively long construction period before revenue is returned means
that servicing of capital costs is often transferred to utility
consumers.”
The statement added that “nuclear energy has been proven to be hazardous
and damaging to health and environment. More advanced countries that have
experienced nuclear disasters are still reeling from the human and
economic waste decades after such accidents occurred. If that happens in
Nigeria, where safety standards and disaster response systems are so weak,
the implications are better imagined than experienced. Currently, several
developed countries are in the process of phasing out nuclear energy. In
fact, the nuclear proportion of the global energy mix has been rapidly
declining over the years and it is rather surprising that Nigeria would be
considering nuclear energy at a time like this”.
The group also expressed dismay that the Agency could seek to undertake
such a potentially hazardous project without any form of consultation with
civil society and the host communities who would be directly affected by
radioactive emissions and potential disasters.
“We urge NAEC to reconsider its plans and the National Environmental
Standards Regulatory Agency (NESREA), the Federal Ministry of Power and
the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) to intervene before
the Agency embarks on this misguided adventure” the statement said. “Civil
society groups and the host communities should put pressure on government
to call off this invitation to disaster. The federal government must
revise its alternative energy policy towards the development of cleaner
and safer forms of energy.”