NA Market Africa


With the current nuclear pollution in Japan and the cost involved in controlling it, Africa must refuse to tread the road that powerful forces want it to take regarding nuclear resources and energy. This path would not only lead to pollution of the continent, but also create huge long-term financial costs, reports Nora Wittman.


The scramble for Africa’s nuclear resources


T


HE CURRENT NUCLEAR POLLU- TION in Japan and the reactions of politicians and governments throughout Europe, the USA and Asia, even in the eye of disaster,


indicate that they will never stop using nu- clear power for military means and domestic energy generation and supply. As Japan was battling to control pol-


lution from its Fukushima nuclear plant, destroyed by the massive earthquake that hit the region on 11 March, French President Nicolas Sarkozy was firmly pronouncing that a withdrawal from nuclear energy was totally out of question for France and will not happen – 80% of domestic energy in France comes from nuclear plants. A few hours later, EU ministers deemed


72 | June 2011 New African


it sufficient to submit European nuclear power reactors to a so-called “stress test”, and even then only on a voluntary basis. Apparently, the nuclear industry and their party allies throughout the political spec- trum have been for a long time in a tight marriage that is far too beneficial for them to split. Africa is currently the continent where


nuclear power plants are least present. Only one such plant is present in South Africa, imposed by the apartheid regime in the 1970s. It is located in Koeberg, 30km north of Cape Town, yet surrounded by the city’s ever-spreading suburbs, and was built by a French company. Like most nuclear power plants, it has experienced serious problems and its reactors have had to be shut down


several times, especially since 2005. Of course, the idea is not totally uncon-


ceivable that there could have been more severe incidents before, and that in apart- heid times the white supremacist regime would not have made it a top priority to inform and protect the surrounding Af- rican people. In 2010, 91 members of staff were contaminated with Cobalt-58 dust in an incident that was said to be confined to the plant only. In view of these facts and the recent de-


velopments, it should be clearer than ever that Africa must not follow the path to ul- timate and lasting nuclear destruction that European, North American and Asian lead- ers seem to be determined to continue to take. Indeed, Africa may not only have the


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100