China and its Need for Namibian Uranium

Nortin TitusTHE OPINION piece, China and Namibian Uranium, authored by Roman Grynberg, and published in The Namibian of 16 August 2019, contains some interesting views on China and Namibian uranium. I do not share his view, but consider it important to provide an alternative perspective on the issue of Namibian uranium and the Chinese acquisitions thereof.

While reading the piece, I was reminded by a wise lady who once told me that if you do not know that flour bakes bread, you will give it away, just to get rid of it. Flour is powdery, messy, dirties everything, awkward to work with, but with a few ingredients, effort and heat, feeds a nation.

For any industrialised economy, stable, on-demand electricity is key to ensure growth and sustainability, and to attract continued investment. With no power, forget about attracting high-quality long-term investment. Today, the only other power-generation technologies rivalling coal at the gigawatt electric (GWe) scale producing reliable on-demand electricity are nuclear, hydro and gas.

Economies today rely on stable, uninterrupted power supply at the terrawatt-hour (TWh) level. China is often credited for taking a very long-term view in planning, and they have certainly done their homework by including nuclear energy to support their ever-growing economy.

China’s main coal deposits and, by extension, most of their coal-fired power plants are located in the north and north-west of mainland China; far from the industrial south-east. To bring power to the industrial centres in China is expensive, and therefore, nuclear power plants located close to industrial cities not only provide clean electricity for the people and industry, but also take up an incredibly small amount of space for the amount of power it produces.

China is including nuclear power into their energy mix to reduce their reliance on coal, which has also contributed significantly to air pollution. China is demanding clean air; also with a population that it has dragged out of poverty within three decades, the demand for electricity is skyrocketing to maintain the quality of life now present in China.

The acquisition of Rössing Uranium Limited by Chinese state-owned China National Uranium Corporation Limited (CNUC) underlines China’s commitment to nuclear energy. By far the largest expansion of nuclear power currently, China’s expansion is just mind-boggling.

China already has 47 reactors operating, with 11 reactors under construction, 43 reactors planned, and a whopping 170 units proposed. To fuel these reactors for decades to come, China must secure energy supply, and it has done so with two of Namibia’s biggest uranium mines.

Quite rightly, China may not be concerned if the uranium mine is loss-making, as Rio Tinto was, but the sale of electricity from nuclear energy more than makes up for these losses. Worldwide, 52 nuclear reactors are currently under construction, a far cry from the regular reporting of a perceived scaling down of nuclear energy.

Namibia does not have a policy of stockpiling nuclear fuel for future use, so the reasoning rings true that every gramme of uranium leaving is a permanent loss to Namibia, and compromises Namibia’s future energy supply. This is Namibia’s greatest risk for the next generation; its security of energy supply.

We’ve been criss-crossing the country and seabed, looking for oil and gas, built renewable energy power plants to harness the energy of the sun and wind, proposed additional hydro-power plants to ensure security of energy supply. Independent Namibia has to date exported over 100 000 tonnes of yellowcake, the world’s most energy-dense concentrate and strategic fuel.

How are we doing it differently, and at the same time criticising the early locals for giving away their land filled with diamonds for nothing? You can argue that they did not know the value of diamonds back then, but equally, the way we deal with uranium today, we also don’t appreciate the value of uranium; like flour. With our sale of uranium, we have not kept 1 gramme for ourselves or our children, we have not saved N$1 derived from it, and we have not invested N$1 to build capacity to beneficiate it.

To put the amount of nuclear fuel exported into perspective, Namibia exports about 70 TWh worth of energy per year, i.e. 3 500t of yellowcake. On average, nuclear power plants generate electricity at eight-15c (US) per kWh. Doing the math, eight c/kWh equates to US$5,6 billion (N$85 billion), which happens to be the average price of a nuclear plant.

So, every year, Namibia’s uranium exports, in ‘beneficiated’ value, equates to the cost of a new nuclear power plant. Couple to this a 2017 report by KPMG, commissioned by the department of energy of South Africa, which determined that the Koeberg nuclear power station in Cape Town directly supported and stimulated economic activity in South Africa, estimated at R50 billion.

It is also not fair to paint the Chinese as sinister partners. In 2010, Chinese investment rescued the almost bankrupt Volvo car brand from Ford Motors. Volvo, under Chinese ownership, has since then thrived and become very profitable.

The good governor of Erongo, Cleophas Mutjavikua, has reason to be concerned, because it is his region that is the main exporter of nuclear source material. He is quite right to question and ponder a future that includes nuclear energy in his region. Electricity from his region can potentially make the Erongo region the richest region, supplying base-load electricity, reliably and on-demand, to the rest of the country and its neighbours, thereby attracting the country’s top skills and workforce.

One can go as far as to say that with the energy produced from Erongo’s future nuclear power stations, an endless supply of desalinated water can be pumped continuously inland, leaving Namibia’s perennial rivers untouched to provide awe-inspiring natural beauty and wonder for the tourism industry.

It is time we move away from believing that nuclear energy is beset with problems and challenges. The only challenge we have is to believe that we can use the fuel resource Namibia possesses in abundance for its benefit and development.

It certainly is a hard pill to swallow exporting such a strategic energy resource, considering our dire need for reliable, on-demand electricity, and let’s hope our rejection of nuclear fuel for own use will not come back to bite us for years to come, but let’s be open to all forms of electricity production.

We have done it for oil and gas, renewable energy and all other forms of energy, except nuclear energy. Rather than rejecting nuclear energy, let’s aim for owning an operating the world’s cleanest electrical grid when Namibia turns 50 years old. So, let’s find and be open to partners that will help us achieve that vision. Let’s keep Namibia open for business.

• Nortin Titus is chief geophysicist at the ministry of mines and energy’s Geological Survey. These are his views and not that of his employer.