It looks like Eskom is retreating from their next-generation nuclear program, instead building more dirty-coal plants.
Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) will run out of money in about a year and must adapt its novel nuclear technology to make itself commercially viable.
It is ironic that the ASME magazine had a feature article on pebble bed reactor designs in Feb 2008, with of course a lot of coverage of the PBMR project. The fate of PBMR is probably an indicator of what is happening to other low-carbon energy options that will be delayed or cancelled due to the global economic meltdown.
…Today, Pelindaba is one of the places that is developing a technology that may not be as revolutionary as fire, but is certainly one of the most promising emerging energy sources. The pebble bed modular reactor is a power plant design that uses heat from fission to “fuel” a gas turbine to generate electricity. Now under development and less than a year from prototype construction, the PBMR will have a gas turbine-driven electrical generator, which will convert some 41 percent of the reactor’s thermal output into 165 MW of electricity. That compares quite favorably to an average of 32 percent for conventional light water nuclear power plants.
If all goes according to plan, the PBMR will become something like the Boeing 747 of nuclear reactors: a reliable, exportable high-tech product that transforms the South African economy.
A more optimistic outlook here.
It is not only the global economic meltdown, which creates trouble to the PBMR, but mainly the lack of maturity of the pebble bed concept. Looking more in detail of the experience of both German pebble bed reactors AVR and THTR a lot of showstoppers become visible: The present fuel element is not suitable for long term high temperature application, and the pebble bed mechanics is not understood (hot spots in the core). As a result the AVR became the most heavily beta-contaminated nuclear installation worldwide and cannot be dismanteled for the next decades, and the THTR had to be taken out of operation after only 1.2 years of full power operation.
For a balanced view on Dr Moormann comment above please see the following response.
http://www.pbmr.co.za/index.asp?Content=217&Article=108&Year=2009
Koster’s reply, as advertised above, is either a masterly example of misrepresentation or a display of complete misunderstanding of the English language. Koster, of course, is a PBMR consultant. I always keep in mind a saying by my old Scottish granny – “It is very well spoken of in the adverts”.