Nigeria’s first ever nuclear power plants with capacity to generate 2,400 megawatts (MW) will be sited at Geregu, Kogi and Itu, Akwa Ibom States by the Federal Government, the Nigeria Atomic Energy Commission (NAEC) has said.

NAEC had entered talks with Russia’s Rosatom Corporation to build four nuclear power plants in Nigeria, costing about $20 billion (about N3.9 trillion) and which is expected to generate as much as 4,800MW.

Erepamo, however said the plants would be co-financed by Rosatom, which will then build, own, operate and transfer (BOT) them to the government.

He explained that the preliminary licensing of the approved sites is expected by the end of 2016 from the Nigerian Nuclear Regulatory Authority (NNRA) which has started the process of developing the licenses.

NAEC, however, noted that training and capacity building for the construction and operation of the plants are ongoing and that it has developed a framework to establish a national nuclear insurance policy and schem will adequately address the civil liability component of the nuclear power industry in conformity with the 1963 Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage.

http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/fg-to-build-2-400mw-nuclear-plants-in-kogi-a-ibom-states/212858/


According to Osaisai, the first nuclear power plant will have the capacity to produce 1,000MW, which will be expanded to 4,000MW within 10 years of the establishment of the plant.

He said the need for safety and security of power infrastructure could not be sacrificed at the altar of expediency even though the nation required urgent solution to its power crisis.

Osaisai said, “Planning and implementing a nuclear power programme takes time. When you consider the national situation where we need significant amount of generation, the timeframe for implementing a nuclear power programme may appear like eternity but the key issue is that implementing a nuclear power programme comes with a large number of obligations.

“Nigeria is committed to ensuring that we are able to maintain a strict regime of safety, security and safeguard. That requires emplacement of key infrastructure. It takes time to develop it on the order of about 10 to 15 years even for very developed countries.

“So, it may appear that we have been doing it for a long time but we have just been meticulous, wanting to ensure that we are able to do it right. That is why it appears to be taking time but it has to be done right.”

http://www.punchng.com/business/business-economy/nigerias-first-nuclear-power-plant-ready-in-2026/

http://www.nigatom.org.ng

http://www.nnra.gov.ng


THE Akwa Ibom State Leaders Caucus has rejected plans by the Nigerian Atomic Energy Commission (NAEC) to site nuclear power plant in Itu local Government Area of the state.

They attributed their action to the disasters which the failure of nuclear plants had brought to several cities in more advanced countries.

The caucus questioned why Nigeria, where perennial incompetence in matters of safety and security had become legendary, should undertake such a risky project, when countries like Germany,
Italy, USA, Russia and Japan, known for their expertise were shutting down such plants.
http://www.tellnig.com/why-akwa-ibom-leaders-rejectednuclear-power-plant/



A nuclear power plant is a thermal power station in which the heat source is a nuclear reactor. As is typical in all conventional thermal power stations the heat is used to generate steam which drives a steam turbine connected to an electric generator which produces electricity. As of 23 April 2014, the IAEA report there are 435 nuclear power reactors in operation operating in 31 countries.Nuclear power plants are usually considered to be base load stations, since fuel is a small part of the cost of production.

The conversion to electrical energy takes place indirectly, as in conventional thermal power plants. The heat is produced by fission in a nuclear reactor (a light water reactor). Directly or indirectly, water vapor (steam) is produced. The pressurized steam is then usually fed to a multi-stage steam turbine. Steam turbines in Western nuclear power plants are among the largest steam turbines ever. After the steam turbine has expanded and partially condensed the steam, the remaining vapor is condensed in a condenser. The condenser is a heat exchanger which is connected to a secondary side such as a river or a cooling tower. The water is then pumped back into the nuclear reactor and the cycle begins again. The water-steam cycle corresponds to the Rankine cycle.


The economics of new nuclear power plants is a controversial subject, and multi-billion dollar investments ride on the choice of an energy source. Nuclear power plants typically have high capital costs, but low direct fuel costs, with the costs of fuel extraction, processing, use and spent fuel storage internalized costs. Therefore, comparison with other power generation methods is strongly dependent on assumptions about construction timescales and capital financing for nuclear plants. Cost estimates take into account plant decommissioning and nuclear waste storage or recycling costs in the globally due to the Price Anderson Act. With the prospect that all spent nuclear fuel/"nuclear waste" could potentially be recycled by using future reactors, generation IV reactors, that are being designed to completely close the nuclear fuel cycle.



In the event of an emergency, safety valves can be used to prevent pipes from bursting or the reactor from exploding. The valves are designed so that they can derive all of the supplied flow rates with little increase in pressure. In the case of the BWR, the steam is directed into the suppression chamber and condenses there. The chambers on a heat exchanger are connected to the intermediate cooling circuit.


In his book, Normal accidents, Charles Perrow says that multiple and unexpected failures are built into society's complex and tightly-coupled nuclear reactor systems. Such accidents are unavoidable and cannot be designed around. An interdisciplinary team from MIT has estimated that given the expected growth of nuclear power from 2005 – 2055, at least four serious nuclear accidents would be expected in that period. However the MIT study does not take into account improvements in safety since 1970. To date, there have been five serious accidents (core damage) in the world since 1970 (one at Three Mile Island in 1979; one at Chernobyl in 1986; and three at Fukushima-Daiichi in 2011), corresponding to the beginning of the operation of generation II reactors. This leads to on average one serious accident happening every eight years worldwide.


There are concerns that a combination of human and mechanical error at a nuclear facility could result in significant harm to people and the environment:

Operating nuclear reactors contain large amounts of radioactive fission products which, if dispersed, can pose a direct radiation hazard, contaminate soil and vegetation, and be ingested by humans and animals. Human exposure at high enough levels can cause both short-term illness and death and longer-term death by cancer and other diseases.

It is impossible for a commercial nuclear reactor to explode like a nuclear bomb since the fuel is never sufficiently enriched for this to occur.

Nuclear reactors can fail in a variety of ways. Should the instability of the nuclear material generate unexpected behavior, it may result in an uncontrolled power excursion. Normally, the cooling system in a reactor is designed to be able to handle the excess heat this causes; however, should the reactor also experience a loss-of-coolant accident, then the fuel may melt or cause the vessel in which it is contained to overheat and melt. This event is called a nuclear meltdown.

After shutting down, for some time the reactor still needs external energy to power its cooling systems. Normally this energy is provided by the power grid to which that plant is connected, or by emergency diesel generators. Failure to provide power for the cooling systems, as happened in Fukushima I, can cause serious accidents.

Nuclear reactors become preferred targets during military conflict and, over the past three decades, have been repeatedly attacked during military air strikes, occupations, invasions and campaigns:

In September 1980, Iran bombed the Al Tuwaitha nuclear complex in Iraq in Operation Scorch Sword.
In June 1981, an Israeli air strike completely destroyed Iraq's Osirak nuclear research facility in Operation Opera.
Between 1984 and 1987, Iraq bombed Iran's Bushehr nuclear plant six times.
On 8 January 1982, Umkhonto we Sizwe, the armed wing of the ANC, attacked South Africa's Koeberg nuclear power plant while it was still under construction.
In 1991, the U.S. bombed three nuclear reactors and an enrichment pilot facility in Iraq.
In 1991, Iraq launched Scud missiles at Israel's Dimona nuclear power plant
In September 2007, Israel bombed a Syrian reactor under construction.


In many countries, plants are often located on the coast, in order to provide a ready source of cooling water for the essential service water system. As a consequence the design needs to take the risk of flooding and tsunamis into account. The World Energy Council (WEC) argues disaster risks are changing and increasing the likelihood of disasters such as earthquakes, cyclones, hurricanes, typhoons, flooding. High temperatures, low precipitation levels and severe droughts may lead to fresh water shortages. Failure to calculate the risk of flooding correctly lead to a Level 2 event on the International Nuclear Event Scale during the 1999 Blayais Nuclear Power Plant flood, while flooding caused by the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami lead to the Fukushima I nuclear accidents.

The design of plants located in seismically active zones also requires the risk of earthquakes and tsunamis to be taken into account. Japan, India, China and the USA are among the countries to have plants in earthquake-prone regions. Damage caused to Japan's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant during the Chūetsu offshore earthquake underlined concerns expressed by experts in Japan prior to the Fukushima accidents, who have warned of a genpatsu-shinsai (domino-effect nuclear power plant earthquake disaster).


The nuclear power debate is about the controversy which has surrounded the deployment and use of nuclear fission reactors to generate electricity from nuclear fuel for civilian purposes. The debate about nuclear power peaked during the 1970s and 1980s, when it "reached an intensity unprecedented in the history of technology controversies", in some countries.

Proponents argue that nuclear power is a sustainable energy source which reduces carbon emissions and can increase energy security if its use supplants a dependence on imported fuels. Proponents advance the notion that nuclear power produces virtually no air pollution, in contrast to the chief viable alternative of fossil fuel. Proponents also believe that nuclear power is the only viable course to achieve energy independence for most Western countries. They emphasize that the risks of storing waste are small and can be further reduced by using the latest technology in newer reactors, and the operational safety record in the Western world is excellent when compared to the other major kinds of power plants.

Opponents say that nuclear power poses many threats to people and the environment. These threats include health risks and environmental damage from uranium mining, processing and transport, the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation or sabotage, and the unsolved problem of radioactive nuclear waste. They also contend that reactors themselves are enormously complex machines where many things can and do go wrong, and there have been many serious nuclear accidents.Critics do not believe that these risks can be reduced through new technology. They argue that when all the energy-intensive stages of the nuclear fuel chain are considered, from uranium mining to nuclear decommissioning, nuclear power is not a low-carbon electricity source.

In 2010 Olusegun Arowolo did a write up on NIGERIA nuclear ambition.

http://nigeriaworld.com/articles/2010/jul/195.html

Assuming Nigerians can run the atomic plant safely, which I personally doubt because of the maintenance culture aforementioned, how will Nigeria go about the atomic waste? It is this atomic waste that is making advanced countries to look for other ways in solving their energy supply problems. Perhaps we should first be informed on how the little nuclear waste products generated in those already existing small nuclear reactor facilities in the research and health institutions across the federation are being disposed off. Definitely some of the atomic wastes have found their ways to the many rubbish heaps across the nation. Is it not in Nigeria that a 50 years old man was contracted recently by Lagos University Teaching Hospital (LUTH), to bury over sixty dead babies at a particular destination and he was intercepted by the police while taking the corpses elsewhere for burial?

The horrifying imaginations that make me more tremble are, one, the thought of a Nigerian nuclear power station worker trying to sell off the nuclear waste to anybody willing to buy to cut corner and make money the Nigerian way in these days of terrorism. Two, the religion fanatics in Nigeria that could easily get access to the nuclear waste in Nigeria. We all know what happened in Nigeria when a cartoon was published in far away Sweden.

Advanced and developed nations are having problems on how to successfully dispose off their nuclear wastes. Apart from the fear of explosion in the plant itself, like it happened in Chernobyl in 1986 that the whole city and surrounding areas have became uninhabitable till now. Some of those Russians, who attempted helping to put the situation under control, died due to radiation under mysterious illness shortly after the operation to save the situation. Others are still wringing in pains up till now. Many children born several years thereafter, from survivals of that tragedy, come to this world with different deformities. The Russian government of that time had to evacuate the whole people of the city and its environ en masse and relocate them to several other far away towns and cities. The Nigeria government is not capable of undertaking such an evacuation. The Bakassi case is still fresh in mind.

There are many health hazards occurring within the vicinity of many nuclear plants and where nuclear wastes are kept temporarily around the world. There is no safe place to keep nuclear waste. It radiates through anything one can think of for hundreds of thousands of years, some scientists say millions of years, and cause immense havoc on human health. There is nothing that can stop the radiation of nuclear material. There are cases of deformities among newborn babies in all the neighbourhoods where atomic energy power stations are built and waste products are deposited throughout the world. Some workers of atomic power plants have met their untimely death while many are suffering from one chronic illness or the other, of which a high degree of different kind of cancer ailment is common.

These and many other overall dangers that nuclear energy poses are making many European countries having a rethink on the politics of nuclear energy generation. North American governments are deliberately hiding information on hazards emanating from nuclear materials from their people, because the controversies, the restlessness and perhaps the violent demonstrations that it will eventually generate. In US in particular, there is no freedom of information on nuclear themes apart from its study in higher institutions and the peaceful usage of it. This is so, because US is the biggest user of nuclear materials, be it as energy source, in health section or for military use, even for some special bullets. Most men and women in uniform are not even aware of the danger of nuclear materials that accompany them.

In the Nigeria of old, Electricity Cooperation of Nigeria (ECN), was generating power from the abundant coal deposits of Udi Hill in Enugu. It was after the commencement of energy generation from Kanji Dam that Nigerian government abandoned electricity generation from coal. This shows how visionless Nigerian leaders are. Agreed there was civil war in-between, mining of coal for energy generation would have been impossible, but the civil war of three years is now more than forty years over. What is stopping the government going back to make use of this source of power generation instead of clamouring for atomic energy, when the European countries are still using coal as a source to generate electricity till date? German government, not quite long ago, relocated the whole people of an area in order to mine the large brown coal deposits underneath their abodes and farmlands for energy generation. The Chinese are going as far as Australia to mine coal for power generation to propel their heavy industries.

Is Nigeria government trying to acquire nuclear bomb through the backdoor, when many Nigerians could not afford one good nourishing meal a day?

Why must Nigeria go nuclear? Are there are no other alternatives to generate energy that could cause little or no havoc to human beings? What about solar (sun) energy that presents itself abundantly in Africa that could be tapped immensely from the vast barren land in the northern part of Nigeria? What about those numerous rivers no matter how small in Nigeria that could easily be dammed and provide the possibility of generating hydro energy? Does wind not blow in Nigeria, that it could be tapped through windmill for energy? Or, Nigeria has no Sea/Ocean that its waves could be used to generate energy? But Nigerians produce mountains of rubbish everywhere you go in the country; can these not be used to generate thermo energy? If all these energy sources are properly and effectively harnessed, there will be more than sufficient energy supply for the whole of Nigeria.

Actually in this modern age, government should have no business in generating and supplying electricity. If energy supply has to be effective and efficiently run, it has to be privatised. It is a profit-making establishment. Therefore, power generation and distribution should be decentralized and made attractive. The federal government should provide enabling conditions with regulations for private entrepreneurs to invest heavily in this sector. By so doing, interested companies will be able to avail all opportunities open, apart from that of atomic energy which the government must explicitly declare no go area, to generate and supply electricity to the populace. Since there is high demand in the country for power supply, many companies will attempt to make money and Nigeria will benefit immensely.

Why must it be nuclear energy that will invariably gulp up double the funds needed for all aforementioned sources of energy put together in terms of construction and maintenance? And that will only create job opportunities for expatriates? Most, if not all, of the alternative sources of energy listed above could easily be constructed, carefully put in place and managed by Nigerian scientists or professionals both at home or abroad without much fuss.

Or, is it not a foreign company that the government going to consult to draw the nuclear plant plan, build, manage and maintain? Oh, I have forgotten, those collaborators and embezzlers parading themselves as Nigerian leaders will beg Julius Berger 'the only indigenous company in Nigeria' to do the job, so that the contract value could easily be inflated sky heavens for the benefits of their private coffers.

Nigeria is blessed with enormous gas deposit apart from those that come with crude oil production and being flared in the Niger Delta. We have heard that many gas turbines were imported into the country and that there is no gas to fire them and generate power, yet gas flaring is going on in many places in the Niger Delta unabated. Can the gas being flared not be directed to fire those turbines? Or is the technology for the diversion of the gas being flared yet to be invented? If the government has failed to utilize this gas to generate power supply effectively, because of lack of coordination between various government establishments involved, as the government is always trying to make people believe, how then will the government be in a position to manage nuclear power generation that the people have no clue about?

Anytime the Federal government decides finally to start building the nuclear power plant, the end of the world is near. The ultimate MCA (the total meltdown), what Germans refer to as super-GAU, will then happen. Thus, Pastor Enoch Adeboye of RCCG will no more need to wait till the end of the century to welcome Jesus Christ on his second coming as he had once in January 2000 so prophesied Jesus revealed to him.

Since 1986 no known new atomic power plant has been built in all the advanced countries (not developing or under-developed countries), because of the havoc experienced with Chernobyl accident, even though there is a very high demand for energy supply. In Germany, for example, most of the atomic energy plants are not even running at half full capacity, because of danger of explosion and the problem associated with atomic waste product's disposal. As of today German is expanding and depending more on wind energy than any other sources of energy. US that is considering building new atomic power plants has no concrete plan to do so. Even China, with the highest demand for energy supply currently worldwide, is looking for other sources of energy supply, and not considering building a new atomic energy power plant.

Why are they then propagating its 'peaceful usefulness' and trying to sell the idea to the third world countries? The answer is because of the economic gains they will derive from the contracts. Some advanced countries are counting on the naivety of the leaders of some under-developed nations to have contract signed for the construction of nuclear power stations.

Their gain is of two folds. One, this invariably will provide opportunities for their unemployed scientists. It is not only just constructing the nuclear power plant that will be in play, but also the involvement of long dependency of the under-develop country on the contractor for the supply of spare parts, maintenance and the disposal of the nuclear wastes that will last for many years if not forever. Nuclear power plant is not what a contractor from one country will construct, and when there is misunderstanding between the two countries the under-developed country will call in another nuclear energy consulting firm from another developed country to come and manage. With nuclear power station, every developed country has a different system that only that particular country can effectively and efficiently manage. Thus, when a nuclear energy consultant/construction company is contracted from a particular country, you are stuck with that country for life.

Look at what is happening today with ordinary Ajaokuta Iron and Steel Company originally constructed by the Russians. Is the company till date being able to produce iron sheets and rods constantly? Nigeria, Nigeria!!! Nuclear power station is more sophisticated. No room for any miscalculation. It is very dangerous and deadly, when messed around like the macabre playing out at Ajaoukta.

The second gain for those advanced countries propagating for the 'positive and peaceful usefulness' of nuclear energy to the under-developed world is an attempt to temporarily stop the continuous downward trend their economy is now experiencing and that will continue to do for the unforeseeable future. With their propaganda, they hope to get one or two under-developed countries hooked to them that will continue to boost and sustain their economy. Most of these countries are loosing their economic power to Asian countries through cheap production and marketing of automobiles, ship building, electrical apparatus, electronics, IT technology know-how and other diverse machineries.

Those with the nuclear energy technology know-how are well aware, that no matter how the under-developed nations' professionals, especially Africans, are trained to run the nuclear power stations in their countries, they will still be found wanting in spare parts procurement and overall maintenance. And the costs are enormous. Their interest in getting the nuclear energy technology transfer to Africa is purely economic. Once a nuclear power station is built, the dependence on the constructor will be forever. It is another way to make unsuspecting African countries be indebted to those countries offering their nuclear technology know-how for 'peaceful uses'. Another easy way to colonize Africa economically.

Nobody should feel safe and unconcerned about the problems of atomic energy power plant. In case of an explosion in a nuclear power station that may be located anywhere in Nigeria, the effects will be visible in the whole region of West Africa, if not half of Africa. It knows no boundary. The Chernobyl explosion of 1986 in Ukraine affected everywhere in Europe. Mushrooms, powdered milk, beans, fruits, potatoes and many other edible food items could not be exported, imported or consumed easily and freely throughout Europe. The effects are still everywhere till today. The city is still a ghost of itself. Nobody is living there, if pictures and commentaries run on German television not quite long ago are to be relied upon. It has become uninhabitable and probably will remain so for eternity.

The leakages that keep reoccurring in some nuclear power plants in Europe always cause big rumpus among governments and oppositions wherever and whenever they happen. There is always a daily agitation in all neighbourhoods throughout Europe, where an atomic power plant is situated. Why would Nigeria and other African countries like to have such a thing in their countries, when Europeans are looking for ways to discard such energy source?

All countries that are currently in possession of atomic energy are disciplined societies, but unfortunately this cannot be said of Nigeria, as many people will agree with me. A country its leadership will collaborate with foreigners to steal the wealth of the nation. A country where the custodian of the apex bank will announce to the whole world, that the banking industry of the nation is under the control of thieves and at the same time still expects foreign investors to bring money into the country. A country that its ruling elites could waste hundreds of millions of Naira to gather in another country for just a discussion on an anniversary that will eventually take place in their own country. Very unfortunate. Therefore, every sensible Nigerian that loves the country is hereby called upon to put in his/her contribution as pressure catalysis to make the government change its plan in acquiring this murderous monster of a technology.

I personally find it difficult to understand African leaders. Why would they always allow black people to be ridiculed every time? These European countries, that are making atomic energy attractive for its 'peaceful usage' in terms of energy generation for Africa, have formed a joint company purposely mandated to build a gigantic solar energy plant (field) in the desert of North Africa for energy supply to Europe. The cost for the construction of the solar energy plant (field) and transferring of the energy generated back to Europe is far less than the budget to construct a few nuclear plants. But the energy to be generated in these fields for Europe consumption will surpass electricity generated by at least tens of nuclear power plants put together. The company is already delivering energy back to Europe from North Africa. The installation of more sun collector panels is on-going, while African leaders are being persuaded (deceived) to go nuclear.

The time is now for Nigerians with more information on havocs the usage of nuclear materials could cause, especially in energy generation, to come out and join hands together, to educate other Nigerians in order to stop the Nigerian government in its adventure to acquire atomic energy on a massive scale. The danger that could emanate from the small nuclear reactors Nigeria already possess for health treatment is fearful enough. There are other cheap sources the government could derive its energy supply from and make electricity available to Nigerians, if the leadership is serious and not ready to privatise energy generation and electricity distribution as suggested above.

Could someone help to tell the Director General of the Nigerian Atomic Energy Commission, Dr. Erepamo Osaisai, the Director General of the Nigerian Nuclear Regulatory Authority, Prof. Shamsuddeen Elegba and their colleagues in African Regional Cooperative Agreement for Research, Development and Training Related to Nuclear Science and Technology (AFRA) that developed nations are seriously doing away with nuclear energy because of the dangers it poses to their people? That, they too should put their resources together and concentrate their energies on how to make use of the God abundantly given solar, water and wind energy sources on the continent for electricity supply. That, not only are these energy sources healthier and renewable, but will create and secure more employment opportunities for African scientists and experts both at home and Diaspora.

Ok

Yepi

So dis man called introvert get sense like dis, anyways wen u write long tinz like ur thread, try put summary for people like me weh dhe allergic to long notes.
#thanks

I can't even read all that but...



































































I was here Happy Sunday !

Brb to comment

.

This post chop my swift one month data plan lol..


On a serious note I'll never support nuclear activities in Nigeria. Apart from incompetency there's also a real danger of radioactive material being stolen by those with alterior motives.. Nigeria is just too volatile for such business.

The nuclear power station should be moved to Asadike's paradise village in Ekwulobia.

did anyone actually read this to the full??

Na who open this thread?






Lalasticlala, fp .

Nuclear power plants! On Nigerian soil? Crass misadventure! How are we going to secure them? With Russian troops? Or Mopol?

TheYoungRebel:
To me Nigeria's most pressing need and problem are the ever undefeated BOKO HARAMS. The security of this country is at stake. People are slaughtered like chickens anyhow. We all are not safe for fear of stray bullets.
If any achievement is to be recorded then it should be when terrorism had been wiped out and peace & order returned to the country once again.
But for now, Nigeria is still were it was afer GEJ'S regime ended and the situations on ground is are getting extreme.
PMB don't give up! Be steadfast!

pmb is on top of the matter. Keep calm!