 |
|
|
|
|
EARTHLIFE AFRICA AND ESKOM GO TO COURT AGAIN EARTHLIFE AFRICA DEMANDS TO SEE ESKOM BOARD MINUTES - THE PUBLIC HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW. June 20th 2005. Today, Earthlife Africa Cape town (ELA) received the date of the court case which it has launched against Eskom. Earthlife Africa will be in court again on the 30th August 2005 this time in the Johannesburg High Court. This legal case is to review a decision on internal appeal by Eskom to refuse Earthlife Africa access to certain information requested by it in terms of the promotion of Access to information act. The Open Democracy Advice Centre (ODAC) is representing ELA in this matter. Earthlife Africa believes that issues of safety as well as the economic case for the PBMR must have been discussed at Eskom Board level. As Eskom is a public entity, and the taxpayers are increasingly being asked to support the development of this PBMR project, ELA believes that the public have a right to know. ELA followed all the relevant administrative channels to access the board minutes but Eskom refused. ELA is left with no choice but to go to court. Eskom put forward the proposed a pebble bed modular reactor (PBMR) and from around 2000, ELA has attempted to participate in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). During ELA's attempts to participate in the EIA of the PBMR, ELA found that insufficient information was put forward by Eskom to enable any meaningful participation. ELA believes that the public has a right to know all the risks and impacts in full as this project involves public enterprises and electricity consumers will be asked to pay for it. "It is strange that although Eskom claims it is such fantastic technology, a leading international energy player, Exelon pulled out of the project and Eskom has been unable to find another international investor. If it is so great, then how come no-one wants to be part of the action" said Olivia Andrews, campaigner in Cape Town. It is also of interest to note that even leading French energy company, Areva appears to find the PBMR unattractive and not viable for large scale electricity generation. However Eskom continues to point to short term shortages of electricity supply as a motivation for going nuclear. But it is difficult to see how Eskom projections are likely to be met by a supply technology that is yet to get off the drawing board, does not have necessary government legal approvals and is still desperately seeking investors. ELA is therefore using the law to force Eskom to show us what information was used to justify investing into the PBMR so that we can assess whether this was in the public interest. Earthlife also wants Eskom to share their rationale for failing to provide adequate information on the health impacts and economics - all information necessary for anyone to have before being able to make an informed choice as to whether this venture is in the public interest. Earthlife Africa won the last court case against the Dept of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. The court case found that the PBMR ROD was fatally flawed, that ELA had not been given an adequate opportunity to put its views across, and that the EIA approval was therefore set aside. ?“Earthlife Africa is hoping that some of the information in the Eskom board minutes will shed some light on the reasons that Eskom opted for expensive untested nuclear technology when investing in energy efficiency and conservation measures would, in our view, have been a far more effective solution,?” said Olivia Andrews. For more information contact: Olivia Andrews ?– 0725098402 Or 021-4474912 EMAIL OLIVIA ?? |
|
|
||||||||||||||||