By Edu Abade
Ahead of the Bonn Climate Conference SB62 which commences on June 16, 2025 in Germany, no fewer than 12 civil society organisations from across Africa, Europe and Russia have published a comprehensive new report on the growing number of African nations considering nuclear energy as part of their overall energy mix.
The report named Angola, Burkina Faso, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Morocco, Namibia, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Rwanda and Uganda as countries that have announced new nuclear power plants, adding that hitherto, South Africa has the continent’s only operating nuclear power plant, which was commissioned in 1984 under the apartheid regime.
The groups that collaborated to compile and publish the report are 360 Human Rights (Ghana), Africed (Burkina Faso), Centre for Justice Governance and Environmental Action (Kenya), CESOPE (Tanzania), Earthlife Africa (South Africa), Ecodefense (Russia) and International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (Germany Affiliate).
Others are Renevlyn Development Initiative (Nigeria), Resilient 40 (African Climate Network), The Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (South Africa), Tipping Point North South (UK) and Uganda Environment Action Now (Uganda). Titled: The Alarming Rise of False Climate Solutions in Africa:
The Nuclear Energy Misadventure, the campaigners prepared the report as a collective advocacy document with strong recommendations that reflect the breadth of civil society’s shared concerns about the development of nuclear energy across the continent.
They are united in their call for a nuclear-free Africa, safe from the dangers of nuclear energy and instead building a future powered by clean, affordable solutions.
Goldman Prize recipient for Africa 2018, Makoma Lekalakala, in her foreword, writes: “The demand for a Just Transition to a post-carbon economy means it must be green, sustainable and socially inclusive.
This comprehensive report lays out the case for why the nuclear energy option is not compatible with these demands. It shows how the nuclear energy lobby undermines and obstructs the need for net zero to be achieved by 100 percent clean sustainable renewable energy.”
The report provides details on the extent of plans and announcements to roll out nuclear power plants across Africa.
It explores the numerous reasons nuclear plants cannot be the solution to the continent’s effort to reduce emissions – the urgency of the climate crisis means nuclear energy is too slow to deliver; it is harmful to human health and the environment; and unlike renewable resources not suited to solving the present problems of energy poverty.
The Alarming Rise of False Climate Solutions in Africa: The Nuclear Energy Misadventure argues that the continent is becoming both a potential testing ground and, in particular, a battleground for conflicting geopolitical influences that are also playing out in the field of nuclear technology exports, or rather the prospect of such exports.
At the same time, the nuclear energy lobby’s extensive, well-funded and global Public Relations (PR) effort, including at UNFCCC climate meetings is also documented in the report. Instead, authors of the report demand an end to plans and announcements to spend billions on building new nuclear power plants.
Three quarters of Africa’s climate finance needs are not met and more than half of existing climate finance is in debt instruments. The focus on nuclear energy will severely crowd out already precious and inadequate climate finance for climate mitigation, adaption and renewable energy generation projects.
The climate emergency has thrown a lifeline to the nuclear power industry. This report makes clear that Africa’s energy needs do not require nuclear power.
The way forward clearly lies in funding clean, safe renewable energy sources, of which the continent has in abundance.
Responding to the report, Executive Director 360 Human Rights, Alberta Kpeleku said: “From environmental disasters to health risks and economic concerns, it’s time for Ghana to reject plans nuclear power. There are far too many risks including nuclear accidents, radioactive waste, health risks, security threats, nuclear proliferation and terrorism.
“The devastating effects of nuclear accidents do not affect the present generation alone but also generations yet unborn. Alternatives and solutions for nuclear energy include renewable energy sources-solar, wind, hydro and geothermal-which should be prioritised.”
Laureate of the Alternative Nobel Prize, Goldman Prize recipient for Africa 2015, Centre for Justice, Governance and Environmental Action Kenya, Phyllis Omido said: “As part of Kenya’s anti-nuclear movement, we stand in solidarity with the newly born Ghana Anti-Nuclear Movement led by 360 and SYND.
We believe in African solutions to African problems. Nuclear energy translates to energy slavery for African people for generations to come. Renewable energy is freedom for our people and freedom for our planet. On his part, Executive Director, Renevyln Development Initiative, Philip Jakpor noted: “Nuclear plans are a “misadventure”.
Nigeria is not ready to host nuclear plants because we don’t have the capacity to manage it. We’ve had longstanding difficulties with oil and gas infrastructure where pipelines are frequently the target of sabotage, theft or terrorism, causing enormous environmental damage in the Niger Delta.
“A nuclear power station would inevitably become a “target of terrorists”. Security at a nuclear power station would need to be akin to a “military base” probably protected by another country such as Russia.”
Executive Director, Uganda Environment Action Now, Sam Mucunguzi argued that Uganda’s energy needs are certainly valid, with half the population not accessing power, the inaccessibility is not caused by lack of generated power as the country has excess power of more than 1000 MW.
The government has set a goal of achieving an electricity access rate of over 99 percent by 2030 and aims to attain it through nuclear power generation by 2031.
“This is a very ambitious goal and not attainable with a timeframe set for generating nuclear energy estimated at over 10 years. Besides, financing a 1000MW nuclear plant amounts to a quarter of Uganda’s national budget. The highly indebted Uganda must review its plans for nuclear energy before mortgaging the country to the western world and Chinese financiers. Uganda is currently mining oil and gas amid many environmental, social and economic disruptions and as such, adding nuclear development will be disastrous.
We can attain our energy needs via cleaner options like solar, wind and Hydro.”
Executive Director, the Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute, Francesca de Gasparis said: “Nuclear energy is not needed or wanted as an energy source in Africa.
When we compare nuclear energy to other energy choices on the table in the 21st century, in terms of all meaningful factors-cost, safety, construction time and waste-there is no rationale for nuclear energy.
Also, Co-Chair, Russian Environmental Group Ecodefense and Laureate of the Alternative Nobel Prize, Vladimir Slivyak stated: “Nuclear power is expensive, slow and dangerous. It is vulnerable to climate change and war.
The growing effects of climate change, such as floods, hurricanes, droughts, heat waves or storms, pose great risks to nuclear safety. Wars increase the risk of military attacks, as seen at the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant in Ukraine. Nuclear power in today’s unstable world creates additional risks of radiation disasters.
“It also creates the risk of nuclear proliferation, as every civilian nuclear plant produces materials that can be used to make a nuclear explosive device or dirty bomb. Renewable energy is safe and cheap and must be the first choice in Africa, where its potential remains enormous.”
