Op-eds

Africa’s nuclear future — surge in energy demand may leave it no choice but to invest heavily in reactors

23 Jan 2025

New designs and features make it a viable future option for many African countries, where current technology does not appear to offer a baseload alternative.

In a world that must urgently move away from fossil fuels to limit global warming, what does Africa’s long-term energy future look like?

Analysis by the Institute for Security Studies’ African Futures programme examined two factors that will determine Africa’s future energy landscape: demand and population growth.

First, substantial increases in energy demand will accompany Africa’s development. Rapid development requires the availability of 8.62 barrels of oil equivalent per person a year. The average in Africa currently is three barrels, the lowest of any region globally.

Second, Africa is experiencing rapid population growth. In 2022, its population reached 1.448 billion, surpassing both India (still growing) and China (which has peaked). By 2066, Africa’s population (then at 3.2 billion) will be almost double that of India, while China’s will continue its steady decline.

A rapid rise in the energy needs of its growing population means that Africa’s energy demand will, from about 2061, exceed India’s. Faster economic growth due to productivity and other improvements will lead to even more significant increases in Africa’s demand and associated carbon emissions.

Modelling using the International Futures forecasting platform from the University of Denver explores the extent to which Africa could transition away from fossil fuels including coal, oil and gas. Oil currently accounts for 43% of Africa’s energy production, gas for 33% and coal for about 19%.

Our Current Path forecast indicates that by 2050, oil will still account for 17% of Africa’s energy production, gas for 40% and coal for 7%. With effort, reducing these numbers might be possible, particularly for oil and coal.

Still, Africa is unlikely to be able to wean itself off gas, implying a slower transition away from fossil fuels than required to keep even a 2°C goal alive. The implication is that other regions of the world would have to reduce emissions rapidly to provide space for those from Africa.

Although much of its fossil fuels are exported, Africa is more fossil fuel-dependent than any other region globally. This means a small portion of its energy production comes from nuclear, hydro, wind, solar, geothermal or other renewables.

On the one hand, Africa’s limited fossil fuel infrastructure (such as refining capacity and pipelines) positions it well for a more rapid transition to clean energy sources. On the other, given the growing domestic energy demand, Africans are likely to use more of their fossil fuels to meet domestic requirements, reducing exports.

It seems the only available technologies that could moderate Africa’s fossil fuel-dependent energy pathway are nuclear, hydro and possibly geothermal.

Whereas other regions with higher energy production and slower-growing populations can steadily replace fossil fuel use with other sources, our modelling shows this will be harder in Africa.

Wind, solar, geothermal and other renewables account for only 2% of Africa’s total energy production. It will take a long time to scale this up to replace some of the energy currently provided by fossil fuels. Wind and solar have a large potential to provide household electricity through off- and mini-grid applications in rural areas, but won’t resolve Africa’s baseload requirement.

Without a breakthrough in energy storage, the intermittent nature of renewables presents a significant obstacle for countries looking to exploit their commodities and industrialise.

In surveying the options, it seems the only available technologies that could moderate Africa’s fossil fuel-dependent energy pathway are nuclear, hydro and possibly geothermal. All three are expensive, take years to build, and come with environmental challenges, not to mention that Africa has very little of them currently in place.

Hydro is also threatened by climate change. For example, Zambia recently suffered from the impact of lower-than-average rainfall on its hydro, which powers 86% of the grid.

Although Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima have given nuclear energy a poor reputation, the emphasis on reducing carbon emissions has boosted the industry.

Hydro accounts for about 3.2% of Africa’s energy production. Although several dams are being built, only Grand Inga in the Democratic Republic of Congo would be large enough to make a significant difference to energy production on the continent. Grand Inga’s estimated capacity is more than 40GW, but it faces numerous obstacles, including an $80-billion price tag and its distance to larger consumer markets.

This leaves us with nuclear energy. The only operational nuclear plant in Africa is Koeberg in South Africa. In 2022, Russia began building four large nuclear power plants with significant desalination capacity at El Dabaa in Egypt. These should come online in 2026, eventually costing about $30-billion. Even then, nuclear will account for less than 1% of Africa’s total energy production.

According to the World Nuclear Association, nuclear power generates 10% of electricity, with about 60 reactors under construction and around double that number in the planning phase. Most of these are traditional, large-scale plants.

However, micro and small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) could play a more important role in alleviating Africa’s energy challenge. But they probably remain a decade away from widespread commercial application. Russia and China have three SMRs in operation, and significant investments are being made in new designs.

The technology and safety concerns with SMRs all seem solvable. The main problem is that a large enough order would need to be placed to allow construction of the first fleet of this new type of reactor. These would be built in a production line process and have many advantages, but the first build is always expensive.

Essentially, an SMR could be assembled close to a fertiliser or desalination plant, or next to a mine or industrial node to provide baseload energy capacity; it need not be part of a national grid.

In South Africa, nuclear could replace the current fleet of coal-fired stations by integrating SMRs into the grid in Mpumalanga as coal plants are retired. For these reasons numerous African countries have expressed interest in nuclear, including Kenya and Rwanda.

Although Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima have given nuclear energy a poor reputation, the emphasis on reducing carbon emissions has boosted the industry. New designs and features make it a viable future option for many African countries, where current technology does not appear to offer a baseload alternative.

New partnerships and bold leadership will be required to promote investment in peaceful nuclear uses that will ensure their safe, secure and responsible application as part of the solution. And to encourage policy choices that balance urgent climate and development needs with public interest. DM

Jakkie Cilliers, Head, African Futures and Innovation, Institute for Security Studies (ISS) Pretoria.

First published by ISS Today.

Categories:

Op-eds

Tags:

DM is much better if you are signed in...

Op-eds