I’m obviously a fan of nuclear technology. I believe that — conditional on long term costs completing with other comparable energy sources — next generation nuclear will help lots of countries meet their economic goals.
But ridiculous goals make governments look unserious. And arguments about energy choices that are not grounded in reality actually undermine the case for supporting nuclear power.
Nuclear analyst Hamna Tariq and I posted Let’s Get Real About Nuclear in Africaexplaining the three kinds of hoopla that we believe undermine nuclear progress. Here’s what we argue:
Lots of countries are eager for clean firm power to run mines, industry, and data centers. The World Bank dropped its nuclear banopening the door to extra support for new aspirants. And major powers like Russia, China, and the United States are aggressively competing for nuclear exports. Africa is responding.
-
Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda and Senegal have all joined the global pledge to triple nuclear capacity by 2050.
-
Guinea, Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso have recently signed civil nuclear agreements with foreign developers.
-
Ghana, Kenya, Uganda, and Ethiopia have all announced ambitious near term nuclear targets.
-
Our “nuclear readiness” scoring (based on specific steps rather than just announcements) finds that Egypt and South Africa are ready now while six countries (Algeria, Ghana, Kenya, Morocco, Tunisia, and Uganda) could be ready by about 2030. Another 13 countries could be ready before 2050 if they take additional steps.
So Africa’s interest in nuclear power is real.
We should separate genuine progress from outlandish announcements. Governments and nuclear advocates do themselves no favor when they make absurd claims or set wholly unrealistic goals.
Hamna and I point to three types of hoopla we think is a problem for both countries and the industry.
Everyone knows not to put all your eggs in one basket. In electricity, the general rule for risk management and sound planning is that no one power plant should be more than 10% of national capacity. That prevents vulnerability to the power system if it goes down or possibly bankrupting the country from one bad project. Yet Niger announced in September 2025 plans to build 2,000 MW of nuclear power, or 4x the current gridwith Russia.
Even if you dismiss the Sahelian junta as Russian propaganda, other more sober countries are making similar mistakes. Kenya announced a first nuclear development of 2,000 MW with plans to reach 6,000 MW against a current installed capacity of only about 3,400 MW. Uganda is publicly targeting at least 1,000 MW of nuclear by 2031, which would nearly double current capacity.
Ambition is good, but you can overdo it. If you’re trying to convince a skeptical marketplace — and or your own public — that you’re serious, going too big is no way to do it.
Nuclear is far more complex than other energy sources, so preparing to build, regulate, and manage nuclear power plants takes decades. Burkina Faso has almost none of the preparatory agencies in place yet claims to be on the cusp of construction to build the country’s first plant (again with Russia — anyone see a pattern??). Guinea, Togo, and Burundi have also made public claims of imminent nuclear plans.
Rwanda is among the most serious and capable governments. Yet they have floated a goal of 1,000 MW by 2031even though the country is still in exploratory stages and has not signed a construction agreement or initiated vendor selection.
Ghana, which is much closer to ready than any of its neighborshas announced aggressive timelines too. Officials sometimes promise an operational plant by the early 2030s when late 2030s is more likely.
Nuclear power is attractive because of scale, reliability, a small footprint, and low emissions. These attributes suit industry and mature utilities that need large-scale long-term energy sources. African countries need this kind of power for mining, industry, data centers, and rapidly growing cities.
But building your first nuclear power plant is not cheap or fast. So it’s never going to be a speedy solution for first-time access. If you want to get basic lighting to everyone in a country (say by 2030), building a nuclear power plant is just dumb.
This doesn’t stop advocates and analysts from trying to justify nuclear as a ready solution to Africa’s electricity access gap. For instance, officials at the 2025 Nuclear Energy Innovation Summit in Kigali repeatedly invoked 600 million people without access as a reason to support nuclear power. I hear this mistake all the time.
Fortunately, the 2026 nuclear summit highlights industrialization and energy security rather than basic access. Yay!
For those of us open to nuclear power and wanting to support Africa’s nuclear ambitions, we have to reject hoopla and illogical justifications. Countries need to grow and diversify their power systems. They need scaleable firm clean power for jobs and economic growth. They need energy for more mining, minerals processing, and industrialization. Nuclear power could help. Silly statements and fantasy goals do not.
