Participants noted that as of 2022, 600 million people, or 43% of the African population, lack access to electricity, most of them in sub-Saharan Africa. Of the 55 African Union (AU) Member States, more than 20 currently do not have radiotherapy centres and over 70% of the African population does not have access to radiotherapy for cancer treatment. In Africa 280 million people face undernutrition. Currently Africa is a minor carbon contributor, responsible for less than 5% of global emissions from various sources. Yet, its fossil fuel dependency is growing rapidly, in parallel with its energy need. On its current fossil-fuel-dependent growth trajectory, Africa will become the region responsible for the most significant carbon emissions from fossil fuel use and will likely overtake the USA by 2050 and India’s emissions by 2055.[6]
Nuclear science and technology contributes to nine of the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), through power applications to increase access to reliable electricity and through non-power applications in the health, food and agriculture, the environment, water and industry sectors. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) provides support to its 178 Member States in these areas including through research, development, capacity building and knowledge transfer. However, more needs to be done to maximise the benefits of peaceful uses for people and the environment. The question is no longer one of what to do but rather how to upscale nuclear technology to bridge the development gap and meet climate change targets by 2050.
The implementation of non-power nuclear science and technology applications for health care, food safety, water management, and industrial development can pave the way for nuclear power. Countries with robust infrastructure for these applications can more easily transition to nuclear power programmes. Advocacy and partnerships for nuclear power should include the full range of peaceful nuclear technologies, covering both power and non-power applications.
The negative perception of nuclear and strategies to mitigate it
Nuclear science and technology continue to suffer from several image problems that hinder the expansion of peaceful uses. For example, nuclear technology is often conflated with nuclear weapons technology; peaceful uses are not mainstreamed into development frameworks; nuclear power for electricity generation is considered to be too costly and unsafe despite it being historically-proven one of the safest source of energy[7] taking into account, among other issues, the health issues and work related accidents caused by other sources of energy.
There was general agreement among the workshop participants that the nuclear narrative has to change, and that there is a need to significantly scale up advocacy and engagement activities to counter the anti-nuclear rhetoric and promote the benefits of peaceful uses. The workshop participants agreed that the benefits of peaceful uses should be mainstreamed through the education curriculum from primary school level to PhD level. A new nuclear narrative should recognise the extensive work of the IAEA, regulators and the nuclear industry to ensure that nuclear technologies are applied safely and securely and under safeguards.
Used fuel and radioactive waste (hereafter collectively referred to as “radioactive waste”) is frequently cited by the public and environmentalists as a decisive argument against nuclear power. However, an expert noted that radioactive waste management is a proven process with established methods for its handling and storage. The nuclear industry and other stakeholders should engage with civil society and the public to communicate how radioactive waste is managed, and the message of its safety should be integrated into the broader nuclear narrative. It would be important for a country wishing to develop a nuclear power programme to adopt a radioactive waste management strategy concurrently. In addition, it should be noted that some A/SMRs will be using radioactive waste as fuel, which would close the fuel cycle for those reactors.
The need to contribute comprehensively to the energy transition discussion was highlighted, emphasizing the importance of discipline and pragmatism in the environmental conversation. It is crucial to pragmatically assess the continent’s energy needs and available resources. The point was made that reengineering and rethinking of the issue are required, with a focus on engaging beyond traditional decision-makers.
Participants agreed that more platforms are needed to engage policymakers, particularly those not traditionally involved in discussions on peaceful uses, such as those in health, food and agriculture, environment, finance, regulatory, legal, and other government sectors. Multistakeholder dialogues between policy makers, philanthropic foundations, multilateral international financial institutions (IFIs), commercial banks, industry, and climate and development communities would facilitate partnerships and increase financing in the nuclear power sector.
The promise of small modular reactors
There was broad agreement that addressing energy poverty in Africa cannot be accomplished using only renewable sources of energy like wind, solar and hydropower. Reliable and cost-effective baseload power that is firmly aligned with climate and sustainable development objectives is required, which nuclear energy provides.
However, most countries in Africa do not have electricity grids robust enough to accommodate a large (typically more than 1000 MWe) nuclear power plant, neither do they have the requisite human and financial resources to construct and run such a power plant. In comparison A/SMRs will have a smaller footprint[8], albeit with a much smaller power output and be quicker to build. Most A/SMRs are being developed with a modular approach. These reactors will be primarily fabricated in controlled factory settings and then transported to the installation site for final assembly. This approach aims to reduce construction time, improve quality control, and potentially lower costs compared to traditional on-site construction methods for large nuclear power plants. A/SMRs will also have enhanced safety and security features. Based on these characteristics, the potential of A/SMRs is that they can be located close to industrial activities, desalination projects, or cities, without the negative impacts on land-use (including loss of agricultural land) or the need to construct costly long-distance electricity transmission lines. The ability to cluster industrial activities around smaller nuclear power plant sites, for example in so-called “hydrogen hubs” makes A/SMRs very attractive to deploy on former coal-fired power plant sites, where parts of the existing infrastructure can be used.[9]
An expert argued that the true potential of nuclear energy lies not in its role in centralised electricity generation (i.e., nuclear forming part of a national energy mix as in the case of the Koeberg NPP in South Africa), but in providing decentralised low-carbon power and heat for energy-intensive industrial processes (such as for the production of hydrogen, ammonia and fertilisers, cement or steel) or for seawater desalination projects. Nuclear technologies should be firmly embedded within wider low-carbon energy transformation and industrial development strategies. There are currently over 80 A/SMR designs under development in around 20 countries, most based on light-water reactor technology, is long proven.[10]
One participant noted an internal assessment that likely fewer than 10 A/SMRs will be running by 2030. This is due to several factors, such as the obtention of funds to develop the technology and the regulatory process to license the technology. Regardless of how many designs are in operation by 2030, they will have to demonstrate that this technology is licensable, operable, and effective for developing countries to pursue A/SMRs.
[6] For more information see: lize le Roux and Jakkie Cilliers (2024) Climate. Published online at futures.issafrica.org. Retrieved from https://futures.issafrica.org/thematic/14-climate-change/[Online Resource] Updated 26 May 2024.
[7] Hannah Ritchie (2020) – “What are the safest and cleanest sources of energy?” Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: ‘https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy’ [Online Resource]. In 70 years of operation, the nuclear sector suffered two off-site damage, with one causing no direct casualties and damage to the environment that has been restored. For information on those accident, see the UN Scientific Committee on the Effect of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) reports relating to the Chernobyl and the Fukushima accidents.
[8] An expert provided the following information: A micro reactor could require a footprint as small as 400 m2 and a SMR up to 40 acres [~16 hectares], compared to 600 plus acres [~ 240 hectares] required for a traditional large nuclear power plant.
[9] 8 Things to Know About Converting Coal Plants to Nuclear Power, US Department of Energy, March 5, 2024: (available here).
[10] IAEA Advances in Small Modular Reactor Technology Developments, 2022 Edition: https://aris.iaea.org/Publications/SMR_booklet_2022.pdf