Kenya has edged closer to getting approval for the planned 1,000-megawatt nuclear power plant after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) review concluded that the country has put in place a “comprehensive regulatory framework” for nuclear and radiation safety.
This is a milestone officials say clears a key hurdle toward the project’s realization. According to Kenya’s Nuclear Power and Energy Agency (NuPEA), the target is connecting nuclear power to the national grid by 2034.
The IAEA’s advisory mission report released on October 29 praised Kenya’s advances on regulation and radiation protection. Supporters argue this strengthens Kenya’s hand to pursue nuclear technology responsibly and to attract the finance needed for construction, operation and oversight.
The IAEA’s endorsement of regulatory progress is a procedural action, not an approval. The government will need to demonstrate that projected climate and energy benefits outweigh financial, social and ecological costs, not just in models, but in detailed, independently verifiable studies and binding mitigation plans.
The 2023 U.N. climate summit in Dubai (COP28), called for an acceleration in the development of nuclear power as a low-carbon electricity source. But some experts question the need for Kenya to turn to nuclear energy given that Kenya a renewable energy leader in Africa.
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), Kenya is on track to achieve universal electricity access by 2030 with an energy mix already made up of 90% low-emissions technologies such as geothermal, hydropower, wind and solar.
However, according to NuPEA, the country’s development ambitions could significantly increase its electricity needs, rendering the current power production insufficient, hence the decision to explore nuclear energy.
For proponents, nuclear energy promises reliable baseload power that they argue renewables cannot always supply. Kenya’s planners point to rising demand, the limit of hydropower during droughts, and the imperative to decarbonize while sustaining development.
The government’s Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) for the nuclear programme frames nuclear as part of a broader strategy to meet energy needs sustainably while managing environmental impacts through planning and safeguards.
Nuclear power brings heavy up-front capital costs. Government projections place the price tag in the range of KES 500 billion, a figure that has led to question over its affordability and opportunity cost, especially for a nation still expanding basic infrastructure and renewable capacity.
Critics argue that money spent on reactors could instead accelerate distribution, grid upgrades and energy access programs more quickly and with lower financial risk.
Beyond money, nuclear projects carry long-term fiscal and technical obligations including waste management, decommissioning funds, and the need for a domestic workforce trained to ensure safety standard.
While the IAEA review noted Kenya’s progress on regulation, it also implicitly underscores that robust, independent oversight must be sustained over decades.
Kenya’s SESA documents and safety planning set out measures for environmental management, impact monitoring and community engagement, and mandate analyses of alternatives and cumulative impacts.
But independent analysts and NGOs urge deeper, independent baseline studies, especially of hydrology, fish migration and groundwater flows, and more transparent, inclusive consultation with communities whose livelihoods stand to be affected for generations.
Environmental groups also argue that the project can have disproportionate consequences for densely populated shorelines and biodiversity hotspots. Some critics go further, arguing that the political and financial risks of nuclear investments could outlast any single administration and saddle citizens with liabilities if projects overrun or conditional financing changes.
Initial consultations about the project location centered on Uyombo, a fishing village in Kilifi County. The decision sparked significant opposition from both local residents and environmental experts.
On June 27 this year, the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum announced that it was considering building the plant in Luanda Kotieno, Bondo, Siaya county.
NuPEA however says no final decision has been made about the project site. But according to SESA report, there are three potential sites: Uyombo; Luanda Kotieno; and unspecified location on the shores of Lake Turkana.
