THE confluence of sustained pressure to decarbonise energy generation, advancing nuclear power technologies and a shift in global sentiment is adding impetus to the Minister of Energy and Electricity, Kgosientsho Ramokgopa’s push to expand nuclear power in the country’s energy mix.
If policy is followed through, new nuclear builds are inevitable. The Integrated Resource Plan 2025, gazetted in October 2025, mandates that new nuclear energy must be brought online.
According to the state-approved policy framework, – a blueprint without a price tag – 5,200 MW of new nuclear capacity should come online between 2036 and 2039. Ramokgopa announced that the state’s broader Nuclear Industrialisation Plan envisions increasing this by an additional 4,800 MW over the long-term, aiming for a grand total of 10,000 MW to make domestic uranium enrichment and component manufacturing economically viable.
There is sustained pressure to decarbonise energy generation in the long-term. As the Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition, Parks Tau, noted in his post-budget address on 27 May, South African industries are facing imposed pressure to use green energy.
There is a looming threat that the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) will impose a premium on carbon-intensive exports destined for EU markets.
Tau said that the automotive industry, steel and others will be impacted if we do not produce these in low-carbon-intensive factories. Additional costs will hinder the country’s global competitiveness.
Wind and solar power generation have proliferated across the country, but Eskom favours nuclear for baseload generation. This is because nuclear energy provides highly reliable, continuous and weather-independent power. Unlike variable solar and wind, nuclear maintains a stable grid frequency and operates at high capacity.
Site location
Dr Kelvin Kemm, executive chairman of Stratek Holdings, a Pretoria-based company that designs and builds nuclear reactors and fuels for international customers, explains the reasons behind Eskom’s site selection. “If you picture South Africa as an upside-down triangle, the coal-fired power stations are located in the top right – in Mpumalanga and northern KwaZulu-Natal, near the coalfields. Power is fed into the national grid and has to be transmitted all the way to Cape Town. “It’s like generating power in Rome and sending it to London! It doesn’t make sense. So, years ago, Eskom realised it needed to generate power at the bottom of the triangle in the Western Cape, and on the sides in the Eastern Cape and on the West Coast. Hence, many years ago, sites were identified at Duynefontein where Koeberg is located, Thyspunt, between Oyster Bay and St Francis Bay in the Eastern Cape, Bantamsklip, between Pearly Beach and Kleinbaai, as well as sites at Skulpfontein and Brazil on the West Coast.”
Dr Kemm believes it is only a matter of time before all of these sites are developed. “It may only be in 30 years’ time, but I have no doubt that nuclear will be the dominant source of energy in the future,”
With a capacity of 1,940 MW, Koeberg is currently Africa’s only large-scale nuclear reactor. In 2017, the site for South Africa’s second nuclear power plant, with a capacity of 3,600 MW was finalised at Duynefontein, next to Koeberg.
The development of this site is being accelerated, with Eskom reportedly working towards environmental authorisation being granted by the national Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) by February 2027 and for any appeals to be resolved by May 2027.
A final site decision for the country’s third nuclear power plant is underway. Eskom tasked WSP Group Africa to undertake the scoping and Environmental Impact Reporting (S&EIR) process, with public consultations starting last year and running until the end of May. A hefty report, presented in March 2026, recommends the Eastern Cape’s Thyspount site for development over the Western Cape’s Bantamsklip. Various reasons are cited, including its close proximity to the deep-water port at Ngqura.
Thyspunt
Well-known for his enthusiastic support for nuclear power, Dr Kemm says most of the 250-hectare Thyspunt site will be left untouched. “If you marked the site out as a 64-block chessboard, only one block will actually be developed. Similar to Koeberg, prohibiting development around the plant increases the likelihood that it remains natural.”
Although the project could bring economic activity and energy security to the region, there is resistance from environmental groups and concerns about preserving the site’s cultural heritage.
The Kouga Municipality is taking a cautious approach, establishing an internal technical team to assess the proposal’s potential implications and formally submit its concerns to Eskom as part of the consultation process.
Kouga executive mayor, Hattingh Bornman, says, “While the importance of national energy security is acknowledged, it is essential that the long-term sustainability and capacity of local municipalities are fully considered.”
He says the municipality has serious concerns regarding the proposed development, particularly considering the rapid growth currently being experienced across the region.
“The municipality is concerned about the potential impact of such a development on critical infrastructure, including roads, water supply, housing, and electricity networks, as well as the potential environmental implications for the surrounding coastline and sensitive ecosystems,” Bornman said.
Technologies
Eskom says it has not selected which technologies will be deployed at the sites. WSP Group Africa based its investigation on an assumption that the development will include multiple units of large conventional Pressurised Water Reactors (PWRs) or Small Modular Reactors of either PWR or High Temperature Gas Reactors (HTGR), or a mixture of these.
Pressurised Water Reactors (PWRs) are currently the most common type of nuclear reactor. They use water as a coolant and moderator. PWRs are typically 1,000 MW or larger, and Eskom’s Koeberg (1,940 MW) is an example of a PWR.
Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are gaining popularity for their affordability and flexibility. These reactors typically produce less than 300 MW of electricity and are designed for factory manufacturing and modular, on-site assembly. Their shorter construction times and easy scalability simplify deployment. SMRs also address safety concerns by incorporating advanced features like passive cooling.
Although listed under the SMR category in the WSP report, Dr Kemm says Stratek’s technology – Small Pebble Bed Modular Reactors (SPBRs) should be regarded as a third category. In the report, these reactors are referred to as High Temperature Gas Reactors (HTGRs) and employ gas as a coolant. They use helium gas and easily handled fuel assemblies the size of cricket balls. These fuel balls contain grains of uranium the size of grains of sugar, coated with ceramic materials to contain all radioactive material. These, in turn, are formed into a graphite matrix the size of a cricket ball. They are designed to efficiently produce heat for about three years before requiring replacement. The reactor can be used for electricity generation or to produce 750 C steam directly to drive energy-intensive manufacturing processes.
A prime reason why helium gas is used as a coolant is that the reactors are independent of water cooling and so can be placed anywhere in South Africa, and are not constrained to be on a coastline.
Within each of these three categories, different models are available.
According to Eskom, the new plant could include 4,800 MW of PWR and 400 MW of SMRs (or SPBRs).
“Using a combination of technologies is sensible,” says Dr Kemm. “It’s like an earth-moving company having a 5-ton truck and a bakkie – you can choose your equipment based on what it’s needed for.”
Timelines and financing
Eskom is pushing for accelerated timelines. Project delays escalate costs rapidly. According to a News24 article on 25 May, Eskom wants to benchmark its new nuclear builds against Egypt’s Rosatom-backed El Dabaa nuclear project. A ministerial directive is expected in the third quarter of this year to kick-start the procurement process.
Costs and funding models have not been disclosed, although mention has been made of public-private partnerships, or a vendor-financing model as options.
Dr Kemm says, although timelines can be long and new nuclear builds are costly, they can be completed on time and on budget. “The 5,000 MW Barakah nuclear complex in the UAE is a good example of a large-scale, multi-unit plant which started in 2009 and progressed through phases until the fourth unit came online in 2024.”
Planning vs action
There is resistance to nuclear power plants in South Africa, but Dr Kemm believes the country has the expertise and Koeberg’s world-class track record as proof that it can be done. “Once the financing is finalised, there are certainly no technical hurdles in our way,” he says.
