Second nuclear plant for Cape Town

On August 8th, 2025, Dion George, the environment minister, upheld a 2017 environmental authorisation permitting Eskom, the state utility, to construct a 4,000-megawatt nuclear facility at Duynefontein, near Cape Town. Following a detailed review of the Environmental Impact Assessment Report and an independent evaluation, the department rejected appeals from foreign-funded environmental activist groups, cementing a key milestone in the country’s energy policy.

The move aligns with South Africa’s strategy to diversify its energy mix, heavily dependent on coal, which supplies the bulk of its power. With Koeberg, the nation’s sole nuclear plant, accounting for just 5% of electricity output, the government sees nuclear as a vital source of stable baseload power. This is especially pressing given persistent load shedding and the scheduled retirement of outdated coal stations, since nuclear energy remains the most reliable baseload power source, contrasting strongly with highly variable sources like wind and solar, which put strain on our fragile and overstretched transmission infrastructure, and were responsible for a blackout in Spain earlier this year.

The proposed Duynefontein site, adjacent to Koeberg, could capitalise on existing infrastructure, keeping down costs and expediting development.

Meddling environmental ideologues such as Greenpeace, renowned for their highly unrealistic and ignorant approaches to environmental policy (such as the time they tried to ban the fundamental element chlorine) decry nuclear power’s high costs and supposed risks. They advocate redirecting resources to renewables, arguing these could be deployed faster and with fewer ecological drawbacks, which is not strictly true – the chemical processes which create the components for “renewable” energy generation remain highly toxic and environmentally destructive.

Other critics point to the price tag (potentially billions of dollars) and question its prudence when cheaper, greener alternatives exist. The government, however, insists nuclear is non-negotiable for long-term energy security and its 2050 net-zero emissions goal.

Eskom still waits on a Nuclear Installation Site Licence from NERSA, among other approvals, before construction can start, and timelines remain vague, a common affliction for nuclear projects of this magnitude. Precedents like Britain’s Hinkley Point C, plagued by delays and budget overruns, suggest caution. South Africa’s own history of ambitious infrastructure ventures adds to the scepticism surrounding delivery dates and final costs.

Previous interference by German government-linked NGO Earthlife Africa helped scrap Jacob Zuma’s proposed nuclear project with Russia’s Rosatom, which would likely have reached completion by now.