Skip to main content
SA Policy Space

Nuclear New Build Programme — 5,200 MW by 2039

EnergyProposedLong TermAI draft, partly checkedRaised 4× in committeeEnergy

Theme: Nuclear energy

First raisedJul 2024Last discussedNov 2024No committee discussion in 12+ months4 meetings on the record ↓
Generate BriefCompareFeasibility Matrix

Reform at a glance

What changes
Nuclear New Build Programme — 5,200 MW by 2039
Responsible actor (recorded)
Department of Mineral Resources and Energy / Eskom / National Treasury / NNR
Recorded status
Proposed — editorial assessment.
Milestone described by this status
Status scope has not yet been independently documented; it may cover only part of this reform.
Next documented milestone
Next milestone not yet documented
Compare shortlist (0/3)
Back to ideas
On this page

Description

AI draft, partly checkedThis idea's text was drafted with an AI model in March 2026. Some of its claims have been checked against sources and corrected; the rest has not. Treat its figures as unverified unless a linked source confirms them. How idea text is checked

South Africa's Integrated Resource Plan (IRP 2025), announced in October 2025, calls for 5,200 MW of new nuclear generation by 2039, up from the 2,500 MW in IRP 2019, following two decades of contested proposals (the Zuma-era R1 trillion nuclear deal collapsed in 2017 after court rulings and public outcry). The current programme, led by the Department of Electricity and Energy in consultation with the National Nuclear Energy Executive Coordination Committee (NNEECC), envisages a competitive procurement process for small modular reactors (SMRs) or conventional light-water reactors at sites including Thyspunt (Eastern Cape) and Duynefontein (Western Cape). Financing is not settled: in May 2026 Eskom reported early talks with the World Bank and other funders on paying for the nuclear expansion. The NNR capacity constraints for new-build oversight are the regulatory bottleneck.

Assessment

Growth Impact3/5
Feasibility2/5

Responsible: Department of Mineral Resources and Energy / Eskom / National Treasury / NNR

Feasibility Assessment

Low-medium: IRP target set but financing, procurement, and timeline unresolved. SMR technology not yet commercially proven at scale. Political economy includes strong pro- and anti-nuclear constituencies.

Drafted with an AI model in March 2026; not yet checked against sources.

Where the numbers stand

All indicators →
  • Eskom Energy Availability Factor72%2025

    +7 pp from 65% in 2020. Eskom Integrated Reports (Eskom IR)

  • Load Shedding (Electricity Shed)0 GWh2025

    −1798 GWh from 1798 GWh in 2020. CSIR / Eskom (CSIR Energy)

Next official read on this: Manufacturing: Utilisation of production capacity by large enterprises, August 2026 — due 5 November 2026 (Stats SA schedule).

Series tagged to this idea’s binding constraint. The period beside each value is the latest observation this site holds, which can lag the official release: the series are rebuilt offline from the sources named, not read live.

Stakeholder Landscape

Who backs this reform, who needs convincing, and which interests or red lines shape political feasibility.

Backers

16

2 stakeholders

Negotiation weight

8

1 conditional actor

Opposition weight

9

1 opposing actor

Coalition Read

AI-drafted stances · 0 reviewed

61/100Mapped support: mixed

Anchor: COSATU. Highest-leverage swing actor: Business Unity South Africa (BUSA). Most serious blocker: National Treasury.

Political Tractability

—Needs reviewed signals

No reviewed signals · 0% of mapped influence has been reviewed.

Backers2 stakeholders
COSATUCoalition anchorInfluence 9/10

COSATU supports nuclear new build as it creates unionisable, well-paid energy jobs unlike IPP contract work.

Interest: Worker protections under the Labour Relations Act and Basic Conditions of Employment Act; collective bargaining rights; equitable wage growth; just tr…

Concern: Labour market flexibility reforms that erode LRA and BCEA protections; Eskom unbundling without adequate just transition planning for NUM members; pri…

Engagement path: Meaningful social dialogue through NEDLAC before structural reforms are finalised; just transition funding ring-fenced in MTEF; skills retraining and…

National Union of Mineworkers (NUM)Operational backerInfluence 7/10

NUM supports new nuclear build as it creates long-term high-quality energy sector employment comparable to coal generation.

Interest: Mining employment security and worker safety; just transition pace that protects coal-dependent community livelihoods; collective bargaining rights in…

Concern: Accelerated coal phase-out without adequate income support, skills retraining, and community economic diversification; renewable energy job quality —…

Engagement path: Just transition fund with dedicated skills retraining and income support; coal community economic diversification plans with government commitments an…

Negotiation Priorities1 stakeholder
Business Unity South Africa (BUSA)Critical swing actorInfluence 8/10

Both reviewers concur: the brief records no anti-nuclear position; its cost-certainty and regulatory-certainty interests plus the cost of a state guarantee and unproven SMRs support conditions, not opposition.

Interest: Cross-sector structural reform across energy security, logistics efficiency, regulatory certainty, labour market flexibility, and digital infrastructu…

Concern: Slow implementation pace relative to policy announcements; inconsistency between reform rhetoric and regulatory decisions (e.g. NERSA tariff approvals…

Engagement path: Already actively engaged. Seeks implementation accountability mechanisms with published milestones, predictable regulatory timelines, and NEDLAC outco…

Opposition to Manage1 stakeholder
National TreasuryHigh-risk blockerInfluence 9/10

Treasury opposes new nuclear build due to massive upfront capital costs and long-term contingent liabilities given Eskom's fiscal history.

Interest: Fiscal consolidation with public debt stabilising below 75% of GDP; structural reforms that improve revenue without expanding contingent liabilities;…

Concern: Unfunded mandates in energy transition (JETP co-financing); Eskom's R400bn+ debt and how restructuring socialises costs; reform proposals that create…

Engagement path: Reforms must be fiscally neutral or revenue-positive over the MTEF window; SOE restructuring must demonstrably reduce contingent liabilities; credible…

Watchlist1 stakeholder
EskomHigh-salience observerInfluence 8/10

Eskom is neutral on new nuclear build, recognising baseload value but focused on managing the current fleet and unbundling.

Interest: Managing R400bn+ debt restructuring with government support; maintaining grid stability during the unbundling transition; preserving technical and ins…

Concern: Unbundling of the distribution arm (EDI) could fragment operational coherence and create regulatory gaps; transmission entity capitalisation requires…

Engagement path: Credible debt restructuring plan with government guarantees; adequate transition period for unbundling with clear milestones; grid investment ring-fen…

Evidence & Research

Research corpus →

Links proposed by lexical matching and screened by a calibrated research judge. Follow the paper for the full argument and its caveats.

Policy documents

No linked official-document evidence yet. Coverage is incomplete.

Get the Monday briefing by email

— A short weekly digest of what moved in SA policy.

Status History

tracked since Mar 2026
  1. Recorded as Proposed when status tracking began — held since at least Mar 2026.
    Mar 2026

Data as of 2026-10-18 · latest PMG meeting 2026-10-09