A GNA feature by Daniel Adu Darko
Accra, May 30, GNA – Ghana is at a decisive energy crossroads. Electricity demand is rising fast, driven by industrial expansion, urban growth and rural electrification. Yet the country’s current power mix is showing cracks.
Hydropower is at the mercy of erratic rainfall. Thermal plants depend heavily on imported fuel, exposing the economy to volatile global prices and draining foreign exchange.
At a recent virtual workshop for energy journalists, Dr Stephen Yamoah, Executive Director of Nuclear Power Ghana (NPG), said Ghana needed a stable, always-available source of electricity, and that nuclear power was firmly on the table.
This is not just about keeping the lights on. It is about economic stability, industrial competitiveness and protecting the cedi.
Why nuclear, and why now?
Unlike solar and wind, which depend on weather conditions, nuclear energy provides what experts call “baseload power”. In plain terms, it means electricity that is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, without interruption.
Dr Yamoah explained that nuclear plants operate at over 90 per cent capacity. That means they produce power almost all the time, unlike other sources that fluctuate.
For Ghana, this consistency matters.
The country’s energy system is already under pressure. Hydropower from the Akosombo and Bui dams drops during droughts. Thermal plants, which currently dominate, rely on imported gas and oil. When fuel prices rise globally, Ghana pays the price locally.
The result is a fragile system where electricity supply and cost are not always predictable.
Nuclear power offers a different equation. It uses uranium, a fuel that is highly energy-dense. A small amount can produce large amounts of electricity over long periods, with refuelling needed only every 18 to 24 months. This drastically reduces the frequency of fuel imports and eases pressure on foreign exchange reserves.
In simple terms: fewer fuel shipments, more stable electricity prices.
The big reactor option: power at scale, risk at scale
Traditional nuclear plants, known as Large Nuclear Reactors, are the heavyweights of global power generation. A single unit can produce between 700 and 1,600 megawatts of electricity, enough to power millions of homes.
They are efficient, reliable and designed to last over 60 years.
But for Ghana, scale comes with complications.
The country’s total installed power capacity is about 5.7 gigawatts, and dependable capacity is often lower. If Ghana installs a single large reactor of about 1,200 megawatts, it would account for roughly 12 to 15 per cent of the entire grid.
That is a technical red flag.
Power systems require balance. If one large unit suddenly shuts down, even briefly, it can destabilise the entire grid, leading to widespread outages or system collapse.
In practical terms, Ghana would need additional backup capacity to cushion any such disruption.
Then there is the cost.
Building a large nuclear plant can cost between six and 10 billion dollars. Construction typically takes seven to 10 years. That timeline increases financing costs and exposes the project to delays.
It is a long-term investment with strong returns, but it demands deep financial commitment, complex international partnerships and a robust regulatory system.
The SMR alternative: smaller, faster, more flexible
Small Modular Reactors, or SMRs, present a different model.
They generate up to 300 megawatts per unit, about a quarter of the size of a large reactor. But their real advantage lies in flexibility.
Instead of building one massive plant, SMRs are manufactured in parts or modules and assembled on-site. This allows Ghana to add power gradually, in line with demand and available funding.
Construction timelines are also shorter, typically three to five years.
For a country like Ghana, this could be a game-changer.
Dr Yamoah emphasised that SMRs were better suited to smaller or developing power grids. Their size reduces the risk of destabilising the system, and they can be deployed in phases rather than all at once.
They also come with advanced safety systems. Many SMR designs rely on natural processes such as gravity and convection to cool the reactor, meaning they can shut down safely without human intervention or external power.
In simple terms, they are designed to fail safely.
Beyond electricity: a multi-sector impact
Nuclear energy is not just about power generation.
SMRs, in particular, can support multiple sectors simultaneously. They can provide heat for industrial processes such as aluminium production and food processing. They can power desalination plants to address freshwater shortages along the coast. They can even support hydrogen production, positioning Ghana for future clean energy markets.
This makes nuclear energy a strategic economic tool, not just an electricity source.
The trade-offs policymakers must confront
Both large reactors and SMRs come with advantages and challenges.
Large reactors deliver cheaper electricity over time due to their scale, but require massive upfront investment and strong grid infrastructure.
SMRs are cheaper to start, quicker to build and more adaptable, but the technology is still evolving globally. There are fewer operational examples, and regulatory frameworks are still being developed.
There are also environmental and public concerns to address. While nuclear energy produces very low greenhouse gas emissions, it raises questions about radioactive waste management, water use and safety perceptions.
These issues require transparency, strong institutions and sustained public engagement.
The bottom line: delay carries its own cost
Ghana’s electricity demand is projected to reach between eight and 10 gigawatts by 2030. Current baseload options are nearing their limits.
The real risk is not choosing the wrong nuclear option. The bigger risk is indecision.
Every year of delay deepens reliance on expensive fuel imports, increases pressure on the cedi and slows industrial growth.
Dr Yamoah’s message to journalists, and by extension policymakers, was clear: nuclear power was no longer a theoretical idea. It was a strategic necessity that demanded urgent, informed decision-making.
The question is no longer whether Ghana should go nuclear.
It is how, and how fast.
GNA
DANIEL ADU DARKO
http://[email protected]
Edited by Samuel Osei-Frempong