Ghana’s bold steps toward nuclear energy have come under serious scrutiny, following a strong press statement issued by the Centre for Climate Change and Food Security (CCCFS), warning that the country’s nuclear ambitions could spell disaster economically, environmentally, and strategically.
In March 2025, the Government of Ghana signed framework agreements with companies from the United States and China to establish its first nuclear power plants. This decision follows a series of policy milestones, including a 2022 move under former President Akufo-Addo to include nuclear energy in Ghana’s national energy strategy.
But in a passionate and data-rich critique released on July 22, CCCFS Deputy Director, Dr. Alexander Nti Kani, challenged the rationale behind the nuclear project, urging a total rethink.
“This is not a rejection of energy development,” Dr. Kani wrote. “It is a redirection toward sustainable, decentralized, and truly safe energy pathways. Nuclear may sound powerful, but it’s the wrong power for Ghana at the moment.”
Financial Black Hole
One of CCCFS’s strongest objections is economic. Building a single 1,000 MW nuclear plant, according to the organization, could cost between US$6 billion and US$9 billion — dwarfing Ghana’s annual infrastructure budget and setting the country up for long-term debt.
In stark contrast, renewable alternatives like solar or wind come with lower construction and operating costs. A 1,000 MW solar plant, for instance, costs between US$700 million to US$1.1 billion, while nuclear’s levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) is over double that of renewables.
Risk Without Readiness
The statement also raised the alarm on safety and security. Ghana, the group argued, lacks the emergency infrastructure, trained personnel, and regulatory depth to manage nuclear risks.
The dangers include radioactive waste, terrorist threats, and accidents. Ghana’s record in managing less hazardous national emergencies — like illegal mining and flood response — casts doubt on its capacity to safeguard nuclear installations.
Citing global examples, CCCFS noted the 1986 Chernobyl disaster and recent military tensions around Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia plant as cautionary tales.
“If Germany — Europe’s most advanced economy — is abandoning nuclear energy, why is Ghana embracing it?” the statement asked.
Questionable Partners
The selection of key players in the nuclear deal also drew criticism. Among them is NuScale Power, a U.S. company whose flagship nuclear project in Utah was cancelled due to ballooning costs. Another is Deep Geo Ghana Limited — a local company with no proven expertise in nuclear waste management.
“This raises profound concerns about transparency, due diligence, and procurement ethics,” CCCFS stated.
Renewable is the Way
The group instead advocated for massive investment in solar, wind, hydro, and sustainable biomass — all of which are abundant in Ghana. Beyond environmental and cost advantages, such projects promise job creation, energy independence, and rural electrification.
They called on Parliament, civil society, and the media to demand a transparent review and halt current nuclear plans.
Final Word
Ghana’s energy future is at a crossroads. The CCCFS insists that while power sufficiency is a national goal, nuclear energy is not the path forward.
“Choosing nuclear over renewables is not visionary — it is risky and regressive,” Dr. Kani warned.
For further inquiries, contact: Dr. Alexander Nti Kani
Centre for Climate Change and Food Security (CCCFS)
+233 24 651 4051