BY Raymond Jumah

As Kenya prepares to embark on its ambitious nuclear power project, with an investment of KES 500 billion for a facility in Uyombo, Kilifi County, we must critically examine the implications of this decision. It is essential to ask: is this the right path for our nation, especially when we have yet to fully develop our renewable energy sector, which currently provides 90% of our electricity?

Investing in nuclear power at this juncture distracts from the pressing need to further enhance our renewable energy infrastructure. Given our abundant natural resources—sun, wind, and geothermal—why allocate substantial funds to a sector that demands advanced technology and stringent regulation, especially when we could be harnessing clean, sustainable energy? The focus should be on resolving existing energy disparities and advancing renewable projects that can deliver power more reliably and at a lower risk to our environment and people.

Furthermore, the shadow of corruption looms large over this initiative. The history of embezzlement in Kenyan health, education, and security sectors raises significant concerns about the management of funds in a project of such magnitude. With millions of dollars at stake, is there a guarantee that these resources will be allocated where they are most needed, rather than being siphoned off in dubious contracts or mismanaged budgets? The trust of the Kenyan people in their government must not be breached again.

Moreover, the cost of this project will plunge Kenya into significant debt. The money spent on nuclear power could be redirected towards transformative sectors such as education, where we could afford to provide free education from early childhood all the way through university. Investing in our youth is essential for long-term growth and sustainability.

The proposed site for the nuclear plant—Uyombo—is not just a location; it is a vibrant coastal town and a UNESCO World Heritage site, pivotal to local livelihoods reliant on tourism. The threat posed by the construction and potential operation of a nuclear power station looms over the local ecosystem, threatening marine life, including vital turtle nesting sites. Would it not be more prudent to preserve our natural treasures and invest in sustainable tourism instead?

Disaster preparedness and response capabilities in Kenya remain inadequate. The specter of a disaster, similar to Japan’s Fukushima incident, highlights our lack of readiness to handle emergencies on the scale that nuclear energy demands. The inherent risks of a nuclear reactor in a country with inconsistent infrastructure and a reactive approach to disaster management are unparalleled. In the unlikely—yet plausible—event of an earthquake or technical failure, the costs to human life and the environment could be catastrophic.

Additionally, claims of creating 7,000 local jobs through this project are unrealistic. A review of past projects shows that skilled positions are often filled with imported talent, and we risk repeating this pattern. The reality is many locals will not possess the qualifications needed to work at a nuclear facility, dampening the promised economic benefits.

In light of these issues, it is crucial that we reconsider our commitment to nuclear energy. Instead of investing in a sector fraught with risks, we must redirect our efforts towards developing renewable energy sources and prioritizing projects that uplift our communities, protect our environment, and secure a sustainable future. Kenya’s energy strategy should reflect our values and our potential, not echo the missteps of past governance. Our nation’s future depends on making informed, conscientious choices that serve the people of Kenya.