From Russia to Kenya and South Africa: Global Activists unite for a sustainable, Nuclear-Free Future

![]( "Photo Caption: Francesca de Gasparis (SAFCEI) Executive Director, Makoma Lekalakala (Earthlife Africa) Director, David Munene (SAFCEI Board Member, based in Kenya) and Vladimir Slivyak (Ecodefense) are in Kenya, on a solidarity visit to support communities opposing proposed new nuclear energy plans. Images supplied by SAFCEI")

In solidarity with the anti-nuclear power movement in Kenya where a proposed nuclear power station is set to be built within the next decade, eco-justice organisations from South Africa and Russia are on a visit to the Republic of Kenya to share insights and learnings, from their experiences of living with nuclear energy, in their respective countries and opposing nuclear as civil society. The Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (SAFCEI) and Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, both from South Africa – where the Minister of Energy and Electricity recently announced that the procurement of 2500MW of new nuclear power was “at an advanced stage” - and Ecodefense from Russia, and Right Livelihood Awards are meeting Kenyan civil society at the proposed site in Kilifi, to stand together in opposition of any new nuclear stations in Africa. The organisations will also meet with the Centre for Justice, Governance and Environmental Action (CJGEA) and faith leaders from the area to support their efforts.

CJGEA founder and Right Livelihood Laureate, Phyllis Omido, says “The Kenyan Constitution gives every citizen the right to a clean and healthy environment. The preservation and realization of this right is greatly anchored in the strict adherence to the procedural environmental rights which include the right to access to information, right to public participation and the right to justice in the event of violation. The failure of the Nuclear Power and Energy Agency (NuPEA) to adhere to these procedural environmental rights makes the proposed nuclear power plant not just risky to the current generations, but to the future generations and the environment.”

“Furthermore, we must remember that development activities that are preceded by human rights violations often result in grave losses. There being potential for untapped renewable energy in Kenya that is safe and harmless makes the risks associated with a nuclear power plant unnecessary. The use of excessive force by security agencies, associated with NuPEA, against the Uyombo community on 21st May 2024, is something that is tragic and clearly shows to the world how far NuPEA will go to try to silence dissent. We stand in our resolve to protect our community, our environment and our rights. We urge our government to listen to the Uyombo community and prioritize renewable energy that is safe, clean and is in harmony with our environment,” adds Omido.

SAFCEI Executive Director, Francesca de Gasparis, says “Our continent’s future depends on the choices we make today. This is why we unequivocally reject nuclear energy as it is not a viable sustainable option because of the threat it poses to people and the environment. And the fact that nuclear deals are often characterised by a lack of transparency and flawed public participation processes, only makes matters worse. Furthermore, the world is increasingly recognising the dangers and pitfalls of nuclear energy. The Global North, where nuclear technology has been utilised extensively, has begun pivoting away from this perilous energy source. Clearly, they have learned from decades of experience about the inherent risks, high costs, and long-term environmental damages associated with nuclear power.”

According to Earthlife Africa and SAFCEI, Kenyans could take lessons from South Africa’s situation with the Koeberg Nuclear Energy Power Plant, which is now reaching the official end of its life, after being operational for 40 years. However, the South African government insists that the plant’s operational lifespan can be extended by another 20 years, even though the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has identified numerous safety issues at Koeberg, many of which remain unaddressed. The national energy utility’s (Eskom) failure to comply with international safety standards since 2014 and the inadequacies exposed during emergency drills, highlight the inherent dangers of continuing nuclear operations. And the cost attached, continues to balloon.

“Africa has enough problems as it is and costs put into new nuclear are a direct loss to the needy, who deserve better economic support from governments who campaign to take care of their interests,” says de Gasparis.

Earthlife Africa’s Director and Goldman Prize recipient (2018) Makoma Lekalakala says, “Nuclear energy is not only a financial burden but also, a threat to our health, safety, and environment. Nuclear energy generates radioactive waste that remains hazardous for thousands of years, and one of the most serious concerns is that the world has yet to find a permanent solution for the disposal of this toxic, cancer-causing waste. This means we are leaving future generations to grapple with its deadly legacy. This waste can leak into our soil and water, posing a perpetual threat to our health and the environment. The catastrophic consequences of such contamination are not just theoretical, they are a lived reality in places where nuclear energy has been employed recklessly.”

The accumulation of even more toxic radioactive waste, to be stored at facilities that are ill-equipped to handle the increased volume, posing severe risks to nearby communities and the environment, is another reason these organisations are pushing back against new nuclear developments, as well as the extension of operations at Koeberg.

Right Livelihood Laureate, and co-founder of Ecodefense – an eco-justice organisation based in Russia – Vladimir Slivyak says, “It is evident that the nuclear industry, facing dwindling support and mounting opposition in their own countries, is now seeking new markets. The people of Africa must fight to avoid becoming the next victim of this dangerous and outdated technology. There are several significant reasons to move away from nuclear energy. From the potential harms that could result from the unresolved issue of radioactive waste disposal to the lack of meaningful public participation and a lack of transparency, and also that fact that globally, there is a clear shift away from this hazardous technology. Africa must not be fooled by the promises of the nuclear industry. This continent deserves an energy future that is safe, sustainable, and just.”

The organisations argue that the fight against climate change demands a just transition to renewable energy sources. And nuclear energy does not align with this goal. It perpetuates environmental harm and fails to address the urgent needs of those most vulnerable to climate change impacts. Africa deserves a future free from the dangers of nuclear energy and should instead embrace sustainable, safe, and affordable energy solutions. Together, Africans can protect the environment, safeguard communities, and build a brighter future for all. But, for this to materialise, Africa needs bold policies and massive state investment in clean energy, climate jobs, and green industrialization that benefits all South Africans.

---

Notes: Vladimir Slivyak is one of Russia’s most committed and knowledgeable environmentalists, who has been spearheading important grassroots campaigns against environmentally damaging practices for decades. He has stopped projects related to the exploitation of fossil fuels, the use of nuclear power and coal, and the shipment of radioactive waste from abroad. He received the “Alternative Nobel Prize”, the Right Livelihood Award in 2021.