Following an October 6 national referendum on the construction of a nuclear power plant in Kazakhstan, an overwhelming majority of voters, totaling 5,561,937 people or 71.12 percent of participating voters, voted to authorize the plant’s construction, the Central Election Commission (CEC) said on October 7.
Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev announced in late June 2024 that a referendum on the construction of nuclear power plants (NPPs) in Kazakhstan would be held in the fall. Nuclear power is highly sensitive in Kazakh society, one legacy of hosting the former USSR’s nuclear test sites and facilities. Thousands of people in Kazakhstan experienced birth defects and cancer linked to nuclear testing.
A total of 12,284,487 Kazakh citizens were eligible to participate in the vote. Of this, 7,820,204 citizens cast their ballots, representing a 63.66 percent voter turnout. Four international organizations, including the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Organization of Turkic States (OTS), and the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA), who observed the referendum, told a press briefing on October 7 that the referendum was transparent and was held in accordance with the national laws and internationally accepted electoral standards.
Sama Bilbao y León, Director general of the World Nuclear Association, welcomed the news of the positive referendum result in Kazakhstan, noting on X that the WNA looks forward “to supporting the Kazakhstan nuclear program and collaborating with the global nuclear industry to provide reliable and clean energy.”
The Kazakh authorities hope that the development of the country’s nuclear energy sector will solve Kazakhstan’s electricity shortage and provide uninterrupted electricity, light, and heat for all of Kazakhstan’s residents.
“Kazakhstan’s decision to hold a national referendum on constructing a nuclear power plant (NPP) is a significant step, driven by the country’s urgent need to address its severe energy shortages and frequent blackouts,” Tatiana Mitrova, a research fellow at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, told NE Global on October 9, adding that the push for additional generating capacity has become critical, and this urgency was a key message from the government leading up to the referendum. She noted the high level of public support indicates that despite the country’s historical skepticism toward nuclear energy, concerns over energy security have taken precedence.
Francesco Sassi, research fellow in energy geopolitics and markets at R.I.E.-Ricerche Industriali ed Energetiche in Bologna, Italy, told NE Global on October 10 the significance of the referendum is manifold. “You have a very good turnout, which on one hand reflects the importance of the political process legitimizing the adoption of nuclear power in the country’s energy mix, and that, on the other, helps Tokayev’s rule to strengthen on the back of energy strategy. However, nuclear power is just a long-term prospect for Kazakhstan,” he said.
Mitrova stressed that it’s essential to recognize that building an NPP is a long-term endeavor. “Even under the most favorable conditions, Kazakhstan cannot expect new nuclear capacity to be operational until at least 2030. On average, the construction of nuclear power plants worldwide takes about 7 to 10 years, with some projects extending well beyond that timeframe depending on regulatory and technical challenges,” Mitrova said.
The research fellow at Columbia University’s Center argued that in the immediate term, the decision to build an NPP does not address the current energy security issues and instead raises new challenges regarding the selection of a construction partner.
Choosing a construction partner poses diplomatic challenges
Kazakhstan has been an important source of uranium for more than 50 years and became the world’s largest uranium producer in 2009. Russian state nuclear firm Rosatom still controls a large share of Kazakhstan’s uranium reserves.
“Kazakhstan is currently evaluating bids from four countries: China, France, Russia, and South Korea,” Mitrova said. “Any decision will inevitably affect diplomatic relations with those not selected, and forming a consortium could be problematic due to the incompatibility of equipment from different countries. Choosing Rosatom, for example, could expose Kazakhstan to significant sanctions risks and increase its dependency on Russia,” she added.
For his part, Sassi also argued that from now on geopolitics, instead of the domestic scenario, will be an important factor guiding the adoption, or not, of nuclear power. He noted that the choice of a construction partner would determine how relationships between great powers and Kazakhstan will evolve through the next years.
Kazakhstan does not plan to limit itself to one nuclear power plant, Energy Minister Almassadam Satkaliyev has announced earlier. He noted that it is necessary to prepare at least three sites – in the north, south and west – for the construction of NPPs in the country in order to ensure a reliable and expandable energy supply in the future.
“In terms of large and small capacity stations, the Balkhash site is worthy of mention. Additionally, there is the Kurchatov site, as well as the site where a medium-capacity plant previously operated in western Kazakhstan. In order to guarantee the reliability of energy supply and facilitate future growth, it is essential to consider at least three potential locations for the construction of nuclear power plants,” Satkaliev was quoted as saying.
Focus on renewable energy could be a better strategy
Mitrova argued that from a decarbonization perspective, a strategy focused on the rapid development of renewable energy sources like solar and wind, combined with energy storage solutions and grid integration, might offer a faster and less risky path to enhancing Kazakhstan’s energy security while reducing emissions. “Renewables could deliver quicker results and help diversify the country’s energy mix without the geopolitical complications associated with nuclear power, she explained, adding, “This version addresses the timeline of nuclear power plant construction, the geopolitical implications of choosing a construction partner, and the potential benefits of prioritizing renewable energy sources.”
