South Africa stands at a critical crossroads. The country can either anchor its “just transition” on renewable energy, community empowerment, and sustainable growth or risk entrenching new inequalities by betting on oil, gas, and nuclear power. While government officials tout these sectors as part of the transition, growing evidence suggests they may delay, rather than deliver, a fair and credible shift toward clean energy.
The Courtroom Warning Signs
Recent court decisions have sent a clear signal: South Africa’s energy future cannot be fast-tracked through fossil-fuel shortcuts. In early 2025, the Supreme Court of Appeal nullified the environmental authorization for a 3,000-megawatt gas-fired power station in Richards Bay. The court ruled that affected communities were not properly consulted and that the project’s environmental review failed to consider cleaner alternatives.
Similar rulings have halted offshore oil exploration projects, citing poor climate impact assessments and a lack of public participation. These legal reversals reveal deep flaws in the government’s approach to its so-called transition one that risks bypassing both environmental responsibility and community consent.
The Illusion of “Transition Fuels”
Proponents of oil and gas argue that these resources can act as “bridge fuels” to stabilize the grid as renewables scale up. Yet, global research increasingly shows that gas is not a clean alternative. From extraction and transport to combustion, methane leakage and lifecycle emissions make gas far from climate-neutral. Once new infrastructure is built, it locks South Africa into decades of fossil-fuel dependency.
Meanwhile, nuclear power, often portrayed as a “clean” baseload option faces its own hurdles. Nuclear plants require immense capital, lengthy construction timelines, and complex waste-management systems. For a nation grappling with debt, energy poverty, and load-shedding, these projects risk diverting public funds away from faster, cheaper, and cleaner renewable options.
The Financial and Social Risks
A genuine just transition must prioritize affordability, social equity, and environmental sustainability. Yet oil, gas, and nuclear investments pose serious risks on all three fronts.
- Financial Fragility:
Nuclear projects, especially large reactors, carry billion-dollar price tags and decades-long payback periods. History shows how such deals can become opaque, politically manipulated, and fiscally disastrous. South Africa’s previous nuclear procurement attempts left scars of mistrust and concerns over corruption. - Social Inequality:
Centralized gas and nuclear plants often bypass local job creation. In contrast, renewable projects, solar mini-grids, wind farms, rooftop installations create decentralized employment opportunities in installation, maintenance, and manufacturing. - Environmental Injustice:
Communities already burdened by pollution from coal mining and refineries are often the same ones targeted for new gas or nuclear developments. Without genuine consultation, these communities face yet another round of “development” that sacrifices their health for national energy ambitions.
Richards Bay A Case Study in Broken Promises
The Richards Bay gas plant was marketed as a quick solution to load-shedding and economic growth. Yet local communities were excluded from meaningful participation in the planning process. Environmental groups warned that the project would worsen air quality, threaten fisheries, and undermine South Africa’s climate commitments.
The court’s ruling to halt the plant exposed the disconnect between government promises and ground realities. It proved that energy transition projects cannot succeed if they replicate the same top-down, extractive patterns that defined the coal era. A just transition must be built on social license not legal loopholes.
Why Renewables Offer a Better Path
South Africa already has some of the best solar and wind resources in the world. The technology is proven, scalable, and increasingly cost-competitive. Solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind power can be deployed faster than large-scale fossil-fuel or nuclear projects. When paired with modern battery storage, these systems can deliver reliable power and grid stability.
Moreover, renewable energy projects can be community-owned and locally financed. This model empowers municipalities, cooperatives, and small businesses ensuring that energy revenues circulate within local economies rather than flowing to large corporations or foreign investors.
Transitioning to renewables also aligns with South Africa’s international climate commitments under the Paris Agreement, while reducing long-term public debt and avoiding the stranded-asset risk associated with fossil infrastructure.
The True Meaning of a “Just” Transition
A “just” transition goes beyond technology. It demands a rethinking of who benefits, who participates, and who bears the costs of energy change. In South Africa, this means:
- Prioritizing affected workers and communities:
Coal-sector workers must be reskilled for new opportunities in renewable construction, operation, and grid services. - Ensuring community participation:
Energy projects must be developed with, not for, local communities. Public hearings should be transparent, inclusive, and genuinely influential. - Investing in distributed systems:
Decentralized renewables rooftop solar, community mini-grids, and small-scale wind can deliver both energy access and job creation. - Protecting environmental and human rights:
Transition projects must not repeat the environmental harms of the past under a “green” disguise.
Policy Recommendations
To safeguard a fair and sustainable transition, South Africa should:
- Make community consent mandatory before any major energy project approval.
- Place renewables and storage at the heart of the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP), with clear milestones and transparent financing.
- Subject gas and nuclear proposals to independent climate and financial stress tests before public money is committed.
- Enforce full transparency in procurement to prevent the corruption risks that have plagued past energy deals.
- Direct international and donor “Just Energy Transition” funds toward community-based renewable initiatives and worker reskilling programs
Also read: Africa Gas Forum 2026 Set to Illuminate Gas’s Emerging Role in the African Energy Transition
A Choice Between False Promises and Real Progress
South Africa’s energy crisis has exposed both the urgency and the opportunity of the moment. Load-shedding, unemployment, and inequality demand swift, inclusive solutions not billion-rand megaprojects that deepen dependency and debt.
Building the country’s just transition on oil, gas, and nuclear is a false promise. These sectors offer short-term political optics but long-term vulnerability. Renewables, in contrast, offer a pathway that is cleaner, quicker, and more democratic.
The nation’s future energy system must be one that uplifts communities, protects the environment, and delivers affordable power for all. That vision will only be achieved when policymakers stop confusing “transition” with “delay” and start investing where justice, not just generation capacity, truly begins.
