Construction of Nuclear Power Plants in Kazakhstan: Economic, Environmental and Scientific Implications

This article reveals the main goals of international experience in nuclear power plant (NPP) construction, analyses of benefits and risks that NPP operations may have on the economy and the development of a country’s scientific potential and examines annual report data.

The article’s methodological approach examines the full range of opportunities and prospects not only in energy production but also in the development of new technologies, medicine, environmental protection, and promotion of scientific and technological progress.

The originality and value of the article analyze the economic, environmental, and social aspects of NPP construction, focusing on safety, greenhouse gas emissions, includes NPV analysis to assess the investment attractiveness, as well as institutional risks, potential advantages and comparative analysis of the RK electricity development scenarios.

The article finds out that nuclear energy contributes to increased national energy security, creation of hightech companies which are involved into the energy research, creation and providing people with working places, as well as the development of start-ups.

1. Nukusheva, A. (2022). Mezhdunarodno-pravovye aspekty regulirovaniya v oblasti atomnoy energetiki. Vestnik Instituta zakonodatel'stva i pravovoy informatsii Respubliki Kazakhstan. (Russian)

2. Ekonomicheskaya vygoda ot stroitel'stva AES v Kazakhstane. (2024). Martok-Tynysy.kz. (Russian)

3. AES: Energeticheskaya nezavisimost' i ekonomicheskoe razvitie. (2024). Lada.kz. (Russian)

4. Ministry of Ecology, Geology and Natural Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (2021). Strategy for achieving carbon neutrality of the Republic of Kazakhstan by 2060.

5. International Energy Agency. (2020). Kazakhstan energy profile.

6. KEGOC. (2020). Annual report 2020.

7. Sabine, C. L., Feely, R. A., Gruber, N., Key, R. M., Lee, K., Bullister, J. L., Wanninkhof, R., Wong, C. S., Wallace, D. W. R., Tilbrook, B., Millero, F. J., Peng, T.-H., Kozyr, A., Ono, T., & Rios, A. F. (2004). The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO₂. Science, 305(5682), 367–371. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097403

8. Thomas, C. D., Cameron, A., Green, R. E., Bakkenes, M., Beaumont, L. J., Collingham, Y. C., Erasmus, B. F. N., de Siqueira, M. F., Grainger, A., Hannah, L., Hughes, L., Huntley, B., van Jaarsveld, A. S., Midgley, G. F., Miles, L., Ortega-Huerta, M. A., Peterson, A. T., Phillips, O. L., & Williams, S. E. (2004). Extinction risk from climate change. Nature, 427(6970), 145–148. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02121

9. Rosenzweig, C., Elliott, J., Deryng, D., Ruane, A. C., Müller, C., Arneth, A., Boote, K. J., Folberth, C., Glotter, M., Khabarov, N., Neumann, K., Piontek, F., Pugh, T. A. M., Schmid, E., Stehfest, E., Yang, H., & Jones, J. W. (2014). Assessing agricultural risks of climate change in the 21st century in a global gridded crop model intercomparison. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(9), 3268–3273. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1222463110

10. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (2015). Paris Agreement.

11. International Atomic Energy Agency. (1994). Convention on nuclear safety.

12. International Atomic Energy Agency. (1963). Vienna Convention on civil liability for nuclear damage.

13. Ciais, P., Sabine, C., Bala, G., Bopp, L., Brovkin, V., Canadell, J., Chhabra, A., DeFries, R., Galloway, J., Heimann, M., Jones, C., Le Quéré, C., Myneni, R. B., Piao, S., & Thornton, P. (2013). Carbon and other biogeochemical cycles. In T. F. Stocker, D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex, & P. M. Midgley (Eds.), Climate change 2013: The physical science basis (pp. 465–570). Cambridge University Press.

14. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2020). Climate change: Atmospheric carbon dioxide.

15. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2014). Climate change 2014: Mitigation of climate change: Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.

16. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2021). Climate change 2021: The physical science basis: Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896

17. Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. W. (1972). The limits to growth. Universe Books.

18. United Nations. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future. Oxford University Press.

19. U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2021). Hydropower explained.

20. World Bank. (2017). World development indicators: Water resources.

21. World Bank. (2022). World development indicators: Energy.

22. World Energy Council. (2020). World energy resources 2020.

23. REN21. (2021). Renewables 2021: Global status report.

24. REN21. (2025). Renewables 2025: Global status report.

25. International Renewable Energy Agency. (2021). Renewable capacity statistics 2021.

26. Kaunda, C. S., Kimambo, C. Z., & Nielsen, T. K. (2011). Potential of small-scale hydropower in developing countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(6), 2021–2029.

27. Kibler, K. M., & Tullos, D. D. (2013). Cumulative biophysical effects of small and large hydropower development in river systems. Water Resources Research, 49(6), 3104–3118.

28. World Nuclear Association. (2022). Nuclear power in the United Kingdom.

29. World Nuclear Association. (2024). World nuclear performance report 2024.

30. Brook, B. W., & Bradshaw, C. J. A. (2015). Key role for nuclear energy in global biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology, 29(2), 702–712.

31. International Energy Agency. (2021). Hydropower special market report.

32. International Energy Agency. (2022). Kazakhstan 2022.

33. Liu, Z., Zhu, B., Ciais, P., Davis, S. J., Lu, C., Zhong, H., Deng, Z., & others. (2021). De-carbonization of global energy use during COVID-19 pandemic. arXiv.

34. Sharifi, M. R., et al. (2022). Optimization of hydropower energy generation. Scientific Reports.

35. Timmerberg, S., Kaltschmitt, M., & Finkbeiner, M. (2020). Hydrogen and hydrogen-derived fuels through methane decomposition of natural gas: GHG emissions and costs. Energy Conversion and Management: X, 7, 100043.

36. Shiklomanov, I. A. (1999). World water resources: Modern assessment and outlook for the 21st century. UNESCO.

37. United Nations World Water Assessment Programme. (2009). The United Nations World Water Development Report 3: Water in a changing world. UNESCO Publishing.

38. Mekonnen, M. M., & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2015). The consumptive water footprint of production: A review. Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology, 1(3), 285–297.

39. International Renewable Energy Agency. (2019). Renewable energy statistics 2019.

40. Zhou, Y., Wang, Y., Xu, Y., & Zhang, H. (2022). Large hydropower development in China: Implications for energy security and environmental sustainability. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 161, 112346.

41. De Andrade, M. R., & Da Silva, E. C. (2017). The Itaipu Dam: A case study of transboundary water governance. Water International, 42(2), 191–207.

42. International Energy Agency. (2021). Net zero by 2050: A roadmap for the global energy sector.

43. Respublika Kazakhstan. (2026). Zakon Respubliki Kazakhstan «O podderzhke ispol'zovaniya vozobnovlyaemyh istochnikov energii». (Russian)

44. Sovacool, B. K. (2008). Valuing the greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear power: A critical survey. Energy Policy, 36(8), 2940–2953.

45. Global Electricity Production by Source (World 2024). (2024).

46. Sabine, C. L., Feely, R. A., Gruber, N., Key, R. M., Lee, K., Bullister, J. L., et al. (2004). The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO₂. Science, 305(5682), 367–371.

47. Nature Energy. (2022). URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-022-00979-x (accessed: 13.07.2026).

48. Bertran, G. (1978). Mezhdunarodnoe sotrudnichestvo v yadernoy oblasti: Proshloe, nastoyashchee i perspektivy. International Atomic Energy Agency. (Russian)

49. International Atomic Energy Agency. (2006). IAEA annual report 2006.

50. International Atomic Energy Agency. (2015). The Agency's programme and budget 2015–2016.

51. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency. (2016). Costs of decommissioning nuclear power plants.

52. World Nuclear Association. (n.d.). World Nuclear Association.

53. International Atomic Energy Agency. (2018). The Agency's programme and budget 2018–2019.

54. Schneider, M., & Froggatt, A. (2019). The current status of the world nuclear industry. In The World Nuclear Industry Status Report. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-25987-7_3

55. International Atomic Energy Agency. (2019). International Atomic Energy Agency.

56. Kim, H. H. S. (2014). Generalised trust, institutional trust and political participation: A cross-national study of fourteen Southeast and Central Asian countries. Asian Journal of Social Science, 42(6), 695–721.

57. Sokolski, H. D. (Ed.). (2010). Reviewing the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College.

58. International Atomic Energy Agency. (2017). The Agency's programme and budget 2017–2018.

59. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency. (2017). Impacts of the Fukushima Daiichi accident on nuclear development policies. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264276192-en

60. Ramana, M. V., & Saikawa, E. (2011). Choosing a standard reactor: International competition and domestic politics in Chinese nuclear policy. Energy, 36(12), 6779–6789.

61. Referendum o stroitel'stve AES: Vklad v ekonomiku i vygody dlya Kazakhstana. (2024). Inbusiness. kz. (Russian)

62. Umarhalinova, A., Tulegenov, M., Nurtazina, Zh., & Beisebaev, A. (2019). Normativno-pravovoe regulirovanie v oblasti ucheta i kontrolya yadernykh materialov v Respublike Kazakhstan. Vestnik NYaTs RK. (Russian)

63. International Atomic Energy Agency. (2017). Seventh review meeting of contracting parties to Convention on Nuclear Safety.

64. Pinsky, R., Sabharwall, P., Hartvigsen, J., & O'Brien, J. (2021). Comparative review of hydrogen production technologies for nuclear hybrid energy systems. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 123, 103317.

65. World Nuclear Association. (n.d.). World Nuclear Association.

66. Blinov, M. (2025). Tokayev did not rule out construction of second and third NPP in Kazakhstan. Izvestia.

67. Mamishev, Zh. (2024). Kazakhstan has no alternative to nuclear power, says Energy Minister. Kursiv Media.