Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Potential hydropower contribution to mitigate climate risk and build resilience in Africa


Hydropower will play an essential role in meeting the growing energy needs in Africa but will be affected by climate change. We assess future annual usable capacity and variability of supply for 87 existing hydropower plants in Africa on the basis of a multimodel ensemble of 21 global climate models and two emissions scenarios (representative concentration pathways RCP 4.5 and 8.5). We estimate near-future, mid-century and end-of-the-century impacts and assess the potential for connections within and across power pools to reduce changes in usable capacity and variability. We evaluate the potential synergies between hydropower, wind and solar resources in each power pool. We find that regional interconnection could mitigate some of the climate impacts on hydropower. Furthermore, variable renewable energy, especially solar power, could potentially compensate for usable hydropower capacity losses. Our work contributes to a better understanding of the climate-induced impacts on hydropower resources in Africa and potential risk mitigation opportunities.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Hydropower plants in the COMELEC, CAPP, WAPP, EAPP and SAPP included in the analysis.
Fig. 2: Mean relative changes in annual normalized usable capacity for RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5.
Fig. 3: Mean relative changes in annual normalized usable capacity for RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 at the power-pool level.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

We use open-access datasets to perform all calculations and analyses. Supplementary Table 13 summarizes the datasets collected for their application in the streamflow and hydropower formulations. We present the locations and characteristics of the power plants in Supplementary Table 1. We provide the individual time series in our online repository78. Finally, we present the complete list of GCMs used in Supplementary Table 14. The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are available in the zenodo repository (

Code availability

R and Python codes used in the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.


  1. Energy Projections for African Countries (Publications Office of the European Union, 2019);

  2. Report Extract: Access to Electricity (International Energy Agency, 2020);

  3. Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations, 2015);

  4. Africa Clean Energy Corridor: Analysis of Infrastructure for Renewable Power in Eastern and Southern Africa (International Renewable Energy Agency, 2015).

  5. 2020 Hydropower Status Report: Sector Trends and Insights (International Hydropower Association, 2020);

  6. 2021 Hydropower Status Report: Sector Trends and Insights (International Hydropower Association, 2021);

  7. Africa Energy Outlook 2019 (International Energy Agency, 2019);

  8. The PIDA Energy Vision (African Development Bank Group, 2016);

  9. Cervigni, R., Liden, R., Neumann, J. E. & Strzepek, K. M. Enhancing the Climate Resilience of Africa’s Infrastructure: The Power and Water Sectors (Africa Development Forum, 2015);

  10. Falchetta, G., Gernaat, D. E. H. J., Hunt, J. & Sterl, S. Hydropower dependency and climate change in sub-Saharan Africa: a nexus framework and evidence-based review. J. Clean. Prod. 231, 1399–1417 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Climate Impacts on African Hydropower (International Energy Agency, 2020);

  12. van Vliet, M. T. H., Wiberg, D., Leduc, S. & Riahi, K. Power-generation system vulnerability and adaptation to changes in climate and water resources. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 375–380 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Yalew, S. G. et al. Impacts of climate change on energy systems in global and regional scenarios. Nat. Energy 5, 794–802 (2020).

  14. Turner, S. W. D., Ng, J. Y. & Galelli, S. Examining global electricity supply vulnerability to climate change using a high-fidelity hydropower dam model. Sci. Total Environ. 590–591, 663–675 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. van Vliet, M. T. H. et al. Multi-model assessment of global hydropower and cooling water discharge potential under climate change. Glob. Environ. Change 40, 156–170 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Turner, S. W. D., Hejazi, M., Kim, S. H., Clarke, L. & Edmonds, J. Climate impacts on hydropower and consequences for global electricity supply investment needs. Energy 141, 2081–2090 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kling, H., Stanzel, P. & Preishuber, M. Impact modelling of water resources development and climate scenarios on Zambezi River discharge. J. Hydrol. Reg. Stud. 1, 17–43 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Stanzel, P., Kling, H. & Bauer, H. Climate change impact on West African rivers under an ensemble of CORDEX climate projections. Clim. Serv. 11, 36–48 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Conway, D., Dalin, C., Landman, W. A. & Osborn, T. J. Hydropower plans in Eastern and Southern Africa increase risk of concurrent climate-related electricity supply disruption. Nat. Energy 2, 946–953 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Spalding-Fecher, R., Joyce, B. & Winkler, H. Climate change and hydropower in the Southern African power pool and Zambezi River Basin: system-wide impacts and policy implications. Energy Policy 103, 84–97 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sidibe, M. et al. Near-term impacts of climate variability and change on hydrological systems in West and Central Africa. Clim. Dynam. 54, 2041–2070 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kling, H., Stanzel, P. & Fuchs, M. Regional assessment of the hydropower potential of rivers in West Africa. Energy Procedia 97, 286–293 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Cole, M. A., Elliott, R. J. R. & Strobl, E. Climate change, hydro-dependency, and the African dam boom. World Dev. 60, 84–98 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. van Vliet, M. T. H., Sheffield, J., Wiberg, D. & Wood, E. F. Impacts of recent drought and warm years on water resources and electricity supply worldwide. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 124021 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Busch, S., de Felice, M. & Hidalgo Gonzalez, I. Analysis of the Water–Power Nexus in the Southern African Power Pool (Publications Office of the European Union, 2020);

  26. Scaling Up Renewable Energy Deployment in Africa: Detailed Overview of IRENA’s Engagement and Impact (International Renewable Energy Agency, 2020);

  27. Renewable Energy Market Analysis: Africa and its Regions (IRENA and AfDB, 2022);

  28. Sridharan, V. et al. Resilience of the Eastern African electricity sector to climate driven changes in hydropower generation. Nat. Commun. 10, 302 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sterl, S., Fadly, D., Liersch, S., Koch, H. & Thiery, W. Linking solar and wind power in eastern Africa with operation of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam. Nat. Energy 6, 407–418 (2021).

  30. Sterl, S., Liersch, S., Koch, H., Lipzig, N. P. Mvan & Thiery, W. A new approach for assessing synergies of solar and wind power: implications for West Africa. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 094009 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pavičević, M. & Quoilin, S. Analysis of the Water–Power Nexus in the North, Eastern and Central African Power Pools (Publications Office of the European Union, 2020);

  32. de Felice, M., Gonzalez Aparicio, I., Huld, T., Busch, S. & Hidalgo Gonzalez, I. Analysis of the Water–Power Nexus in the West African Power Pool (Publications Office of the European Union, 2019);

  33. Wu, G. C. et al. Strategic siting and regional grid interconnections key to low-carbon futures in African countries. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E3004–E3012 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Wu, G. C., Deshmukh, R., Ndhlukula, K., Radojicic, T. & Reilly, J. Renewable Energy Zones for the Africa Clean Energy Corridor (IRENA, 2015);

  35. Sterl, S. et al. Smart renewable electricity portfolios in West Africa. Nat. Sustain. 3, 710–719 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Gernaat, D. E. H. J. et al. Climate change impacts on renewable energy supply. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 119–125 (2021).

  37. Hofste, R. W. et al. Aqueduct 3.0: Updated Decision-Relevant Global Water Risk Indicators (World Resources Institute, 2019);

  38. Renewable Capacity Statistics 2021 (International Renewable Energy Agency, 2021);

  39. Tong, D. et al. Geophysical constraints on the reliability of solar and wind power worldwide. Nat. Commun. 12, 6146 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Sawadogo, W. et al. Current and future potential of solar and wind energy over Africa using the RegCM4 CORDEX-CORE ensemble. Clim. Dynam. 57, 1647–1672 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Bichet, A. et al. Potential impact of climate change on solar resource in Africa for photovoltaic energy: analyses from CORDEX-AFRICA climate experiments. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 124039 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. The Renewable Energy Transition in Africa: Powering Access, Resilience and Prosperity (International Renewable Energy Agency, 2021);

  43. Statistical Review of World Energy (BP, 2021);

  44. Share of Electricity Production from Hydropower (Our World in Data, 2021);

  45. African Union Development Agency. General Procurement Notice—Multinational—Continental Power System Master Plan Project (African Development Bank Group, 2022);

  46. Region Profile: Africa (2020 Data) (International Hydropower Association, 2020);

  47. de Faria, F. A. M., Jaramillo, P., Sawakuchi, H. O., Richey, J. E. & Barros, N. Estimating greenhouse gas emissions from future Amazonian hydroelectric reservoirs. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 124019 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Jurasz, J., Canales, F. A., Kies, A., Guezgouz, M. & Beluco, A. A review on the complementarity of renewable energy sources: concept, metrics, application and future research directions. Sol. Energy 195, 703–724 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Deemer, B. R. et al. Greenhouse gas emissions from reservoir water surfaces: a new global synthesis. BioScience 66, 949–964 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Barros, N. et al. Carbon emission from hydroelectric reservoirs linked to reservoir age and latitude. Nat. Geosci. 4, 593–596 (2011).

  51. Boulange, J., Hanasaki, N., Yamazaki, D. & Pokhrel, Y. Role of dams in reducing global flood exposure under climate change. Nat. Commun. 12, 417 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Gernaat, D. E. H. J., Bogaart, P. W., Vuuren, D. P., van, Biemans, H. & Niessink, R. High-resolution assessment of global technical and economic hydropower potential. Nat. Energy 2, 821–828 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Hydropower Special Market Report: Analysis and Forecast to 2030 (International Energy Agency, 2021);

  54. Bishoge, O. K., Kombe, G. G. & Mvile, B. N. Renewable energy for sustainable development in sub-Saharan African countries: challenges and way forward. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 12, 052702 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Electricity, Net Installed Capacity of Electric Power Plants (UNdata, 2021);

  56. Randolph Glacier Inventory—A Dataset of Global Glacier Outlines Version 6.0 (NSIDC, 2017);

  57. Abatzoglou, J. T., Dobrowski, S. Z., Parks, S. A. & Hegewisch, K. C. TerraClimate, a high-resolution global dataset of monthly climate and climatic water balance from 1958-2015. Sci. Data 5, 170191 (2018).

  58. Navarro-Racines, C., Tarapues, J., Thornton, P., Jarvis, A. & Ramirez-Villegas, J. 2020. High-resolution and bias-corrected CMIP5 projections for climate change impact assessments. Sci. Data 7, 7 (2020).

  59. Caceres, A. L., Jaramillo, P., Matthews, H. S., Samaras, C. & Nijssen, B. Hydropower under climate uncertainty: characterizing the usable capacity of Brazilian, Colombian and Peruvian power plants under climate scenarios. Energy Sustain. Dev. 61, 217–229 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Bartos, M. D. Pysheds: a fast, open-source digital elevation model processing library (, 2018).

  61. Lehner, B., Verdin, K. & Jarvis, A. New global hydrography derived from spaceborne elevation data. Eos 89, 93–94 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Jarvis, A., Reuter, H. I. I., Nelson, A. & Guevara, E. Hole-filled Seamless SRTM Data Version 4 (International Centre for Tropical Agriculture, 2008);

  63. Sanchez, P. A. et al. Digital soil map of the world. Science 325, 680–681 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Kanamitsu, W. et al. NCEP-DOE AMIP-II Reanalysis (R-2) (American Meteorological Society, 2020).

  65. Ziese, M. et al. GPCC Full Data Daily Version 2018 at 1.0°: Daily Land–Surface Precipitation from Rain-Gauges built on GTS-based and Historic Data (Global Precipitation Climatology Centre, 2018);

  66. Bfg. Global Runoff Database. Accessed Oct. 20, 2021;

  67. Ghiggi, G., Humphrey, V., Seneviratne, S. I. & Gudmundsson, L. GRUN: an observations-based global gridded runoff dataset from 1902 to 2014. Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss. (2019).

  68. NEX-GDDP Dataset (Climate Analytics Group & NASA Ames Research Center, 2018).

  69. van Vuuren, D. P., Edmonds, J. A., Kainuma, M., Riahi, K. & Weyant, J. A special issue on the RCPs. Clim. Change 109, 1 (2011).

  70. Schwalm, C. R., Glendon, S. & Duffy, P. B. RCP8.5 tracks cumulative CO2 emissions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 19656–19657 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. IPCC: Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (eds Stocker, T. F. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

  72. The CMIP6 landscape. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 727–727 (2019).

  73. FAQ Data and Access (WCRP CORDEX, 2020);

  74. Lehner, B. et al. Global Reservoir and Dam Database Version 1 (NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center, 2011);

  75. Turner, S. W. D. & Galelli, S. Water supply sensitivity to climate change: an R package for implementing reservoir storage analysis in global and regional impact studies. Environ. Model. Softw. 76, 13–19 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Wu, X., Cheng, C., Lund, J. R., Niu, W. & Miao, S. Stochastic dynamic programming for hydropower reservoir operations with multiple local optima. J. Hydrol. 564, 712–722 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Feng, Z., Niu, W., Cheng, C. & Lund, J. R. Optimizing hydropower reservoirs operation via an orthogonal progressive optimality algorithm. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 144, 04018001 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Marwick, B. & Krishnamoorthy, K. cvequality: Tests for the equality of coefficients of variation from multiple groups. R package v. 2.0 (2019).

  79. Yan, J. et al. Reviews on characteristic of renewables: evaluating the variability and complementarity. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 30, e12281 (2020).

  80. Cáceres, A. L., Jaramillo, P., Matthews, H. S., Samaras, C. & Nijssen, B. Climate forced hydropower simulations for the African continent using NASA NEX GDDP. Zenodo (2021).

Download references


This study was supported by the Rockefeller Foundation through a subcontract with the University of Massachusetts at Amherst (subaward no. 19-10766 A 00). This article was prepared while C.S. was affiliated with Carnegie Mellon University. The opinions expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not reflect the view of the US government or any other organization.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



A.L.C., P.J., H.S.M., C.S. and B.N. conceived and designed the study. A.L.C. collected the data, developed the model, developed the results and led the manuscript preparation. All authors interpreted the results and contributed to the manuscript writing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana Lucía Cáceres.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

C.S. declares a potentially perceived non-financial competing interest. After the completion of this paper, C.S. began a temporary mobility employment assignment with the US government through the Intergovernmental Personnel Act. C.S. is on Public Service Leave and this article was prepared while he was employed at Carnegie Mellon University. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Climate Change thanks Ranjit Deshmukh, Giacomo Falchetta and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Aggregated usable capacity for the COMELEC, CAPP, EAPP, SAPP, and WAPP.

The boxplots present the results from the multimodel ensemble of 21 GCM experiments for the 1970–2005 historical reference (wheat), RCP 4.5 (orange), and RCP 8.5 (purple). Each column presents the time frame of the analysis: near-future (2010–2039), mid-century (2040–2069), and end-of-century (2070–2099). The scales of each of the panels are different depending on the power pool.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Probability Density Function of Aggregated Multi-Model Ensemble Power Pool Usable Capacity Time Series.

The Y axis of the plot represents the probability for a usable capacity (MW) value for the power pool. We include all five power pools in the analysis (COMELEC, WAPP, CAPP, EAPP, and SAPP). We present three scenarios (historical reference, RCP 4.5, and RCP 8.5) and three time frames (early century – 2010–2039, mid-century – 2040–2069, and end of the century – 2070–2099). We present the historical reference in “wheat” colour, RCP 4.5 in “orange” colour, and RCP 8.5 in “purple” colour.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Exceedance Probability of Aggregated Multi-Model Ensemble Power Pool Usable Capacity Time Series.

The Y axis of the plot represents the exceedance probability of usable capacity (MW) for the power pool. We include all five power pools in the analysis (COMELEC, WAPP, CAPP, EAPP, and SAPP). We present three scenarios (historical reference, RCP 4.5, and RCP 8.5) and three time frames (early century – 2010–2039, mid-century – 2040–2069, and end of the century – 2070–2099). We present the historical reference in “wheat” colour, RCP 4.5 in “orange” colour, and RCP 8.5 in “purple” colour.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Notes 1–3, Figs. 1–22, Tables 1–14 and references.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cáceres, A.L., Jaramillo, P., Matthews, H.S. et al. Potential hydropower contribution to mitigate climate risk and build resilience in Africa. Nat. Clim. Chang. 12, 719–727 (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing