Africa is slowly stepping into the solar spotlight. According to the Africa Solar Industry Association (AFSIA) in 2024, the continent added 2.5 GW of new capacity, taking the total installed solar to 19.2 GWp. Yet, even with this growth, the divide between Africa and the rest of the world is still widening.
For decades, solar power has played a critical role across Africa—lighting rural homes, powering water pumps, running mini-grids, and keeping hospitals connected. Now, momentum is shifting from small-scale use to large-scale adoption. The question is no longer whether solar will expand, but how fast and how broadly it will spread.
China’s Solar Exports Drive Africa’s Growth
The clearest signal of Africa’s solar rise comes not from domestic capacity figures but from trade flows. According to new research, “The first evidence of a take-off in solar in Africa” by energy think tank Ember, in the 12 months ending June 2025, Africa imported 15,032 MW of solar panels from China—a 60% jump from the previous year.
Notably, over the past two years, imports outside South Africa have nearly tripled, soaring from 3,734 MW in 2023 to 11,248 MW in 2025. This marks a structural shift: solar demand is no longer concentrated in a handful of markets but is spreading across the continent.
-
20 countries set new import records in the last year.
-
25 countries imported at least 100 MW, up from 15 the year before.
-
Countries such as Algeria, Zambia, Botswana, and Sudan experienced explosive growth, with imports increasing several times over.
For countries with fragile electricity systems, the implications are enormous. In Sierra Leone, the panels imported in 2024 alone could supply 61% of the nation’s total 2023 electricity generation. In Chad, they could deliver nearly half of the annual demand.
Economics Now Favor Solar Over Diesel
The case for solar in Africa is no longer just environmental—it’s economic. Heavy reliance on diesel imports has left many countries vulnerable to price shocks and soaring fuel bills. Solar is fast becoming the cheaper, more resilient option.
In Nigeria, savings from avoiding diesel imports can pay off the cost of a solar panel in just six months. In several other countries, the payback is even quicker.
Despite the surge in solar imports, fossil fuels still dominate trade balances. In nine of the top ten solar panel importers, the value of imported refined petroleum outweighed solar panels by 30 to 107 times. This mismatch highlights the scale of opportunity: replacing even a fraction of fossil fuel imports with solar would transform energy security and economic resilience across Africa.
Installed Solar Capacity and The Concentration Challenge
While imports are spreading across the continent, installed capacity remains heavily concentrated. AFSIA says that of the 2.5 GW installed in 2024, a staggering 78% came from just two countries—South Africa and Egypt.
-
South Africa accounted for 50%.
-
Egypt added 29%, almost all from two mega-projects in Kom Ombo.
The dominance of these two nations reflects both their stronger policy frameworks and their ability to attract international finance. But it also underscores a challenge: outside of a few hotspots, large-scale solar development is still slow to take root.
Encouragingly, 2025 could change that narrative. A pipeline of landmark projects is now under construction in countries that have not traditionally led the solar charge. If delivered, these could shift the balance of Africa’s solar map in the coming years.
Utility-Scale Solar Makes a Comeback
After two years where commercial and industrial (C&I) projects led the way, utility-scale solar rebounded strongly in 2024, representing 72% of all new capacity.
This resurgence was powered by large, donor-backed projects, often financed by development finance institutions (DFIs) and built by international developers. National utilities, supported by governments, remain the primary off-takers.
Still, the C&I segment is far from disappearing. In South Africa, C&I accounted for 39% of new solar capacity, driven by both small embedded projects and larger wheeling initiatives that bypass strained grids.
By contrast, in Nigeria, weak transmission infrastructure makes utility-scale projects harder to sustain. Instead, C&I, residential rooftop systems, and mini-grids dominate the solar mix, with private companies and communities driving the transition from below.
Still China Remains Africa’s Solar Lifeline…
Africa’s solar boom would not be possible without China. In 2024, China produced 80% of the world’s solar panels and remains by far the largest exporter. Africa’s dependence on imports is heavy because local manufacturing capacity is still minimal.
-
Morocco has doubled its annual production to 1 GW.
-
South Africa maintains a similar capacity.
-
Egypt and Nigeria host small manufacturing lines, but volumes are limited.
Larger projects are in the works. Egypt will soon add significant capacity through EliTe Solar (3 GW in 2025), Sunrev Solar (2 GW in 2026), and a Masdar plant (4 GW, start date unannounced). These projects could eventually reduce Africa’s reliance on imports, but until then, Chinese exports remain the backbone of growth.
Solar’s Ripple Effects Across Economies
The Ember report further highlights that in 16 African countries, the solar panels imported in just one year could boost electricity generation by more than 5%. That is a game-changer for economies plagued by power shortages.
The shift also has profound fiscal consequences. Every dollar spent on solar reduces exposure to volatile global fuel prices, strengthens local currencies, and frees up budgets for critical investments in health, education, and infrastructure.
At a household and business level, distributed solar is breaking new ground. From small rooftop panels to mini-grids, decentralized systems are enabling energy access where traditional utilities have failed. For rural communities, that means lights in schools, refrigeration in clinics, and power for small businesses—building blocks for broader economic growth.
Is Africa’s Solar at a Crossroads?
The surge in imports shows that solar is no longer a niche or donor-driven sector in Africa. Instead, it is becoming a mainstream energy choice. The question now is whether governments can harness this momentum, ensure fair distribution, and scale up both infrastructure and financing to meet demand.
The risk is that growth remains uneven. If capacity stays concentrated in just a few countries, much of Africa could remain locked into fossil fuel dependence, missing out on the economic and social benefits of clean power.
But the opportunity is vast. With costs falling, technology advancing, and local manufacturing beginning to scale, Africa could leapfrog into a solar-powered future faster than many expect.
Yet, despite more than ~20 GW of installed capacity, the region still trails far behind the global curve. Concentration in South Africa and Egypt highlights both progress and fragility. To close the gap, policymakers must support broader adoption, attract investment beyond the usual markets, and accelerate local manufacturing.
If that happens, Africa’s energy future could change a lot. It might move from relying on expensive fossil fuels to a solar-driven system. This new system could provide power, stability, and growth all over the continent.
The post Africa’s Solar Imports from China Surge 60% in 2025, Pushing Clean Energy Goals appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Most businesses that decide to act on their net-zero targets reach the same point of friction. Buying carbon credits has meant tracking down brokers, sitting through sales calls, and requesting a quote just to learn a price, sometimes with limited proof of what you are buying.
The earnings calls that quietly reframed climate from sustainability question to operating risk.
Three earnings calls in the last 18 months tell the story without any help from a press release.
Hershey, May 2024: cocoa price exposure compresses margin, and the company attributes part of the cost shock to West African weather. Olam, July 2024: coffee climate exposure quantified in the annual report. JBS, January 2025: supply chain climate disclosures expanded materially in response to investor pressure and regulatory expectation. None of these companies issued the announcement as climate news. They issued it as financial news. The climate-linked supply chain risk did not arrive with a sustainability framing; it arrived as a P&L line.
You are probably reading this article because you suspect the same thing is happening to your business. This piece walks through what is showing up on which earnings calls, how procurement and finance leaders are quantifying the exposure, and what serious corporates are doing about it before the regulator asks.
Where climate risk has already appeared in earnings
The pattern is consistent across resource-intensive sectors. A weather event compresses supply, the price spikes, the cost flows through the income statement, and the analyst on the call asks whether the event is anomalous or structural. Increasingly, the honest answer is the second one.
Cocoa is the cleanest example. The 2023 to 2024 West African harvest fell sharply on the back of erratic rainfall and disease. Cocoa futures more than tripled. Companies with concentrated West African sourcing absorbed the cost; companies with diversified sourcing absorbed less. The exposure was not climate as ESG topic. It was climate as cost of goods.
Coffee follows the same pattern. Brazilian and Vietnamese harvests have moved on weather more sharply across the last several seasons. Roasters with long-tenor supplier relationships and origin diversification have managed the volatility; roasters with spot-market exposure have not. Wheat, sugar, palm oil, beef: the same dynamic in different commodities, a pattern the IPCC AR6 Working Group II report projects will intensify across agricultural systems through mid-century.
What this means: climate risk is no longer a footnote in the 10-K. It is a line item the CFO has to explain on the call.
The three commodity exposures that hit margin first
For most companies with material Scope 3 exposure, three exposures dominate the near-term P&L risk.
- Concentrated single-origin sourcing in a climate-vulnerable region. If your tier-one supply for any material commodity sits in one geography, you have a concentration risk that climate amplifies. Diversification across origins is the obvious hedge, but it takes years to build and requires relationships you cannot acquire by tender.
- Supplier financial fragility under climate stress. Smallholder farmers, who supply a large share of the global cocoa, coffee, and palm oil market, do not carry the balance sheets to absorb yield shocks. When yields collapse, they exit. When they exit, your supply base shrinks, and the surviving suppliers raise prices. The risk is structural, not cyclical.
- Logistics and storage exposure to extreme weather. Hurricane disruptions to Gulf shipping, drought-driven Panama Canal restrictions, flooding in European inland waterways: each of these has moved input costs in the last three years, a pattern documented in Munich Re’s natural catastrophe data. The exposure shows up as a one-quarter event in the financial press but accumulates over time on the cost line.
TCFD and ISSB disclosure changes
The disclosure architecture has now caught up with the risk. The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, whose recommendations are now embedded in the ISSB’s IFRS S2 climate standard, requires companies to disclose climate-related risks across physical and transition categories, with quantification where possible.
For physical risk specifically (the climate-linked supply chain risk you are reading about), the disclosure must address both acute exposures (extreme weather events) and chronic exposures (gradual changes in temperature, precipitation, and growing seasons). The disclosure must address the time horizon over which the risk is material, the parts of the value chain exposed, and the financial impact under different scenarios.
The CSRD imposes similar requirements under European law, with double materiality (both financial and impact materiality) embedded in the assessment. The practical effect: your auditors and your investor relations team now need a defensible answer to the climate-linked supply chain risk question, and the answer needs to be quantified.
What procurement and finance can do now
Three actions matter near-term.
Map your exposure. Most companies do not have a clear view of which tier-one and tier-two suppliers sit in which climate-vulnerable geographies. Without the map, you cannot quantify the risk, and without the quantification, you cannot disclose it credibly. The map is the foundation, and World Resources Institute climate risk research provides useful public tooling to start.
Diversify and deepen, in that order. Diversification across origins reduces concentration risk, but the deeper move is to invest in the resilience of the suppliers you already have. Regenerative practices, agroforestry, soil health interventions: these reduce yield volatility under climate stress and protect your input cost trajectory.
Embed the climate spend inside procurement, not outside it. Treating climate risk as a sustainability cost line subordinates it to the ESG budget. Treating it as a procurement and resilience investment puts it in the budget that matters, which is the cost-of-goods budget that the CFO defends quarterly.
Nature-based supply chain investments are the asset class designed for exactly this purpose. They sit inside the value chain, they reduce climate-linked supply risk, they generate verifiable Scope 3 reductions, and they produce the documentation an auditor and a regulator can both test.
If you are quantifying climate-linked supply chain risk in advance of the next earnings cycle or the next disclosure period, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help you map your exposure and structure a Dual-Value Model response that addresses reduction, resilience, and disclosure-readiness in a single program. Schedule a consultation.
More and more small and medium-sized businesses are hearing the same question from their larger customers: What is your carbon footprint? That question now travels down entire supply chains, and it arrives next to tender requirements, certification criteria, and rising customer expectations.
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Renewable Energy11 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits