Saint Helena vs Zimbabwe: Primary energy from nuclear
Saint Helena
0 terawatt-hours
in 2024
Zimbabwe
0 terawatt-hours
in 2025
Saint Helena rank
32nd
Zimbabwe rank
32nd
Primary energy from nuclear over time
- Saint Helena
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Saint Helena currently reports 0 terawatt-hours against 0 terawatt-hours in Zimbabwe, a difference of 0 terawatt-hours.
Across all 44 years both countries report, Zimbabwe has been ahead every year.
Saint Helena ranks 32nd and Zimbabwe ranks 32nd of 213 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Saint Helena | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1980s | 0 terawatt-hours | 0 terawatt-hours | 0 terawatt-hours | — |
| 1990s | 0 terawatt-hours | 0 terawatt-hours | 0 terawatt-hours | — |
| 2000s | 0 terawatt-hours | 0 terawatt-hours | 0 terawatt-hours | — |
| 2010s | 0 terawatt-hours | 0 terawatt-hours | 0 terawatt-hours | — |
| 2020s | 0 terawatt-hours | 0 terawatt-hours | 0 terawatt-hours | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher primary energy from nuclear, Saint Helena or Zimbabwe?
- Saint Helena, at 0 terawatt-hours against 0 terawatt-hours in Zimbabwe as of 2024.
- What is the difference in primary energy from nuclear between Saint Helena and Zimbabwe?
- 0 terawatt-hours, with Saint Helena ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Saint Helena and Zimbabwe?
- 44 years are reported by both, from 1981 to 2024.
- How do Saint Helena and Zimbabwe rank globally for primary energy from nuclear?
- Saint Helena ranks 32nd and Zimbabwe ranks 32nd of 213 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Energy Institute - Statistical Review of World Energy (2026); Smil (2017) – with major processing by Our World in Data, published as Primary energy from nuclear. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Measured in terawatt-hours of total energy supply.