Hi! This week, let us explore Singaporean’s opinion on harnessing nuclear power locally.
I conducted a survey on 58 local participants aged between 19-24. The result of the first poll question already threw me off my feet.
Last week I left a little teaser at the end of my post implying that nuclear energy is not a renewable source of energy, considering that the majority of the global nuclear power plants still use Uranium as the raw material for nuclear fission. This tells me that there is an apparent misconception on the renewability of nuclear energy amongst locals, which might potentially affect their judgment on whether nuclear power should be implemented in Singapore or not.
Moving on, I wanted to know if Singaporeans are aware of how dangerous nuclear power can be.
The 2 charts above validate the point that participants are indeed conscious of the fact that nuclear power is a volatile source of energy which can lead to disastrous outcomes if nuclear accidents were to happen. However, I realized that one factor leading to this response might be the lack of awareness of newer developments in safer nuclear technology amongst the survey participants.
Next, I explored Singaporean’s opinion on the feasibility of nuclear power in the local context.
The response is synonymous with experts’ claims that nuclear power in Singapore could have more bane than boon. According to this article, Singapore has changed its stance towards harnessing nuclear power on separate occasions. On one hand, the world calls for cleaner and alternative sources of energy to reduce carbon emissions. On the other hand, Singapore faces land constraints that restrict its ability to build new nuclear reactors (with the exception of Pedra Branca) as well as the concerns of increased exposure to radioactive leakage in the case of an unprecedented nuclear accident.
Subsequently, I questioned the participants on the viability of the global usage of nuclear power.
Contrary to their opinions on local utilization of nuclear power, there is an increase in the number of participants who felt that the world should incline towards seeking nuclear energy sources.
Finally, I moved on to the perception of Singaporeans on whether nuclear power is good or bad for us overall.
In general, the majority of the locals cannot make a decision between the pros and cons of nuclear power, which is understandable given the mishaps that have happened before.
The possibilities of using nuclear power in Singapore is under scrutinization as newer nuclear energy technologies are developed. In fact, there have been justifications promoting the use of nuclear power in Singapore, such as its safety prospects and high energy output.
Recently I contacted EMA on their insights on nuclear energy use in Singapore. According to them, a pre-feasibility Study on Nuclear Energy concluded in 2012 that presently available nuclear energy technologies are not yet suitable for deployment in Singapore. The risks to Singapore, given that we are a small and dense city, still outweigh the benefits at this point. So are you on the supporting or opposing side of harnessing nuclear power in Singapore then?
-Wen Han
(Cover photo by Markus Distelrath from Pexels)
Hi Wen Han,
It is interesting to note the various steps the government has taken to look into the viability of nuclear energy. I wasn’t aware of the Singapore Nuclear Research and Safety Intitiave under NUS. Nonetheless, it makes sense that the government is encouraging the formation of a core team of people familiar with nuclear energy in case we ever pivot towards nuclear energy.
In your opinion, what are some of the steps to raise, train and sustain nuclear energy capabilities IF the government intends to adopt nuclear energy?
Also, in the opinion piece linked, one of the author’s issue with natural gas is our reliance on imports for that. How would importing uranium make us any less reliant on imports for electricity production?
Also, although I mentioned Pedra Branca in last week’s comments, I doubt the Malaysians will be very comfortable with that idea. Building such a sensitive facility on a sometimes-disputed island might not be a good idea. It might also be a tad harder to defend the facility from both conventional and unconventional attacks as opposed to if it were on our main island.
Hi Ee Kin
First and foremost, I would like to thank you for giving my posts on nuclear energy so much attention.
I opine that it is essential to train local nuclear specialists and gain expertise from foreign nuclear experts. The government has to conduct its pilot testing on locations outside Singapore before its actual implementation locally. Nuclear-related policies have to be written to ensure that proper protocols are strictly adhered to. More importantly, the government has to reassure the public on the safe use of nuclear energy on our shores.
Uranium is a naturally-occurring element that can be found in abundance throughout the world. (https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/mining-of-uranium/uranium-mining-overview.aspx#:~:text=Uranium%20is%20a%20naturally%20occurring,than%20cobalt%2C%20lead%20or%20molybdenum.) Furthermore, it is used in nuclear-related production, primarily nuclear power plants. This entails that nuclear energy could work just as well, if not better than its fossil fuel counterparts (https://www.rsc.org/periodic-table/element/92/Uranium#:~:text=Uranium%20is%20also%20used%20by,ships%20and%20counterweights%20for%20aircraft.) Pertaining to your query on reliance on imports, I would like to clarify that importing uranium is just like importing natural gas and any other fossil fuel. Especially for countries like Singapore with no natural resources, we have to rely on external sources of Uranium for nuclear power plants. However, Uranium as aforementioned is abundant and if you refer to my previous blog, it is less prone to market changes and promises higher energy security. Thus this makes Uranium a more economically viable option, just that the world is not ready for a change yet (At least from my standpoint) Hope this clears your doubt.
And yes, the Malaysian government would not be too happy with Singapore’s decision to establish a nuclear plant on Pedra Branca (PB). During my service, my guys were almost deployed to PB during a period of tension to safeguard the nation’s interest. Thankfully, they were told to stand down eventually. Perhaps a feasible solution would be to engage Malaysia in talks about the possession of PB before rolling out the nuclear initiatives.
Hey Wen Han!
Let me start off by thanking you for these 2 posts on nuclear energy. I didn’t know much about it before, and these 2 posts have given me a much better understanding of it. I think it is no surprise that majority of people would think nuclear energy to be unsafe, given highly publicized disasters like Chernobyl and Fukushima. But I remember my JC physics teacher exclaiming how nuclear power is actually much safer than one might think, and more people should be open to its adoption. To that end, I think education plays an important role in shaping mindsets towards nuclear power, as a better understanding of the mechanisms behind it may encourage more people to be more accepting of it on our shores.
In the opinion piece that you shared, the author suggested the idea of a floating nuclear power plant (FNPP) over a land-based one, and I found an interesting read on it here: https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/nuclear/is-the-world-ready-for-floating-nuclear-power-stations. In the case of Russia’s Akademik Lomonosov will be deployed in remote regions, but I’m not too sure if that can be applied to Singapore, given how important trade by the sea is to our country. I’m curious, what are your thoughts on the potential areas of concerns with regards to a FNPP in Singapore, and do you think it is feasible?
Cheers!
Jeng Wei
Hi Jeng Wei
Thanks so much for dropping by! Yes, I do agree with you that education is vital to gain increased public acknowledgement on the adoption of nuclear power. Doing so would greatly minimise the general misconception associated with nuclear power.
Given the small and densely populated landmass that Singapore is restricted to, adopting FNPP would be befitting in our nation’s case. Having FNPP would definitely diminish the catastrophic extent of a nuclear disaster dealt towards us compared to one that occurs on our shores. However, that being said, Singapore is located in close proximities with neighbouring countries like Malaysia and Indonesia. In the case of a nuclear disaster, the harmful radiation might plausibly reach foreign shores too. This puts not just Singapore, but other countries at risk. Because of this innate fear, other countries might not accede to Singapore’s deployment of FNPP, since FNPPs are meant to consistently provide electricity and power to people living inland. Additionally, released radioactive materials will bioaccumulate in marine livestock and this can potentially affect food security in our region (as learnt in class regarding bioaccumulation and biomagnification)
Nevertheless, FNPP is certainly one aspect of nuclear power that Singapore can consider since I see more benefits than harms. Perhaps, one way to reassure neighbouring countries would be to have a shared FNPP facility in the Java Sea that Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia can tap into (although this would require heightened diplomatic ties). Another way would be to have the FNPP remotely controlled from a headquarters from inland. In this way, we are able to manoeuvre the FNPP without being too close to it (minimising health hazards)
Pertaining to your query on implicating sea trade, I partially agree as it can turn away maritime trade opportunities due to fears. However, this is avoidable as FNPP, according to the website you provided me, are normally situated in remote locations where construction of nuclear plants is difficult. Of course, these are just some of my bizarre ideas regarding FNPP. Hope you get my drift!
Hi Wen Han, thanks for your post! It is really interesting to see how evenly(?) divided we are on this topic. Continuing from my comment on your previous post, I wanted to ask what is YOUR opinion on this? Do you think Singapore should harness nuclear energy?
Before reading your posts and comments, I have never really considered using offshore islands for nuclear plants and that really is an interesting idea. However, it might be quite difficult for us to manage and protect considering it is offshore. Other than PB, our islands are pretty much all used up for other purposes, some industrial, some military, and some ecological, and I do not think using any of those islands and combining current uses with nuclear plants is a good idea. Other than that, I feel having a nuclear plant on mainland is a big no-no, simply because we have nowhere to run to if something does happen. I acknowledge that technology is getting safer, but hey, we always need to plan for worst-case scenarios don’t we? And I’m sure our government does that too. Looking forward to your opinion!
Hi Ernest
Thanks again for dropping by! Perhaps I was somewhat ambiguous in my previous reply (as I was trying to view things from a balanced perspective), so I will reply to your question this time around with a ‘yes’ (provided that we do it elsewhere apart from on our shores). I do agree that mainland Singapore is far too small to be harnessing such a volatile source of energy. Furthermore, our demand for energy does not require additional sources of energy to supplement the existing fossil fuel means of generating energy (https://www.worlddata.info/asia/singapore/energy-consumption.php).
However, from an environmental stance, Singapore can take a cleaner and safer approach by investing in nuclear power. According to this URL (https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/safety-of-nuclear-power-reactors.aspx#:~:text=The%20evidence%20over%20six%20decades,with%20other%20commonly%20accepted%20risks.), nuclear-related deaths is the lowest in its category, in fact almost negligible. If you were to refer to Jeng Wei’s comment on this post, you can see the suggestive use of FNPP (Floating Nuclear Power Plant) in Singapore. That in my opinion is a much safer solution than having one constructed inland, although FNPP can possibly jeopardize diplomacy with other countries as well as maritime trade security. If a nuclear power plant were to be established locally (be it FNPP or inland), I feel we should adopt contingency plans and incorporate them into our Total Defence Day to prepare for the worst-case scenario of nuclear adversity. As for PB, we might have to come to a resolution on the sovereignty of the island before anything else takes place on it. Hope this answers your question!