I recently came across a news article stating that Singapore is mulling harnessing nuclear energy by 2050. A 56-page report by the Energy 2050 Committee was commissioned by the Energy Market Authority (EMA,2020). 

With Singapore’s relentless pursuit of net-zero emissions, it might almost seem that it is “technically viable” for Singapore’s power sector to achieve so. Nuclear energy has always been deemed unsuitable for Singapore, as recently as 2012, given its land scarcity and the fear of nuclear fallout. However, with the advancement in nuclear technology, nuclear energy is becoming safer and more reliable progressively (Gabriel, 2022) (Belmont, 2022). 

Why Nuclear energy? 

COVID-19 forced countries into lockdown for the first time, reports abounded of reduced pollution and clear skies as the result of the reduction in economic activities. This visible change in the environment has led policymakers to “build back better” by opting for renewable energy sources like wind, hydropower and solar in our energy grid (Nian & Goh, 2020). 

However, Singapore is a resource-constrained city, most of our energy needs are imported. Natural gas generates 95% of Singapore’s electricity, and industrial and commercial sectors account for 80% of this energy. This over-reliance on imported gas leaves Singapore vulnerable to price shocks and supply disruptions (Nian & Goh, 2020). This is the case for many European countries such as Germany, Italy and France. The souring relations between these countries and Russia as the result of the conflict in Ukraine has caused gas prices to soar (Jake et al., 2022). The ongoing pandemic and the ever-changing geopolitics landscape might affect Singapore and Singapore must be well-advised to consider incorporating alternative energy to mitigate future shocks.  

In addition, when considering ramping up alternative energy resources such as solar or wind energy, Singapore is severely disadvantaged. Firstly, solar energy faces several constraints. Sunlight is intermittent due to heavy cloud cover and land in Singapore is limited, ruling out large-scale development. The lack of energy storage infrastructure also poses an issue; thus, Singapore’s solar energy can only meet the needs during the daytime. Following, wind energy posts a doubt because the average wind speeds are just too low to accommodate commercial wind turbines (Kopi Co, 2021). Thus, nuclear power presents an alternative emission-free source that Singapore can produce locally to meet its needs. 

Why not nuclear energy? 

The perceived safety of nuclear energy has always been the subject of debate. Following the nuclear fallout in Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011, public reception of the safety of nuclear energy has mostly been negative (Kopi Co, 2021). In the case of Fukushima, following the earthquake and tsunami, the resultant loss of reactor core cooling led to three nuclear meltdowns, three hydrogen explosions, and the release of radioactive contamination. Immediately after the accident, some 120,000 people in a radius of 40 kilometres around the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant had to leave their homes due to the high levels of radiation (Steven, 2012). Food products were also contaminated by the radioactive material that was deposited on agriculture or that was absorbed via the roots of fruit and vegetable crops. While decontamination measures have taken place for many years, Celsium-137 will still maintain ownership of the exclusion zone for centuries more. The estimates of the total economic loss range from $250- $500billion USD, which is one of the costliest nuclear accidents recorded (Steven, 2012). Thus, Singapore’s public perception remains adamant about the possibilities of nuclear fallout. The fallout area constitutes almost 800 square kilometres surrounding the reactor. If the accident were to occur in Singapore, it would mean the entire land area of Singapore will be part of the exclusion zone, essentially posing a significant threat to the entire 5.5 million population. 

What is the government consensus? 

The government is not opposed to nuclear power. The government is continuously studying the recommendations in the Energy 2050 Committee’s report and plans as technologies evolve. However, there continues to be a political dimension to the issue of nuclear power (Kopi Co, 2021). The misconceptions of safety attributed to the Fukushima disaster might generate further significant backlash. Even if nuclear technology has advanced, the public misconception might continue to be a barrier. 

My thoughts
After reading through both sides of the argument, I am for the use of nuclear energy. While I truly understand the catastrophic problem if things go south, I feel that it is a worthy investment. Besides, the Fukushima disaster has in fact sparked the development of safer power plants. In addition, energy security has asserted that Singapore could have a nuclear plant underground under 30-50m of bedrock. This granite will provide natural containment in the worst-case scenario. The possibilities continue to be endless, but one thing for sure is the need to meet the demand of Singapore’s needs. Singapore must reduce reliance and adopt an independent approach.  

 

References 

Belmont L. (2022). S’pore mulling harnessing nuclear energy by 2050. (n.d.). Retrieved  from https://mothership.sg/2022/03/singapore-nuclear-power/ 

Energy Market Authority (2022). Charting the Energy Transition. Retrieved from https://www.ema.gov.sg/cmsmedia/Publications_and_Statistics/Publications/Energy-2050-Committee-Report.pdf 

Gabriel A. (2022). Singapore could potentially include nuclear energy supply mix report. Retrieved from https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/government-economy/singapore-could-potentially-include-nuclear-in-energy-supply-mix-report 

Jake H., Danielle P., Tim B. (2022). Ukraine war: How reliant is the world on Russia for oil and gas. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/58888451 

Kopi Co.(2021). Should Singapore build a nuclear power plant? Retrieved from https://thekopi.co/2021/11/02/singapore-nuclear-power/ 

Nian, V., & Goh, G. (2020). Why Singapore should consider nuclear power. Sustainability Times. https://www.sustainability-times.com/clean-cities/why-singapore-should-consider-nuclear-power/ 

Steven Starr (2012). Costs and consequences of the Fukushima Daiichi disaster. Physicians for Social Responsibility. Retrieved from https://www.psr.org/blog/resource/costs-and-consequences-of-the-fukushima-daiichi-disaster/