Nothing to lose in studying nuclear option

432 words10 February 2010Straits TimesSTIMESEnglish(c) 2010 Singapore Press Holdings Limited
NUCLEAR power is controversial as an energy source despite its long use. So, it is hardly surprising the Economic Strategies Committee's recommendation to study the nuclear option has provoked some discussion. Safety concerns are more acute than in larger countries. On a small, densely populated island, is there anywhere a nuclear power plant can be located and operated without environmental and human risk if there is a malfunction? The world is most familiar with Three Mile Island and Chernobyl as representations of extreme technological risk and the nightmare consequences of accidents. Still, the committee's energy panel is justified in saying the option should not be excluded from study.
The price of conventionally produced energy will rise as demand continues to outpace supply with the urbanisation and industrialisation taking place in Asia. The need to diversify sources has been picking up pace. Electricity tariffs will go up as imported liquefied natural gas, used to generate 80 per cent of power here, continues to rise in cost. Singapore has no recourse to hydro and geothermal options, while low wind speeds do not favour wind farms. Solar energy is a better bet, and even then is a limited alternative. It will be a challenge to generate 5 per cent of peak electricity demand from renewable sources in 10 years' time, a goal the panel proposed. So, through a process of elimination, nuclear power surprisingly survives the winnowing, as a concept.

The panel has placed realistic hope on technological advances to make nuclear plants as safe as nuclear fission can be made to be. It has been nearly 60 years since the world's first reactor generated electricity. After several mishaps and decades of cheap oil which caused nuclear power generation to fall out of favour, it re-emerged as an attractive and clean source in the face of global warming concerns. Research into safety has accelerated in recent years, including building fail-safe features to prevent or compensate for human error. Also, smaller plants will promote safety, as accidental impact can be more easily contained. Another advantage of small structures is they enable generation to be decentralised, ensuring supply stability.



But challenges remain in storing and disposing of nuclear waste safely and inexpensively. This could be unmanageable for a small country. It is an open question whether nuclear power can be a safe enough alternative for Singapore. In the meantime, there is nothing to lose in considering its feasibility long-term while waiting for new-generation refinements to be developed in mature operating countries.

Document STIMES0020100209e62a0002e