Public Education Efforts on Nuclear Energy for Singapore

Mr Speaker, our public education efforts will cover both the benefits as well as the risks of nuclear energy. I have said it many times – while Singapore has not yet made a decision on nuclear energy, a number of countries in the region have already announced plans to adopt nuclear energy within the next decade.

Of course, whether they can do it or not, that is a function of how the technical aspects will pan out.

It is important, therefore, to help the public understand how with the advancements in nuclear energy technologies, the deployment of nuclear energy can now be carried out in a safer way. We also need to educate the public on how including nuclear energy in our energy mix can enhance our energy security, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ultimately, benefit Singaporeans.

While the Government had ruled out conventional nuclear energy technologies in the 2012 Pre-Feasibility Study, the newer nuclear technologies, such as the small modular reactors (SMRs) and Generation IV reactors, incorporate new safety features that can significantly reduce the risks and mitigate the impact of accidents, compared to many of the plants operating around the world today.

We will also help the public to understand the capabilities, first and foremost, that Singapore is building up, to enable us to take a considered decision on whether eventually to deploy nuclear energy. And if we should decide to do so, how we will manage this safely.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to thank the Minister for the reply. It appears to me that the question on safety involves two distinct issues. One is Singapore's own decisions insofar as SMRs and Gen IV technology is concerned; and the other question is the regional roll-out of nuclear technologies. So, the public education process has to address both these issues.

On the matter of announcements made by countries in the region, can the Minister confirm: what is the extent of that progress? And is the technology that is being considered by these regional partners of ours of the new generation nuclear technologies or of the old generation technologies?

That aside, the other question, of course, is in terms of the Government's plans, specifically in terms of public education. The paper that I referred to, which was in my Parliamentary Question, the 2018 paper, which was funded by the Singapore National Research Foundation, suggests that there may be a lot of misunderstanding with regard to nuclear technology amongst Singaporeans, that has to be overcome. Granted, the sample size was small, which is 39, but the suggestion is that there is quite a bit of work to be done on the public education front.

I thank Mr Singh for his supplementary questions. It has flowed into a trend of thought, so I would try to follow according to the same wavelength and frequency. But in event that I drop a few beats, please give feedback on some of the points that the Member is raising.

First and foremost, perhaps, I can provide a glimpse as to what the Government is thinking of, in terms of the set-up. There are two teams today: a team at the Energy Market Authority (EMA) and one team at the National Environment Agency (NEA). EMA's Nuclear Energy Office falls under my portfolio of coverage within the Ministry of Trade and Industry family. The EMA's Nuclear Energy Office will primarily assess the feasibility of deploying advanced nuclear energy technologies for power generation in Singapore. NEA's Nuclear Safety Division will focus on nuclear safety and safeguards for potential deployments in Singapore, as well as in the region.

And I note that there is a lot of interest surrounding the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region, in terms of their deployment. I cannot commit for sure as to their timelines, although what we have gleaned are from official, public newspaper reports out there. There have been some exhortations by our neighbours that they want to develop it in 10 years, some 15, some 20 years.

They have not stated what type of technologies they are going to deploy, whether it is conventional ones or whether it is going to be the advanced nuclear energy technologies. If it is the advanced nuclear technology type, the newer types like the SMRs, the Gen IV, then I think pretty much the assessment level, the readiness level, we are probably on par.

Having said that, within the countries in the region, many of them actually have already developed and they have planted research reactors within their respective countries. I do not have the total numbers of the research reactors. I suppose there are some in Indonesia, in Malaysia, I believe in Vietnam, possibly even in the Philippines as well.

For us, what is important to note is that, as I have said earlier on in my reply to the other Members in the House: today, the physics work, the engineering works. I think the last big step is whether it can be commercially viable, because the physics, the engineering can work, but if the costs are so high, are so prohibitive, then it really would not be pragmatic, feasible, nor would it be practical for us to deploy here. Hence that comparison and the undertaking of that feasibility study today by Mott MacDonald, it is out there to assess this.

Having said this, what we know today is that, the advanced nuclear technology is significantly safer than the conventional ones, because a lot of the safety systems are passive and they are inherent. They do not need an external active operator to go in and intervene. The public – myself included, in the early stages of my entry into Government – was also pretty much affected by what we read about in Fukushima, in Chernobyl. But those systems were the first and second generation ones. They were built many, many decades ago. I think that engineering, the safety design has significantly improved since then. That is why we are undertaking this feasibility study.

So, I beg your indulgence. For some of the questions Members asked pertaining to our neighbours, it would be very difficult for us to comment on what they are doing. We have heard anecdotal announcements that there could be potential need for sitings 500 kilometres south of us. There are also need for more remote areas for small modular reactors, for instance, in Kalimantan, or even over in the eastern part of Indonesia. We cannot confirm what is the state or the level of maturity in terms of their thinking or their discussions.

Suffice to say, we work very closely with international agencies, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), for instance; together with the IAEA. And with that, we understand from the data and we try to triangulate, but these are very early stages. Hence, that is why I said that we will try our best to answer, but a lot of that information is just not out there.

Thank you, Speaker. I note the two agencies within the Government that Minister Tan mentioned as well, as the recently set up nuclear research and safety institute within the National University of Singapore (NUS). Notwithstanding how the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) does not restrict peaceful uses of nuclear technology, I am wondering if the Minister would be able to share what challenges the Government has faced in acquiring top end talent in nuclear science and engineering, given the traditional guardedness that leading nuclear nations have had in disseminating the frontier of such knowledge.

I thank Prof Lim for his supplementary question. First and foremost, the Singapore Nuclear Research and Safety Institute (SNRSI) was incorporated sometime back. I do not have the date off-hand with me. This year it was upgraded. It used to be SNRSI – the "I" was for "Initiative". But what the agencies have recognised is that because of the enhanced interest in advanced nuclear technology, they have decided to upgrade it from an "Initiative" into an "Institute". So, it resides within NUS. It is an independent body and it does all of the simulation framework, it does a lot of the public education and it continues to be so.

For the type of technologies that would be suitable for Singapore, we have concluded as a result of that pre-feasibility study in 2012, that conventional nuclear technologies would not be possible for us, nor is it even practical, nor feasible – because the emergency safety zones means that there is nowhere in Singapore we can site it.

However, the way the newer types of nuclear energy development that we have seen, offers promise, because that buffer zone is significantly reduced; and some of these small modular reactors allow for the potential and the possibility of it stacking. So, to that end, we look at it with a lot of interest, because it could offer, potentially, if we make that decision – and it would take us some years to come to that decision. For us, it is one way of diversifying our energy mix and at the same time, it offers us security. Security in terms of supplies. And to your colleague, Mr Kenneth Tiong's earlier point about thorium, we also need to think about the supply chain, because today, that concentration risk is very, very high.

So, these are all the factors that we have taken into consideration.

The nuclear talent that the Member was alluding to, from now to the time, if ultimately, we should choose to deploy, the deployment part would take a different level of talent versus those with regard to just making sure that we have a safe environment, we take the necessary precautions, should our neighbours decide to deploy.

So, we are really talking about different scenarios.

Having said that, we have made some plans to start to train our own core group. We have got nuclear trained scientists, both on EMA, as well as within the NEA's perspective, and also in academia. And we will continue to work with international bodies. I have also made the announcement that we recently signed the US 123 Agreement with the United States. We are working, stepping up engagements with the French and learning from the Idaho National Labs, learning from the different institutes in France, even working with the United Kingdom. That would allow us to train to provide that runway, to train the type of talent that we would need. I hope that gives the Member that reassurance.