REACH (Telegram) 88 - What are your views on the Government exploring all possible energy options, including considering nuclear energy as a potential source of power?
(SK)
28 Jul 2025 (10am - 7pm)
REACH (Telegram)
REACH Singapore, [28/7/2025 10:31 am]
Dear Contributors,
Welcome Back! 😊
⏰ We will be opening the chat from 10.45am to 7pm today. ⏰
House Rules (short version of our Terms of Use) to keep in mind:
1. Be kind and respectful. We all want to be in a safe space to share our views.
2. Any and all threatening, abusive, vulgar or racially, religiously and ethnically objectionable content is prohibited.
3. Consider the quiet ones among us and give them a chance to comment.
4. No need to repeat your comment or in differnet forms (including caps) - we heard you loud and clear the first time.
5. Let's protect each other's privacy and keep contact details in this group what it should always be - confidential.
Full set of Terms of Use: https://www.reach.gov.sg/Participate/reach-telegram-group/REACH-Telegram-Group-Chat-Terms-of-Use/
We will strive to uphold these rules to ensure this is a safe space for all.
Please be assured that the points made by participants during the chat are aggregated and shared with relevant agencies.
The topic will be posted shortly.
Thank you.
Megan 😊
REACH Singapore, [28/7/2025 10:55 am]
📢 Topic 📢
Dr Tan See Leng, Singapore’s Minister-in-charge of Energy and Science & Technology, said that it is no longer feasible nor practical for Singapore to avoid working towards a net-zero future.
Fluctuations in the prices of fossil fuels due to geopolitical conflicts have driven up energy prices. Dealing with the impacts of climate change, such as rising sea levels, is also critical for Singapore.
"Energy is existential for us, just like water was existential in the 90s," he said. Singapore is exploring all possible options in its energy transition to ensure its energy needs are met in a sustainable, resilient and cost-effective way. “Nothing is off the table. We will explore every single pathway, every single possibility, and... make sure it is cost-effective and sustainable,” he said.
During his first formal interview as Minister-in-charge of Energy and Science & Technology, Dr Tan fielded a range of questions about Singapore’s energy future, from developments in the Asean power grid, to the country’s exploration of nuclear and geothermal energy, and the role of emerging technologies such as carbon capture and storage.
At a separate event, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Rafael Mariano Grossi shared that Singapore could be the “most perfect example” of a country that needs nuclear energy given its territorial limitations, energy requirements, technological base and institutional maturity.
The chief of the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog was in Singapore as part of the SR Nathan Fellowship, a high-level programme for foreign leaders and prominent individuals to visit the country, and spoke at a lecture and question-and-answer session hosted by the newly launched Singapore Nuclear Research and Safety Institute at NUS.
With a very small nuclear power plant, you can have a level of energy density and production that you cannot match with anything else,” he said. The IAEA chief said that Singapore has the technological capacity, financial ability and regulatory institutions in place to deploy nuclear energy if it so decides, and it made sense for Singapore to consider tapping nuclear energy, as the island state has limited access to renewable energy options.
Around 95 per cent of the country’s energy supply comes from burning natural gas but given the rising energy demand, and the need to reduce emissions from the power sector, Singapore needs a stable domestic source of energy, he added. “When it comes to decarbonising, what are your options? Here, there is no hydropower. You have renewables, but you don’t have much territory... It’s a small country, so you cannot have wind parks for kilometres on end," he said.
💬 What are your views on the Government exploring all possible energy options, including considering nuclear energy as a potential source of power?
📌 Global Trends in Nuclear Energy
A new trend in nuclear energy is small modular reactors. While most are not in operation yet, these reactors are being licensed in many countries, including the United States, France, the United Kingdom and Argentina, said the IAEA’s chief. Small modular reactors are advanced and compact reactors that can be factory-assembled and installed in dense urban areas. They are also known to be safer than traditional large reactors, but are now mainly still in a research phase.
Climate scientists and experts have recognised that, in terms of climate change, decarbonisation without nuclear energy is “practically utopian”. He urged the audience to recognise nuclear energy’s contribution to gradual decarbonisation, which the world is embarking on and addressed the safety concerns that came with nuclear technology and nuclear energy.
📌 Potential collaboration within ASEAN
Singapore could also potentially develop a plant in collaboration with another country in Asean, he added. During his lecture, Mr Grossi noted that Asean countries have shown an increasing interest in collaborating with the IAEA on developing nuclear energy capabilities.
REACH Singapore, [28/7/2025 10:55 am]
Mr Grossi cited how countries like Indonesia and Vietnam are planning to have nuclear power plants by the mid-2030s, while in other countries, companies are already signing agreements to start looking into concrete projects.
Asean’s interest in nuclear energy mirrors that of other countries, as more come to view atomic power as a stable, carbon-free alternative to fossil fuels.
👉🏻 Not feasible for S’pore to avoid net‑zero; all options to cut energy emissions on table: Tan See Leng: https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/not-feasible-for-spore-to-avoid-net-zero-all-options-to-cut-energy-emissions-on-table-tan-see-leng
👉🏻 S’pore could have nuclear energy ‘within a few years’, if it decides on it: UN nuclear watchdog chief: https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/environment/spore-could-have-nuclear-energy-within-a-few-years-if-it-decides-on-it-un-nuclear-watchdog-chief
👉🏻 Singapore could be ‘most perfect example’ of a country that needs nuclear energy: IAEA chief: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/singapore-nuclear-energy-iaea-rafael-grossi-5258646
----
REACH Singapore, [28/7/2025 10:58 am]
[ Poll : How confident are you in the government's ability to ensure the safe and responsible development of nuclear energy in Singapore, if it were to pursue this option? ]
- Very confident
- Somewhat confident
- Neutral
- Not very confident
- Not confident at all
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 11:12 am]
1. I think our energy needs and security is like our water needs and security as pointed out by our Government.
2. Without water we can't survive and industries cannot operate.
3. Likewise without electricity power - we and industries cannot function.
4. With geopolitical tension, disruption to trade supply chain, war etc - a high risk that our traditional supply of natural gas and fuel will be cut.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 11:15 am]
5. Hence securing a reliable source of electricity is of vital important.
6. Though we can jointly collaborate with ASEAN countries to build energy plants offshore due to our limited lands - but if any untoward events happen like border war, South China Sea conflict etc - our energy supply will still be cut.
7. Hence having energy plant within our territory is still imperative.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 11:20 am]
1. We have a few sources of energy:-
a. Imported natural gas, solar grid, hydropower, fuel.
b. We install solar panels on HDB flat roof top - but yield is small can only power common areas and unstable supply depending on availability of sun.
c. We also discover geothermal energy in sembawang with hot water vapour underground that can generate electricity - but yield also not sufficient for our needs.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 11:28 am]
2. Hence we need higher yield energy sources to ensure all our housing needs, offices, industries and retails etc can be powered up without disruption and unstable supply.
3. These will leave us with 2 other options:-
a. Hydrogen gas driven electricity produce from water H20 through electrolysis.
b. Nuclear energy source that can come from 3 types of nuclear reactions:-
i. Nuclear fission by splitting atoms that produce enormous of heat to generate electricity through traditional nuclear reactors - but produce alot of nuclear waste that is radioactive.
ii. Nuclear fission through SMR - small modular reactors - produce lesser nuclear waste hence safer.
iii. Nuclear fusion by fusing hydrogen atoms to produce heat and generate electricity. This is the safest nuclear reactions as it has negligible nuclear waste as it produce extremely hot plasma.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 11:33 am]
4. Understand that to perform electrolysis to split seawater hydrogen (H) and oxygen (O) (which is abundant around us) - seems to be the most logical steps (equivalent to dig petrol from the ground like in Middle East) - but there are challenges.
5. But we need to have electricity power (passing electric current) to perform the electrolysis that require fuel (in which we don't have).
6. So it come back to the square one - power through hydrogen gas not a good option.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 11:38 am]
7. So we are now left with one option - nuclear power.
8. Nuclear fission with traditional nuclear reactors are not very safe as it produce alot of radioactive waste and need a bigger land space - hence not suitable for Singapore.
9. We left with 2 alternatives:-
a. Nuclear fission with SMR.
b. Nuclear fusion.
Both of these options are not yet in full production but have alot of potential.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 11:44 am]
1. Let us talk about nuclear fusion that involves fusing hydrogen atoms to produce heat and generate electricity.
2. To produce hot plasma through fusion of hydrogen atoms - high energy input like laser with be required.
3. But currently, higher input energy is required more than the production of energy output.
4. Hence nuclear fusion to produce electricity also don't look viable.
5. So we are now leave with only one last option - nuclear fission through SMR.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 11:51 am]
1. Nuclear fission through SMR require smaller land space.
2. It is modular, and can add on when more energy needs are required.
3. Even though nuclear fission will produce radioactive waste - but it is a very small amount and the risk to health can be minimised and managed.
4. However thinking aloud, can we use offshore islands to place our nuclear fission with SMR and pipe back electricity to our mainland?
This will reduce our worry of radioactive material affecting our health.
5. In retrospect, Government can disseminate more information how nuclear fission with SMR will not affect our health.
6. Also in the event of accident like what happens to Fukushima, or sabotage or fire etc - how nuclear fission will not transmit radioactive material through the air or sea and impact our health.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 12:16 pm]
nuclear power energy is a one way ticket to destruction for Singapore.
i am not optimistic about it..look at japan.
and Singapore is not that far , in geological distance, from the tectonic plate fault lines.
thus not immune to earthquake in the future.
anything mishap at the nuclear power plant..... Singapore will be doomed.
.......
think thrice and thrice more...do not jump into the conclusion Nuclear power energy is the solution for Singapore.
...............
I seen the video on the person who says Singapore has the right condition for nuclear power energy.
really...his objective is to secure business and money for it...thus he is saying good things about Singapore how we have the right condition for a nuclear power plant.
.......
mark my warning.
nuclear power plant energy is a one way doom ticket for Singapore.
in all area. safety and defense wise.
DO NOT TREAD LIGHTLY into nuclear power.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 12:19 pm]
SAFETY wise it IS A PROBLEM.
DEFENSE wise it IS EVEN MORE PROBLEMATIC.
.MUST EMPHASIZE THIS AGAIN SO IT WILL SINK IN DEEP INTO THE CONSIDERATION for the government
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:22 pm]
Nuclear anything happens you got no way to run in Singapore
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:22 pm]
Thinking aloud, probably placing the SMR in Jurong Island where all our petrochemical plants and oil refinery are - could be one viable choice.
As these island has all the safety and security measures put in place.
Also it is far from the mainland.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:23 pm]
Singapore is too crowded even a camp need to make way for residential
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:23 pm]
So do we have space for safety for nuclear
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:24 pm]
Unless you build it off island
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:25 pm]
Somewhere near st John maybe
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:25 pm]
SMR is as safe as any petrochemical plants or oil refinery.
If we feel that petrochemical plants and oil refinery in Jurong island is safe, then SMR and nuclear fusion reactor is safe.
It don't spread radioactive material like nuclear fission reactors like the Fukushima or Chernobyl nuclear reactors.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:25 pm]
Somewhere in the north Malaysia will not be happy
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:26 pm]
Jurong island is one big island, south of Singapore.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:27 pm]
I mean nuclear is the way to go if it is safely made but the main concern is just safety. We need to prepare for the worst. Nothing is 100%safe.
what happens if it explodes. What are the plans and damage
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:27 pm]
Very far from Indonesia and encircled by many Singapore small islands.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:28 pm]
But consider near to Malaysia
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:29 pm]
Cause error tends to happen. And there's a probability everything goes wrong.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:30 pm]
Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and Safety
- *Containment Design*: SMRs are designed with multiple containment structures to prevent the release of radioactive materials in the event of an accident.
- *Passive Safety Features*: Many SMR designs incorporate passive safety features that can cool the reactor without the need for an external power source, reducing the risk of radioactive material release.
Radioactive Material Release
- *Multiple Barriers*: SMRs have multiple barriers to prevent radioactive material release, including the fuel matrix, cladding, reactor vessel, and containment building.
- *Accident Scenarios*: While unlikely, if an accident were to occur, the design of SMRs aims to minimize the release of radioactive materials.
Environmental Impact
- *Site Selection*: SMRs are typically designed to be sited closer to population centers, but still require careful site selection to ensure safety and minimize potential environmental impact.
- *Waste Management*: SMRs produce less waste than traditional reactors, and the waste management strategies are designed to minimize environmental impact.
Regulatory Oversight
- *Safety Standards*: SMRs must meet strict safety standards and regulations set by nuclear regulatory bodies.
- *Public Safety*: The primary goal of these regulations is to ensure public safety and minimize the risk of radioactive material release.
Do you want to explore more about SMR safety, nuclear energy, or advanced reactor designs?
Source :- Meta AI
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:31 pm]
Yes another thing is radioactive waste
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:31 pm]
Where shall we store them
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:31 pm]
When Iran 3 nuclear reactors (those traditional type) were bomb by US penetration bombs - no radioactive spread was discovered.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:32 pm]
A container in which the radioactive waste will decompose and become harmless.
SMR produce very little waste.
Adam, [28/7/2025 12:33 pm]
Our nuclear energy plants will work as perfectly as our mrt 💪💪💪
Adam, [28/7/2025 12:33 pm]
Hopefully we dont overmaintain. Imagine spending too much
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:34 pm]
Even if Singapore don't use nuclear for our energy needs - ASEAN countries will be doing so.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:35 pm]
The half-life of nuclear waste varies greatly depending on the specific isotopes present, ranging from days to billions of years. For example, some fission products like cesium-137 and strontium-90 have half-lives of about 30 years, while actinides like plutonium-239 can have half-lives of 24,000 years, and uranium-238 has a half-life of 4.5 billion years.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:37 pm]
Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and Radioactive Waste
- *Waste Forms*: SMRs produce radioactive waste in various forms, including spent fuel assemblies and other radioactive materials.
- *Storage Containers*: Radioactive waste is typically stored in specially designed containers or dry casks that provide multiple barriers to prevent leakage.
Waste Management Strategies
- *Dry Cask Storage*: Spent fuel is often stored in dry casks, which are designed to be safe and secure for long-term storage.
- *Deep Geological Disposal*: Some countries are exploring deep geological disposal as a long-term solution for radioactive waste.
Radioactive Decay
- *Half-Life*: Radioactive materials decay over time, with each isotope having a specific half-life.
- *Long-Term Storage*: While radioactive materials do decay, they can remain hazardous for thousands to millions of years, requiring careful long-term storage and management.
Research and Development
- *Advanced Waste Management*: Researchers are exploring new technologies and strategies for managing radioactive waste, including advanced reactor designs and waste treatment processes.
Do you want to explore more about radioactive waste management, SMRs, or advanced nuclear technologies?
Source:- Meta AI
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:38 pm]
Do we have the space
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:38 pm]
Are we exporting them? To where and whom
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:38 pm]
Jurong island is one that I can think off and suggested.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:39 pm]
Government to provide answers in discussion with IAEA.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:40 pm]
We already have pulau semakau problem and we definitely cannot do things like Japan
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 12:43 pm]
that is their problem and they have the land mass to build it at a distance from city area...they can even move the city to another place.
.......
not for Singapore.
Singapore is already vulnerable because of our small size...not wise to add on a fatal achilles' heel to Singapore's vulnerability. Defense wise it is a fatal weak spot.
we have really wait for new form of energy technology...just like we waited for decades still newater....even with newater it still cannot solve Singapore's water problem.
........
REALLY NOT WISE TO HAVE NUCLEAR PLANT IN SINGAPORE.
.......
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:45 pm]
Thinking aloud, what happens if Malaysia put a nuclear plant in Johor?
And Indonesia put a nuclear plant in Batam?
Can we tell our neighbours not to?
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:48 pm]
They can as they have the land mass
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:49 pm]
They can put at least a Singapore distance away from city
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:49 pm]
That's what previously M say put one in Johor near to Singapore.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:50 pm]
We will of course dismay and try to stop them
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:50 pm]
How to stop?
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:52 pm]
If they build close to Singapore we can hire online people to change their people mindset. And once resistance is too high they will not build
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:52 pm]
Unless they build place like ulu ulu which will be far from sg
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:52 pm]
Hahaha.
Good try.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:54 pm]
For batam no gov will build there as it's a tourist destination for Singapore and they will lose out
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:54 pm]
Same goes to jb
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 12:54 pm]
first of all johor sultan will have to agree....and he is likely to object...unless they have malicious intention...then that is a possibility...
they do not have the money for it yet, may be they do, but it is not on their menu of consideration yet.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 12:55 pm]
Maybe they will choose sarawak first lol
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:55 pm]
I think we are wishing against something that we cannot control.
Trump has done the impossible, the unthinkable that the whole world think only crazy people will do.
Yet it happens.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 12:56 pm]
we off track.
the key point is defenses and safety..
thus not wise for Singapore to build nuclear power energy plant.
the current nuclear technology is for power output but the handling of nuclear waste still yet to mature into a safe handling level.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 12:58 pm]
The nuclear waste can be buried deep underground into an offshore islands in fail safe containers.
In fact the nuclear waste not a big amount even if the nuclear plants are to run for decades.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 12:59 pm]
off track a bit... maybe government has a plan for Singaporean to become mutants....after generation....there maybe generation of Singaporean able to live with the nuclear waste just like a new form of fungus found thriving on nuclear radiation wastes..
( a long shot and hopefully fantasy)
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:00 pm]
The fungus was not just surviving the immense radiation levels in the reactor building, but seemed to be thriving – even growing towards the very highest levels of gamma radiation. The resilient black fungus is called Cladosporium sphaerospermum and it was observed to thrive where the radiation was highest.1 Feb 2025
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:02 pm]
Maker Faire Rome A Black Fungus Might Be Healing Chernobyl By Drinking Radiation
https://makerfairerome.eu/en/blog/a-black-fungus-might-be-healing-chernobyl-by-drinking-radiation/
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:03 pm]
If Singapore build our nuclear reactors, we gain experience and know how to manage the risks.
Hence if our neighbours are building one near us, we have the expertise to advise and manage the risks.
If we don't even build one, then how to advise or communicate with our neighbours if they are building nuclear reactors near us?
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:03 pm]
Singapore should endure a bit more until a much more safer way of handling nuclear waste and a proper defense plan before embarking on nucelar power as energy source.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:04 pm]
We will be at the mercy of our neighbours.
That's, if you don't have experience in building and running nuclear reactors, why should we listen to you?
In the end, we suffer more than if we have build one and manage it well.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:05 pm]
this is based on friendly neighbors.
Malaysia is growing more extreme year on year especially when PAS is slowly gaining more parliamentary seats year on year.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:08 pm]
With unfriendly neighbours, at least we have the expertise and experience to run nuclear reactors and we can come out with contingency plans how to respond.
If we don't even have experience with nuclear reactors, then we are as good as a paper tiger - can only make noise but cannot execute any good contingency plans to contain the risks.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:11 pm]
The not in my backyard analogy
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:12 pm]
So yeah far from residential area. My first thought was build one in tekong
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:12 pm]
375. I post in REACH (Telegram) LCL (Danny 心), [14/7/2025 12:02 pm]:-
9. However I feel that if parents or abusers turn themselves in or willing to rehabilitate, punishment should be more lenient - to encourage people to rehabilitate.
Such as no imprisonment but must accept rehabilitation and monitoring.
10. If the penalties are too severe, parents and abusers will dodge rather than submit themselves for rehabilitation.
11. But if they are arrested by authorities, then they should be treated like other drug abusers.
12. Drug laced vaping traffickers should be treated like traditional drug traffickers.
----
CNA news 25 Jul 2025 03:43PM (Updated: 25 Jul 2025 06:13PM)
'Vape bins' to be placed across Singapore; no penalties for surrendering devices.
The move comes ahead of a reclassification of etomidate - an anaesthetic agent increasingly misused via e-vaporisers - as an illegal drug.
Vape users are encouraged to dispose of their e-vaporisers in bins that will be placed across 24 locations in Singapore from Friday (Jul 25), as part of efforts to get people to quit the habit.
Vaping is illegal in Singapore, and authorities have been trying to crack down on a rising number of cases.
"Persons who come forward to bin their e-vaporisers or voluntarily seek support for quitting will not face any penalties for doing so," said the Ministry of Health (MOH), the Health Sciences Authority and the People's Association (PA) in a joint media release.
Under the new initiative, called "Bin the Vape", e-vaporiser disposal bins are being placed at 23 community clubs and one Residents' Network Centre for the public to voluntarily dispose of their devices safely.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:14 pm]
As you need military to protect it
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:15 pm]
Tekong is our recruit training areas.
Not a good location.
Also Jurong island infrastructure to hold energy plants are ready and can easily integrate SMR into the electricity power micro grid.
In tekong we need to invest another billions of dollars to build up all the energy infrastructure.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:19 pm]
The only thing needed to address is radioactive waste in a long run
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:20 pm]
Jurong island micro grid run from Jurong island and come into the mainland through Jurong industrial site and spread into all our housing estates and central districts.
Tekong nearest is Changi airport.
Are we going to dig into Changi airport, a new power grid infrastructure and then spread it to Jurong and other housing estates?
I think another hundred billions of dollars and alot of digging throughout whole Singapore is needed.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:20 pm]
And how to protect it in the event of war
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:20 pm]
And terrorist
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:20 pm]
If the technology is safe enough
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:21 pm]
Just buried it deep into one offshore islands for waste.
Not alot of containers needed - as the radioactive waste very little.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:21 pm]
But it accumulates. You are not using it for short term
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:21 pm]
what are the alternative?
weighing the odds, safety, and defense...it is better to wait for new breakthrough in energy source.
than to prematurely jump in and commit on nuclear power.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:21 pm]
How we protect our petrochemical plants and oil refinery in Jurong is how we protect the SMR.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:22 pm]
petrochemical is somehow different from nuclear power plant.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:22 pm]
Yeah
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:22 pm]
Even running into many decades, the island won't be full up with the containers.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:22 pm]
Will it cause chain reaction
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:22 pm]
Pulau semakau
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:23 pm]
Petrochemical plants can have toxic smoke.
Radioactive material also radioactive cloud.
All can have impact on human health.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:24 pm]
If petrol chemical fail and explode will it cause a chain reaction to nuclear plants
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:24 pm]
Vice versa
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:24 pm]
Possible dumping site for nuclear waste.
But it is better for our government working with IAEA to advise.
Because IAEA is our consultant experts.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:25 pm]
Nuclear fission is very different from fuel explosion.
Nuclear fission is atom splitting not explosion.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:25 pm]
I mean there's not enough space for our normal waste liao is there enough space for radioactive
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:26 pm]
just like the expert on our MRT system...only to realize there is upgrading and maintenance problem decades later?
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:26 pm]
And another thing is security once Jurong island conquer there will have no back up supply
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:27 pm]
decades later...oops...we having problems handling nuclear waste and a bigger problem in defenses and safety of nuclear power plant.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:28 pm]
Building a facility is simple but maintain it is not so simple
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:28 pm]
aggressive invader comes....then we say to the aggressors...no no no don't aim the nuclear power plant....we surrender?
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:30 pm]
You can build now and later SG200 haibesh
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:32 pm]
We need to do it in the Singaporean style Kia si and Kia su at the same time
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:32 pm]
Well, handling nuclear waste is up to our government discussion with IAEA who are our nuclear experts.
I think they will explore all possibilities.
What we are discussing now are some layman discussion with whatever limited information that we have.
But I intuitively feel that SMR is not an insurmountable obstacle to breach.
In fact, it is as safe as whatever petrochemical plants or oil refinery we have.
Whatever security and safety we have build into Jurong island, I think it is possible to secure our SMR if we build it in conjunction with expertise from IAEA.
In fact IAEA will provide intense scrutiny to ensure how we build the SMR is safe not only for Singapore but for the whole world community.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:34 pm]
The same arguments as our neighbours building nuclear reactors next to us.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:35 pm]
Since it's small and safe why not in tekong where it provide a backup in security. If Jurong island fail we have tekong
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:36 pm]
Eggs cannot put in one basket
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:36 pm]
not same arguments.
Singapore survival is based on equality, openness and tolerance, and more importantly secularism.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:36 pm]
Unless you're willing to dig out another hundred billions of $ to build micro grid infrastructure from tekong to Singapore plus digging throughout Singapore.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:37 pm]
This also provides electricity for tekong to train
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:38 pm]
You say aggressors bomb our nuclear reactors we die.
If our neighbours turn hostile and build nuclear reactors next to us and decide to bomb it?
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:40 pm]
die lor..
before that why creating a fatal achellie's heel...
.....
lets wait further for a better energy sources..or until a safer way to recycling nuclear waste.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:40 pm]
I think you didn't get my point.
Building a nuclear reactor is not a silo.
It needs to connect to all the buildings in Singapore to provide electricity through a massive power grids.
Currently all the web of power grids are running and tunnel from Jurong island to all our houses, offices and industries estates.
Are we going to build the same massive power grids from Tekong and Changi airport where our planes are flying?
G, [28/7/2025 1:41 pm]
The way this is presented, nuclear energy in SG is a done deal already
Most we can do is station the nuclear plant in a place where any potential nuclear fallout will guarantee collateral damage to aggressors to deter them from any funny business
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:45 pm]
Why not. I heard plans and land reclaimation on going in tekong
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:45 pm]
I think I give up.....
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:45 pm]
And can extend to ubin
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:46 pm]
I think our smart engineers will have a solution
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:48 pm]
Probably an electrical engineer can better explain how those micro grids work.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 1:49 pm]
wait further.. don't be too eager to dig a hole where Singapore cannot out of decades later.
.......
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:51 pm]
I think better halt first as we really don't have enough land to do it
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:54 pm]
This one wait for authorities to decide where to build.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:55 pm]
I will not want want my children and grandchildren to train in Pulau Tekong firing blanks, throw thunder flash next to a SMR nuclear reactors.
Wonder if our government allow soldiers to run around shooting blanks and throwing thunder flash in Jurong island where our petrochemical plants and oil refineries are around or not?
Probably we can see alot of fireworks and huge explosion in Jurong island.
Or now we see nuclear reactors exploding when our recruits shoot blanks and throw thunder flash into the nuclear reactors in Pulau Tekong....
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:56 pm]
Tekong is a big area...
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 1:57 pm]
Nobody ask you to build by the camp
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 1:57 pm]
Jurong island is bigger than Pulau Tekong.
Even smoking is strictly disallowed much less firing blanks and throwing explosives like thunder flash?
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 2:00 pm]
Jurong island is 32 km sq.
Pulau Tekong is 25 km sq.
Though Pulau Tekong is under reclamation and land space expanding.
REACH Singapore, [28/7/2025 2:01 pm]
📢 Topic 📢
Hanny: [28/7/2025 2:01 pm]
Nuclear energy is the only way going forward for Singapore and its neighbors. Small nuclear reactors using technologies that do not radioactive material will be more common in the near future. Look at molten salt reactors.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 2:03 pm]
Yes.
We have no other better alternatives.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:03 pm]
Let's build it on semakau island then as I really don't want all our power plants cramp together
Hanny, [28/7/2025 2:05 pm]
Johor sez is an excellent place because it requires a lot of energy due to data centers development.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 2:05 pm]
Molten salt reactors can use nuclear waste as fuel.
I think one good way to dispose off toxic radioactive waste.
No need to store in containers for disposal some more.
Good idea.
In fact, MSR also use to generate electricity and hydrogen production.
Another option for electricity generation.
Hanny, [28/7/2025 2:06 pm]
Joint development with Neighbours would allay the fears
Hanny, [28/7/2025 2:07 pm]
Prosper together
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:07 pm]
If Malaysia agrees
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 2:07 pm]
A possible good idea.
But also I think we need to build one within our territorial boundary in case we are cut off from access in the event of hostility.
Eg. Threaten to cut our water supply.
Hence Jurong island is one option.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:09 pm]
the world has yet to handle nuclear waste safely....
why rush into it...and face the fatal problem it brings Singapore decades later?
safety and defense issues added on to the problem with no satisfactory solution.
.....
i still think it is better to endure and wait further. rather than face the consequence of the problem brought by nuclear power.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:09 pm]
How about build at the island that near to potential customer? since our population is small, the excess electricity can be sold to them.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:11 pm]
If we plan better, we should be able to handle nuclear incident.... with What-if scenario, we could create SOP.... as long as the we can cover all the What-if, I think it should be fine.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 2:13 pm]
Yes.
We have no choice, no other good options.
In fact when we build our petrochemical plants and oil refinery in Jurong island in 2009, there are also many opposing voices.
Say if fire, explosion - then Singapore electricity cut off and our cloud will be full of toxicity and we all die.
After 26 years, we are safe and still humming.
No one raise objections anymore.
In fact, there is fire in one refinery if I recalled.
But it is well segregated and fire are well contained and did not spread to other refineries because of all the safety features build into it.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:15 pm]
It is the same thing... other countries had already started... How they handle the nuclear waste? Send it to moon? 😅😅
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:16 pm]
the problem Singapore facing with MRT system , a super hot potatoe that most MPs does not want to be handling already shows that though Singapore has put on effort of consideration all possibility, but there is still area Singapore overlooked.
.....
the recent sinkhole issues...caused by water from burst pipe or sewage..
is also another concern that Singapore still has room to to consider in terms of safety.
.........
please do wait and tough it out for a moment longer.
once embarked on nuclear power, there will be no turning back ....
things will turn badly very quickly.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:20 pm]
It is all engineering issue.... If all the road is made of concrete (Hard pavement), we might not have sinkhole... until the sinkhole is big enough.... If we are too afraid to advance, then we will hentak kaki... Yes, there will be risk for everything we do.... but by doing nothing, we know that we won't survive either.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:22 pm]
It's about safety and maintenance. Building it was never an issue
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:23 pm]
And how to defend it as in war we have seen many targets nuclear facility first
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:23 pm]
Agree... that's why I said, as long as we have SOP in place for "What-if" scenario, then it would be wise to embark on new technology...
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:24 pm]
We are in the era of war where war are easily break out.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:25 pm]
Combine it with political strategy.... That's why we made friends with many countries.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:25 pm]
it is a no turning back route....
......
best to think very very very carefully...
......
if we do not learn the lesson from our mry system and sinkhole safety...it will come to haunt Singapore years later after the nuclear power is built...which will be even tougher to handle than just disruptive MRT service.
it has life and death consequences
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:26 pm]
Building it deep underground is a option
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:26 pm]
In order to prevent sinkhole, you could build piling foundation... but piling foundation is not suitable for roads... but it is suitble for building...
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:27 pm]
The only thing I worry is nuclear waste
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:27 pm]
Gov needs to come out with plan for it
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:28 pm]
Some say no need to worry... Very little waste. But waste is still waste it will accumulates and half life is quite long
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:29 pm]
you missing the point..
there could be things that the government missed out when considering to build nuclear power..... which will have life and death consequences for Singapore years or decades later.
stop thinking narrowly on the sinkhole.
......
look at a broader perspective, including safety and defenses.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:30 pm]
enough of wasting time. enjoy debatimg ovrr it.
driving taxi now.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:31 pm]
SOP.... if SOP is missed out... then they don't do homework properly.... SOP also includes safety and defenses.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:33 pm]
Also, I only reply on your concern on sinkhole... however, you could also apply the thinking framework on other cases.... anyway, if we don't adapt in this new advanced world, we will extinct.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:39 pm]
Ancel Keys, a physiologist, proposed the lipid-heart hypothesis in the 1950s, suggesting that high intakes of saturated fat and cholesterol lead to heart disease. This hypothesis, particularly his Seven Countries Study (https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-samsung-rev2&sca_esv=ef5f6f2b1a614c94&cs=0&sxsrf=AE3TifMpRoHdfEJDyobdstTOz9joFsqIEQ%3A1753684321923&q=Seven+Countries+Study&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjBtZeY996OAxVLZWwGHeCaOR4QxccNegQIBBAB&mstk=AUtExfBWCMYA9Bv9rQVNw4Umq_ouWCRt3mOMWZi_ceKmmfna5C69ldC52e9PA_JYBaj1Y_-uRJHWcysbD-e0bZiJJNDMFrL7D-YuHrKH_oKEyD5dt_smEtE2uV60-zkpzSdbOKy1WDPrIgXhcd33I0-TKpvAIO1B_yLibzzhSWTUqOlsMgGXbZzrbLubdwqTG8mXzAAduaqJ_3To3lC0ESJu3nMhuY9jYVIgnz9KxZafHriF6O5xwtshxZoYX28oxQS7wE82-PUXu0LiHGoi443oP6pc&csui=3), influenced dietary guidelines to reduce saturated fat intake. However, his work has been criticized for cherry-picking data and oversimplifying the relationship between fat and heart health.
ancel keys lied about fats...and because of his lies....wasted population's life for decades....causing health issue with his faulty reports on fats.
......
this Mr Grossi is making a sales pitch...trying to convince Singapore government to build nuclear power..
to him it is a business and money..
it is totally different for Singapore..once Built and anything missed out ....it is Singaporeans' lives and livelihood at stake.
..............
孙子曰，
兵者国之大事，死生之地，存亡之道，不可不察也。
.......
the miscalculation of MRT system already causing problem to Singapore and Singaporeans...and we only realize it decades later..
......
imagine the fatal problem nuclear power will bring if Singapore government miscalculated the pro and cons.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:40 pm]
by then Singapore will cease to be the shinning little red dot..
it will be the little radioactive red dot.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 2:41 pm]
If we don't have MRT, Singaporeans cannot easily travel to any parts of Singapore.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 2:42 pm]
When I travel overseas, I begin to realise how efficient is Singapore in travelling.
Mainly due to Singapore MRT.
And travelling in Singapore is comfortable, cooling and can reach many parts of Singapore very easily and efficiently.
Whereas in overseas, travelling is a big headache - traffic jam, not friendly public transport, hire cabs or private hire more expensive and caught in jam.
When I come back to Singapore and travel in MRT, it is like comparison of heaven and h...
I feel so relief to have stayed in Singapore.
Never mind the cheap car prices overseas - always caught in jam, haphazard traffic and insufficient car park to park.
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:42 pm]
yet the consequences is different between MRT and Nuclear power.
just inconvenience on disruptive MRT service.
for nuclear power...it is life and death issue.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:43 pm]
From your sample, isn't it the hypothesis report is not being analysed deep enough? Should we build SOP to prevent this thing to happen in future for new invention or report? If you don't build MRT, we will be like Jakarta, bangkok where traffic jam is hell... needs 3 hours to travel.... how much Singapore will lose time and $$ if there is no MRT? Just Imagine, In jakarta, the distance can be travelled only 15 mins at night (No traffic) had to be done in 2 hours due to traffic jam.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:44 pm]
Nope .... if SOP is stringent and good enough...
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:45 pm]
you are assumption with sop it will solve the problem.
we do not know what we do not know..
we do not know what we might missed out during consideration and planning..and the consequences is fatal for Singapore.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:47 pm]
Bro... I believe most companies in Singapore had SOP... can we tell them that you don't know their own SOP.... Come on.... be honest... at least to yourself... of course SOP is created by person who is specialised in its industries... don't expect person like you and me to create SOP for Nuclear facility...😆😆
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:48 pm]
Singapore missed out the maintenance, upgrading and renewal of MRT system... decades ago...
what makes us think Singapore government will not commit the same mistake for nuclear power which has a much more fatal consequences for Singapore than just disruption in MRT system and services
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:48 pm]
currently No amount of SOP will solve the MRT system problem... maintenance, upgrading and renewal.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:49 pm]
Do we have to discuss this? Of course after SOP had been created... we need to do and check... ever heard ISO... Your question is like.... Singapore had the law.... how come there is still crime? come on...
Hanny, [28/7/2025 2:49 pm]
If Singapore were to go nuclear, it has to be a technology that does not use uranium. This technology is advancing rapidly.
Hanny, [28/7/2025 2:50 pm]
Should a disaster occur, no radioactive leaks would happen.
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:50 pm]
Whatever it is.... let the expert think and decide... My point is.. it is better to try...rather than sit and do nothing.... and waiting for our doom....
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 2:51 pm]
Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and Fuel
- *Uranium Fuel*: Many SMR designs use uranium as the fuel for nuclear fission, similar to traditional nuclear reactors.
- *Low-Enriched Uranium (LEU)*: SMRs typically use LEU, which has a lower enrichment level than the highly enriched uranium used in some research reactors or naval reactors.
Fuel Cycle
- *Fuel Form*: The uranium fuel is often in the form of uranium dioxide (UO2) pellets, which are loaded into fuel rods.
- *Fuel Efficiency*: Some SMR designs aim to improve fuel efficiency and reduce waste production through advanced fuel cycles or design features.
Alternative Fuel Options
- *Advanced Fuels*: Some SMR designs are exploring alternative fuels, such as uranium nitride or other advanced fuel forms, which could offer improved performance or safety characteristics.
Do you want to explore more about SMR fuel cycles, advanced reactor designs, or nuclear energy applications?
Source:- Meta AI
Joomua Tng, [28/7/2025 2:51 pm]
by then when we found out what was missed out is already too late.
....anyway i really have to drive taxi..
enjoy the debate on an important subject.of Singapore life and death.
.........
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:51 pm]
BTW, do you take transport to work? or walk? since you are very conservative...
Hanny, [28/7/2025 2:53 pm]
I don’t have car
Ahin, [28/7/2025 2:53 pm]
Don't take bus or car.. because they might explode and you will be trapped inside....
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:53 pm]
Google say nuclear fusion reactor
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 2:53 pm]
Nuclear fusion is different from nuclear fission SMR.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:54 pm]
It's produce very little waste
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:56 pm]
Smr despite their smaller size may produce more nuclear waste
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 2:57 pm]
From Gemini ai
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 3:00 pm]
Nuclear fusion fuse 2 hydrogen atoms together to produce plasma - like the Sun.
It don't produce nuclear waste.
The hot plasma produce heat to turn turbine and generate electricity.
The challenge is how to fuse 2 hydrogen atoms with laser knocking 2 atoms at high speed - that requires alot of laser energy.
The laser energy input is much higher than output.
Hence it don't make sense to use nuclear fusion to produce electricity.
Also need tokamaks - a doughnut device to hold the hot plasma through magnetic field to enable high pressure, high temperature for nuclear fusion to take place.
Hence nuclear fusion option is not viable.
Like Sun that produce plasma, it is not radioactive.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 3:01 pm]
In the future yes.i have faith in nus
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 3:01 pm]
Hanny is supportive of nuclear SMR.
I think you got the wrong guy.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 3:02 pm]
If they never give a good ans in nuclear waste I think will not give a green light
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 3:04 pm]
Hanny suggested MSR - molten salt reactors that make use of nuclear waste as fuel.
So no need to dispose off the nuclear waste.
Of course government need to assess with IAEA whether this is feasible as they are the experts.
RY, [28/7/2025 3:27 pm]
Science journals: Nuclear fusion and the promise and challenges of making energy like the sun | The Straits Times https://share.google/UlsJEzZEfFpz04bps
RY, [28/7/2025 3:28 pm]
SG may consider Nuclear Fusion Power, if the experimental is successful and commercialise in future
RY, [28/7/2025 3:30 pm]
Nuclear Fusion Power - World Nuclear Association https://share.google/GORL5bjaeKuPBg6sF
RY, [28/7/2025 3:32 pm]
Check out this video from this search, sun fusion power https://g.co/kgs/oGEHsKr
RY, [28/7/2025 3:36 pm]
Hope to see more experimental breakthroughs in the "artificial sun" power
If it is successful, it may solve most of the other energy pros & cons & problems and even global energy pollution issues
RY, [28/7/2025 3:43 pm]
Nuclear power is just one of energy source among other renewable energy
SG govt may have to seriously consider using nuclear as alternative energy, as too many issues to resolve and do have the nec expertise to support nuclear plants, and what if any accidents will to occur, which may cause detrimental mankind health and environment issues (eg Japan nuclear waste into sea)
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 3:44 pm]
It needs 250 football size to hold the nuclear fusion plant.
Singapore won't have such spaces.
Also the technology is very far away from commercially viable.
It would also be important for these plants to produce more energy than they consume, which fusion experiments have not yet been able to do.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 3:50 pm]
The issue is :-
If our neighbours move faster than us in nuclear reactors, it will be more dangerous for us.
If we move ahead first with all the safety measures in place, we can control the narrative and nudge our neighbours into a safer implementation.
The reverse will be disastrous for us - because we need to be technically advanced.
Nicholas, [28/7/2025 3:51 pm]
My view is that we should avoid nuclear, as frenemies could use that as a pretext to bomb us, even though the intend is to use it for civilian purposes. Just look at what happened in Iran, even though they have said all along that they are not intending to build a nuclear bomb, the USA still bombed them.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 3:53 pm]
Then let us imagine the scenario whereby all ASEAN countries build nuclear reactors except Singapore.
What will be the consequences?
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 3:55 pm]
Then we just import electricity in lor
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 3:55 pm]
By then it will be safe to explore nuclear
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 3:55 pm]
I think you didn't think deeply enough.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 3:56 pm]
Or other sources of energy
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 3:57 pm]
It is not only about energy.
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 3:57 pm]
Then what weapons?
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 3:59 pm]
I have already paint the scenario, Malaysia build nuclear reactors in Johor, Indonesia build nuclear reactors in Bintan and Batam.
Singapore build nothing.
Then how safe will be Singapore?
How Singapore control the narrative of how nuclear reactors should be built to avoid risk when we don't even know what is nuclear reactors when we don't have one?
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 4:02 pm]
But Singapore is just too small and the environmental impact is huge
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 4:03 pm]
Unless you build it deep down 2okm
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:03 pm]
SMR is safe even in high population density.
IAEA the nuclear experts has already confirmed that.
REACH Singapore, [28/7/2025 4:05 pm]
📢 Topic 📢
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 4:06 pm]
Like I said govt needs to address all questions first
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:06 pm]
And if Johor build just few km away from Singapore, you think is safe for Singapore?
RY, [28/7/2025 4:08 pm]
U agree that nuclear has safety issues whether it is built by our neighbouring countries or SG ourselves
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:08 pm]
And if we advise Johor how nuclear reactors to be build so as to be safe.
You think Johor will listen to you when we don't even have one?
How do you control your nuclear reactors narrative?
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:10 pm]
Building nuclear reactors have many types.
Some are safe, some are not.
It is whether we can build a safer one and influence our neighbours which one to build.
If we don't even have one, who will listen to us?
RY, [28/7/2025 4:10 pm]
However I do agree to have own energy, it is better to be reliant on other countries via importing
Look at europe now, who depend on russia for energy supply
Khai Mun L., [28/7/2025 4:13 pm]
By helping/collaborating other countries build their nuclear reactors, we would also gain knowledge on how to better develop our own when the time comes
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:13 pm]
Just like fire is dangerous.
But as long as we can control it, fire is useful to cook for us.
But because fire is dangerous, we don't use it to cook.
This is not the right approach.
The approach is knowing all the risks, know how to control it, then use it to our advantage.
Same approach to SMR nuclear reactors.
It is not as dangerous as it sounds.
Khai Mun L., [28/7/2025 4:15 pm]
If the reason to reject is due to being dangerous, then our existing gas and oil processing plants is the same. Can blow up suddenly and keep emitting cancerous smoke that we breathe in
RY, [28/7/2025 4:15 pm]
We can buy fm country that built artificial sun power eg china, which is experimenting now
If we dont have the capacity to build ourselves
Even now, SG energy are mainly buy fm other countries eg natural gas fm indonesia
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:16 pm]
This nuclear reactors thingy is not a new issue.
It was raised in 2013.
My boss point blank ask me should we build a nuclear reactor in 2013.
I was shocked and was thinking about it since then.
And I realise now that if we still procrastinate, Singapore will be in deep shit.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:17 pm]
Nuclear fusion will not be ready until 1/2 century later.
Khai Mun L., [28/7/2025 4:17 pm]
Relating energy self-sufficiency to our water issues with malaysia would be a way to start.
We had been 'held hostage' by neighboring countries in the past
Jun Ming, [28/7/2025 4:22 pm]
My concern is just nuclear waste. As no matter what type of nuclear it will still produce waste.
Japan just throw them into the sea. And most countries just bury it in ground. But for Singapore there is no space to bury and I doubt other countries will accept such waste
As for safety Japan can do it, other countries can do it should be more or less safe.
RY, [28/7/2025 4:22 pm]
https://youtu.be/E5tnQcS4LwY?si=KEUoQz-hFtrlp3rb
RY, [28/7/2025 4:24 pm]
If this Aussie-SG solar mega-project will to materialise, may solve SG energy issues
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:27 pm]
Singapore power requirements is 13GW currently - and could increase in the future.
Without nuclear energy, we can't meet our power demand.
RY, [28/7/2025 4:39 pm]
https://youtu.be/hVoIi6zI9As?si=CKemrWgClr-gMNq_
RY, [28/7/2025 4:39 pm]
GeoThermal Energy
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:44 pm]
Geothermal energy - yield is not that big.
RY, [28/7/2025 4:45 pm]
Nuclear is not the only solution for energy production
Many other renewable energy are avail eg solar/geothermal/wind/hydro n etc
And SG energy should be multi-source and not just one
If we cant produce, then we import fm other countries
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:46 pm]
Our current low carbon import only meet 5.6GW.
We still need 7.3 GW more.
Only nuclear energy can meet.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 4:47 pm]
Besides nuclear energy is our geopolitical necessity for survival - as ASEAN countries will be going nuclear energy whether we like it or not.
If we are the odd one out - forget about our survival.
RY, [28/7/2025 4:56 pm]
Quite a few countries eg china/usa/europe/japan n etc are already researching into "artificial sun power"
If it is successful one day, it will certainly be the next energy era and breakthrough for mankind
Sametime resolving the pollution problems
With our fast tech advancement, lets hope that there is breakthrough for this new energy source and may materialise in near future 🙏
SG may not be able to build the plant, but we may invest and research together
RY, [28/7/2025 5:07 pm]
I cannot decide what ASEAN/other countries do
But we may decide what SG can do
Learn fm other countries mistakes eg Japan/Chernobyl nuclear disasters to mankind and world eco system
Why countries are choosing to abandon nuclear plants eg germany/taiwan and etc ?
Hope SG govt may seriously consider, when there are others renewable energy avail also
If the 'artificial sun power" experimental is successful, it will be the next era of energy revolution
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 5:08 pm]
1. During conflict, when our water supply is cut, at least we have newater, reservoirs and desalination plants running.
We still have water to drink.
2. If we do not have energy plant and nuclear reactors within our territory, when people cut the power grids, our houses and industries got no electricity.
We cannot see tv, no computer, no internet, no smartphone, cannot cook our food, cannot work in the office, cannot go to bank, our economy go to zero.
RY, [28/7/2025 5:11 pm]
I do agree that energy/water are essential/vital resources for any countries survival/economic growth 👆
Look at europe now whom dependent for russia for energy supply
RY, [28/7/2025 5:12 pm]
And most of SG energy source are imported
RY, [28/7/2025 5:15 pm]
SG govt has many factors to consider if wish to build nuclear plant
Have to weigh the pros and cons
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 5:16 pm]
SMR nuclear reactors are safe.
There are thousands of traditional nuclear reactors fission out there in many countries all over the world for many decades and didn't get into accidents.
Except Fukushima and Chernobyl got into accidents, one due to tsunami, the other due to poor design and mismanagement.
Even Ukraine nuclear reactors got bomb around them, Iran 3 nuclear reactors bomb directly on them don't emit radioactive spread because of the containment barriers and other safety measures in place.
SMR nuclear reactor uses even safer Uranium material UO2 pellets (Uranium Oxide pellets) loaded into fuel rods or other advanced fuel form such as uranium nitride - not those traditional Uranium.
This is a LEU - low enrichment uranium that produce very low radioactive.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 5:21 pm]
In addition, it is protected by multiple barriers that poses almost zero chances of leakage.
It includes multiple containment barriers - fuel matrix, cladding, reactor vessels and containment building.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 5:26 pm]
Just like lighting up a cooking pot with fire to cook, how can fire be dangerous during cooking and if we properly switch off the fire?
Unless we pour fuel into the fire or don't switch off the fire in cooking stove after cooking - then fire will be dangerous.
Same as SMR nuclear reactor, if the Uranium Oxide pellets (small little pallets) with multiple layers of protection are run - with passive cutoff safety measures that cut off the reactors unlike traditional nuclear fission reactors - why are people so scared about SMR nuclear reactor?
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 5:29 pm]
It is like a tiger roaming in the wild is dangerous.
But if tiger keep in the cage in a zoo, then people will start to take selfies and wifies - and people don't think is dangerous.
The SMR nuclear reactor is the tiger in the zoo kept in a cage.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 5:36 pm]
1. Previously when our government coin the ideas of newater - recycling water from sewage and drainage, people make noise say yucks, so dirty, so filthy, so unhygienic.
2. Our neighbours M make fun of us with his politicians, say we drink urine.
3. My cousins from Malaysia even come over to Singapore and laugh at us about newater.
I bring a bottle of newater and drink in front of them - and told them this is the urine you are talking about.
I say all humans drink urine and waste water.
Even the river that flow into your reservoirs, got humans and animals pass urine, then go for water treatment and in fact you are drinking it.
I say.
4. Now everyone happily drink the newater.
5. So it is the foresight and vision of our government to be able to see more than the surface - but able to think deeply.
This nuclear energy is another big barrier we need to cross to secure our energy security that are needed for our survival.
REACH Singapore, [28/7/2025 6:00 pm]
📢 Topic 📢
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 6:23 pm]
The capacity of Jurong island is very big.
Each SMR nuclear reactor can produce 300 MW of electricity.
To produce the remaining 7.3GW, we need only 24 SMR nuclear reactors in which Jurong island can easily accomodate.
Because the SMR footfall is very small.
100 meters by 20 meters per SMR.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 6:31 pm]
Jurong island 32 Sq km can easily accomodate 24 SMR nuclear reactors even if line up side by side.
Khai Mun L., [28/7/2025 6:35 pm]
As time pass and technology mature, i believe the issue of nuclear waste would be resolved.
Sg also looking at carbon capture locations by putting containers deep underground. I believe our military ammunition kept same way. Could do the same for nuclear waste.
Nicholas, [28/7/2025 6:40 pm]
There is a safe distance recommended: "The recommended safe distance from a nuclear reactor, in case of an emergency, is within a 10-mile radius for immediate evacuation and a 50-mile radius for potential contamination of water and food supplies. These are defined by the Emergency Planning Zones (EPZ) established by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)."
Khai Mun L., [28/7/2025 6:42 pm]
I assume it is when open air? Likely can decrease distance if there are enought barriers in place
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 6:44 pm]
The safety distance for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) within population vicinity isn't strictly defined by a fixed distance, unlike traditional nuclear reactors. Instead, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is adopting a more flexible, risk-informed approach ¹.
*Key Considerations:*
- *Population Density*: The NRC considers population density around potential reactor sites, but the new guidelines allow advanced reactor owners to demonstrate compliance based on potential radiological consequences of accidents specific to their reactor design.
- *Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ)*: The EPZ size will be determined based on the reactor's design and potential accident scenarios, rather than a fixed distance. This approach aims to facilitate emergency preparedness and reduce potential doses to large numbers of people in the event of a severe accident.
- *Site-Specific Factors*: The NRC will consider site-specific factors, including the type of reactor, its safety features, and the surrounding population, when evaluating the suitability of a potential site.
*Regulatory Framework:*
The NRC's revised Regulatory Guide (RG) 4.7 provides a more flexible framework for advanced reactor siting, allowing for ¹:
- *Performance-Based Approach*: Reactor operators can demonstrate compliance with population density rules based on safety features and accident scenarios rather than strict adherence to fixed population density requirements.
- *Technology-Inclusive Approach*: The revised guide accommodates various reactor designs, including SMRs, and allows for more nuanced evaluation of site suitability.
Source:- Meta AI
REACH Singapore, [28/7/2025 6:45 pm]
Dear Contributors,
⏰ We will be closing the chat in 15 minutes ⏰
Thank you very much for being part of our Telegram chat and participating actively.
Goodnight!
Megan 😊
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 6:47 pm]
SMR_Safety_and_Security_TemplateB.pdf
https://gnssn.iaea.org/main/ANNuR/Activity%20Documents%20%20Public/Workshop%20on%20Small%20Modular%20Reactor%20(SMR)%20Safety%20and%20Licensing/SMR_Safety_and_Security_TemplateB.pdf
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 6:49 pm]
Jurong island safety distance meet the SMR nuclear reactor safety distance requirements.
LCL (Danny 心), [28/7/2025 6:52 pm]
This document is produced by IAEA.
So I think people will be reassured after reading this document.
REACH Singapore, [28/7/2025 7:00 pm]
Dear Contributors
We will be closing the chat for today.
Thank you very much for being part of our Telegram chat and participating actively.
Goodnight!
Megan 😊
====
After note:-
心法:
Size of the pellet is similar to 10 cent or 20 cents coin.
A hand can easily hold 20 pellets.
Uranium material for nuclear fission reactors - that produce alot of radioactive waste look like this.
Radioactive waste for traditional nuclear fission reactors from uranium material can go into tonnes.
[30/07, 8:39 pm] ☸️ Danny 心: What is the dimensions of the container for the natural, enriched and depleted uranium?
[30/07, 8:39 pm] Meta AI:
Container Dimensions for Uranium
The dimensions of containers for natural, enriched, and depleted uranium can vary depending on the specific application, transportation requirements, and storage needs. Here are some general dimensions for common containers:
Standard Containers
- *UF6 Cylinders*: For uranium hexafluoride (UF6), which is used for enrichment, cylinders typically have a diameter of about 12-30 inches (30-76 cm) and a length of 4-15 feet (1.2-4.6 meters).
- *Spent Fuel Casks*: For storing and transporting spent nuclear fuel, casks can be much larger, with dimensions ranging from 4-6 meters (13-20 feet) in length and 2-3 meters (6-10 feet) in diameter.
Specialized Containers
- *Type A Containers*: For transporting small quantities of radioactive materials, including uranium, Type A containers are designed to withstand normal conditions of transport. These containers can be much smaller, with dimensions ranging from 10-100 cm (4-39 inches) in length and 10-50 cm (4-20 inches) in diameter.
The exact dimensions of containers for natural, enriched, and depleted uranium will depend on the specific requirements of the material being handled and the regulations governing its transportation and storage.
https://images.app.goo.gl/1u9cLw941b7qJDB48
https://images.app.goo.gl/98DY5VN1EqW8DdH56
Gorilla versus kachang puteh.
1 bigger than human size cylinder versus 1 peanut pellet.
1. 1 traditional Uranium nuclear fission reactor can produce 1.3GW of electricity - with those huge cylinders of natural uranium.
2. 1 SMR nuclear fission reactor with those uranium oxide pellets of 10-20 cent coin size produce 300MW of electricity.
And the radioactive waste produce by traditional nuclear fission reactor can be in tonnes.
Whereas SMR radioactive waste - look like "peanuts".
