Energy Prices rising. Should we consider nuclear power?

purpledragon84 SG

It seems that most of you have serious misconceptions regarding nuclear power. There are a few other countries, including the United States, that are relooking at nuclear power. France is an excellent example, with about 80% of their energy needs met by nuclear power.

Nuclear power is one of the least pollutive energy source available. It requires only minimal land space, which is suitable for Singapore's offshore islands. Secondly, with proper monitoring, there are no dangers associated with nuclear power plants. The incident that happened in USSR in the 80s was due to their experimentation with the reactor.

Nuclear energy also has one of the lowest operational costs. Once the plant is built up and the source of enriched uranium secured, there's practically no additional costs.

The issue now with nuclear energy is public acceptance as well as strategic location of these plants. Solar energy, though the best, requires massive land space, and unless we build them over our roofs, we are never going to actually replace natural gas/oil/coal.

lowest operational cost only if u plan to use it 24/7..den the cost of operation will be low..so the more impt qn is do we even need that source of power to be produced 24/7 in the 1st place, are our industries currently running 24/7..?

moreover the capital cost of building one is sky-high..

purpledragon84 SG

Singapore Nuclear? where got space to build... tear down bukit timah hill and make nulcear power station there meh?

i GUARANTEE you that will not happen=)

Shotgun SG

Whether nuclear power is good or not, its not up to the citizens to decide as per SOP.

However its not up to PAP either, its whether USA will allow it or not.

I believe it will only with one condition - USA military supervision at all stages of procurement, delivery, storage and disposal of the fuel.

Btw, dont you know you have dispose of the hazardous waste somewhere? Where huh?

"it's just that the above statement is more towards sophistry"

IMHO, PAP has the much greater penchant for sophistry as demonstrated by its propogandists in this forum.

No, the US military will not supervise it unless we ask them to. And a civilian reactor is none of their concern. The only agency we ought, or rather we must have full transparency to is the IAEA. So essentially, if we are "certified" by IAEA to have fully complied to their standards, and that wear are not making erm.... "silver bullets", we'll be fine.

Currently, only the US stores nuclear waste. Other countries like UK and Japan reprocess their waste to be used as fuel again.

Uncle Ver SG SG

"my question is, is singapore running out of power,seems there not so much manufacture industry."

The point of the thread is not about the supply; its about prices. If Malaysia/ Singapore was not politicized and free market prevails in Malaysia, electricity companies can also supply a portion of electricity to compete with local electricity companies.

Uncle Ver SG SG

"Currently, only the US stores nuclear waste. Other countries like UK and Japan reprocess their waste to be used as fuel again."

If I am not mistaken, Oz also stores nuclear waste and the waste cannot be reprocessed repeatedly.

"No, the US military will not supervise it unless we ask them to. And a civilian reactor is none of their concern."

Yes they will. The IAEA is a powerless watchdog organization (re: Iran). They can recommend reports, but lets face it, only the USA will enforce it.

After MSK's escape, do you think that USA will trust Singapore with guarding a potential weapon that could kill thousands of people? Moreover, I recall a Singaporean (or Malaysian working in Singapore I cant remember) got caught recently acting as middle-man selling the centrifuges to Iran.

Shotgun SG

"Currently, only the US stores nuclear waste. Other countries like UK and Japan reprocess their waste to be used as fuel again."

If I am not mistaken, Oz also stores nuclear waste and the waste cannot be reprocessed repeatedly.

"No, the US military will not supervise it unless we ask them to. And a civilian reactor is none of their concern."

Yes they will. The IAEA is a powerless watchdog organization (re: Iran). They can recommend reports, but lets face it, only the USA will enforce it.

1. Even if the waste cannot be repeatedly reprocessed, we'd still have already achieved greater energy to fuel efficiency. As for what we can do to the eventual waste, I'm sure we can think of a solution should we really decide to go into it.

2. Again, its for IAEA to decide, not the US government. If we are fully transparent and compliant to IAEA, there is no reason for US to enforce anything.

tripwire SG

LOL.

That reminds me of a stupid book that criticize LKY.

Because LKY said nothing is free in this world, then the author rebunk by saying, "Since his birth, doesn't he needs air? But did he pay for the air that he breathed in? Doesn't he needs sunlight? Did he pay for the sunlight he received?"

I'm not a pro-PAP or pro-LKY, it's just that the above statement is more towards sophistry rather than a debate. That's the reason I said it is "stupid"

air and sunlight is great... if you are a tree...

tripwire SG

nuclear power is dangerous

wat if the nuclear power plant explodes like the one at Soviet Union in the 1980s?

they dont explode.... but they do meltdown...

with over 450 nuclear power plant around the world... and starting soon near us among our neighbours.... including indonesia and vietnam.

a nuclear meltdown from our neighbours would affect the entire south east asia(using chernobyl incident as a reference)....

what you gonna do? bomb their nuclear plant like wat isreal did against the iraqi nuclear plant?

tripwire SG

Nuclear power-plants have a lower accident rate compared to the often-perceived "safer" conventional ones.

But should anything go wrong, it's game over.

i feel that we should get into the nuclear energy fast... before oil price hits 1000 dollar a barrel... think about the impact on our economy... nuclear fallout (if accident do occur) though horrendous is no excuse to starve our kids.

Uncle Ver SG SG

" If we are fully transparent and compliant to IAEA, there is no reason for US to enforce anything."

You know Iran is actually pretty transparent regardless of the conservative and USA media propoganda against it. But USA and Israel are dead set against a nuclear power station in Iran for obvious reasons.

While Singapore may be an "ally" (for now), the core question is USA's belief in Singapore's competency in guarding the uranium from thieves (whether by terrorists or by greedy internal operators etc). The only way to guarantee that is by allocating (maybe not military, maybe FBI) overseers to make sure nothing goes wrong.

gevo SG

moreover the capital cost of building one is sky-high..

woah. If I am not mistaken, nuclear plants cannot be shut down. The costs of restarting a nuclear plant is very high. They'd just slow down the reaction (critical mass) if demand is not that high. If my stats are correct, one nuclear plant is still not sufficient for Singapore.

Shotgun SG

" If we are fully transparent and compliant to IAEA, there is no reason for US to enforce anything."

Maybe we should have further insight before commenting on the Iran's nuclear ambitions.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/08/iran.nuclear

And BBC's bite sized article on Iran's nuclear reactor program.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4031603.stm

The main issue is about the enrichment of uranium.

Iran is being offered help to develop a civilian nuclear power programme including light-water reactors. Crucially, Iran would not be allowed to make the fuel itself. This would be done in Russia in a partnership with Iran. However, as a condition for any substantive talks, Iran has to suspend enrichment. It does not accept such a pre-condition.

So why does Iran not want to accept this pre-condition? Why must it insist of enriching uranium itself? That is why the IAEA and US is suspicious of Iran's intentions.

OTOH, if Singapore was to develop a reactor, I think we wouldn't mind having someone else enrich the fuel for us.

Shotgun SG

I'm not surprised if that were so. Singapore is a very densely populated country, and has a very high energy consumption rate. Look at the number of appliances per household, then the amount of infrastructure in all that needs to be powered 24/7.

Even with 1 plant, we should be able to see a cost reduction in the long run.

I believe the nuclear energy option should be explored further, and with full cooperation with IAEA.

purpledragon84 SG

err i din mean switching it off.. i mean not having to reduce its use becoz of lower demand.. becoz u tend to be able to maximise profits if u run at full capacity 24/7.. and if u lower the operations at nite, it will take much longer to recoup loss..

but anyway the capital cost of a nuclear plant is still very much higher than coal/gas plants..

Uncle Ver SG SG

"OTOH, if Singapore was to develop a reactor, I think we wouldn't mind having someone else enrich the fuel for us."

I didnt mention anything about enrichment.

"That is why the IAEA and US is suspicious of Iran's intentions."

Even if Iran DOES concede enrichment of uranium, you tell me what are its chances of building said nuclear reactor. Russia can say ok, but USA will still say no.

MohamedF SG

There is still the option of a hydrogen based power plant... There was an accidental discovery in 2007 that can possibly make hydrogen production a lot easier... it only involves mixing 2 everyday metals with water and hydrogen in produced...

16/f/lonely SG

Ultimately.....reduction in consumption is the most feasible.

Even nuclear fuel is limited.

Lord Kang SG

Singapore nuclear power will not be cheap as compared to other countries..Because the gov will say need to pay more for better security and safety reasons..

purpledragon84 SG

Singapore nuclear power will not be cheap as compared to other countries..Because the gov will say need to pay more for better security and safety reasons..

lol.. x2..

by itself nuclear plant expensive enuf.. let alone its singapore.. nuclear tax anyone?

alwaysdisturbed SG

sim city?

« Previous Page Next Page »