Singapore nuclear study omits key details on siting and grid integration

Radiation exposure near a plant is likened to 2% of a chest X-ray or eating 10 bananas a year. 

Singapore’s government has begun a formal feasibility study into nuclear energy, but the process remains silent on some of the most critical practical questions—where a reactor could be sited, how it would be cooled, and how it would be integrated into the national power grid.

These issues are absent from the latest digital booklet released by the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI), even as the government ramps up regulatory capabilities, expands research capacity, and aligns its process with international nuclear development norms.

The document outlined a clear shift in policy posture—from passive monitoring to structured feasibility assessment—and confirmed that Singapore is now formally evaluating the safety, technological maturity, and commercial readiness of advanced nuclear technologies.

The Energy Market Authority is leading the process, supported by global engineering consultancy Mott MacDonald, which was appointed in September 2025. The government stated that work follows the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) Milestones Approach.

Supporting this, Singapore has significantly upgraded its research and regulatory infrastructure. The Singapore Nuclear Research and Safety Initiative was converted into a full institute in July 2025, with 50 researchers now working on areas such as reactor simulation and radionuclide detection. It aims to double its headcount by 2030.

Regulatory capacity is also expanding: the National Environment Agency formed a Nuclear Safety Advisory Panel earlier this year, and Singapore has formalised collaboration with nuclear regulators in the US, France, and Finland.

The government argued this is the right time to act. With natural gas still supplying 95% of Singapore’s electricity and land-constrained solar capped at around 10% of potential demand, nuclear is seen as a possible long-term hedge for energy security, affordability, and emissions reduction. Globally, nuclear momentum is growing.

The MTI booklet puts strong emphasis on safety and public understanding. It frames nuclear as having lower accident and fatality rates than many other energy sources, and highlights built-in passive safety systems that don’t require active cooling under emergency conditions.

Radiation exposure near a plant is likened to 2% of a chest X-ray or eating 10 bananas a year. Singapore already operates a national radiation monitoring network with 40 sensors, and the IAEA last reviewed the country’s nuclear emergency plan in 2018.

Still, key operational, economic, and institutional details remain vague or missing. The booklet did not identify any potential reactor sites or discuss how cooling water would be sourced—both fundamental requirements in a dense, coastal city-state.

It also lacked specifics on how a nuclear plant would be integrated into Singapore’s grid, or what kind of flexibility, reserve margin, or storage would be required to support it.

Cost claims are similarly light. The booklet suggests nuclear energy “could be cost-comparable” to gas and solar, but provides no levelised cost estimates, financing structures, or expected tariff impacts.

Waste management is treated at a high level, with references to international models like Finland’s Onkalo repository, but no localised strategy for spent fuel storage, transport, or disposal. The structure of a potential independent regulator—and how licensing, insurance, and liability would be handled—is not addressed.

Any deployment decision, the government said, will be based on safety, reliability, affordability, and environmental sustainability, and will involve regular public engagement.

The absence of detail on siting, cooling, grid integration, and economics suggests that Singapore remains in an early exploratory phase.

However, with international partnerships, institutional expansion, and formal frameworks now in place, the groundwork is clearly being laid for a long-term decision—one that will require not just technical readiness, but broad social and political consensus.