DID you know that Malaysia has been operating a nuclear reactor since 1982?
Not many people might be aware that the research reactor Triga Puspati was set up then, and its use has been incorporated in advancing the fields of healthcare, agriculture and environmental management, among various other fields.
But Malaysia has yet to connect nuclear technology with the national power grid. That might change, though, with the pressing need to achieve net zero emissions of global warming gases to mitigate climate change.
In August, Economy Minister Rafizi Ramli, during an energy transition conference here, said Malaysia is not ruling out nuclear power generation but needs to take many factors into consideration before integrating it into the country’s energy mix.
“Of course, we look at planning but usually any major pivot, especially on something like nuclear, we have to bring throughout all the government decision-making bodies and agencies.
“But I can say with clarity that I don’t think we can be choosy. And I prefer to be agnostic, so long as it meets all our demands, all our requirements – and we have to be stringent with our requirements,” Rafizi said.
There are, indeed, many considerations for the government to make, such as costs, expertise, and the lack of an applicable regulatory framework as well as public apprehension.
The last remains a crucial matter to look into due to public concerns about the disposal of radioactive waste, which can remain toxic for decades, leading many to consider that a nuclear power plant will bring more harm than good.
Nuclear accidents, such as Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011, have added to the generally negative perception the technology has developed over the decades. These tend to overshadow the development of safer and more reliable ways of using nuclear energy as a power supply.
Nevertheless, it looks like today, the government is opening its doors to the possibility of powering Malaysia with nuclear energy.
According to the Sustainable Energy Development Authority Malaysia, in 2018, the three largest primary energy sources in Malaysia were natural gas (41%), crude oil (30%), and coal and coke (22%). Hydropower and renewables contributed only 7% of primary energy supply. In other words, our power grid is largely fossil fuel-based and emitting a lot of carbon.
Figuring out our approach
The government is, obviously, considering the pros and cons of using nuclear energy as it comes with its fair share of concerns that need to be addressed, says Natural Resources, Environment and Climate Change Minister Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad.
Among these, he acknowledges the risk of accidents and managing radioactive waste.
“Firstly, the risk of nuclear accidents. Although rare, accidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima have demonstrated the potential for catastrophic events leading to the release of dangerous levels of radiation into the environment.
“The consequences of a nuclear accident in Malaysia could be severe, posing significant risks to public health. Secondly, the management of radioactive waste is a crucial aspect of nuclear technology, he says.
“Nuclear power generation produces transgenerational radioactive waste that remains hazardous for thousands of years. Ensuring proper disposal and long-term storage of this waste is essential to prevent environmental contamination and protect public safety.
“This will require the implementation of robust waste management practices and the development of suitable storage facilities,” he tells Sunday Star in response to emailed questions.
ALSO READ: No passion for fission
On the pro side, nuclear energy provides some advantages compared with Malaysia’s current power mix when it comes to balancing the energy trilemma: energy security, affordability and sustainability.
“In terms of energy security, nuclear power provides a stable base load which complements well the use of intermittent solar energy.
“In terms of affordability, with rising geopolitical concerns that have resulted in volatile fuel prices, the use of nuclear power mitigates this risk as the required amount of nuclear fuel, such as uranium, is much smaller than that of the required fossil fuels in a conventional power station.
“Nuclear power does not emit greenhouse gases during electricity generation, providing the much-needed sustainability benefits towards our quest of achieving net zero [carbon emissions].
“It can provide a stable, non-intermittent source of energy that doesn’t depend on weather conditions or time of day, unlike wind or solar. This can help diversify Malaysia’s energy mix and reduce dependency on fossil fuels.”
Nik Nazmi says that strict regulatory compliance will ensure the safe utilisation of nuclear energy.
“Addressing public safety concerns would require a comprehensive approach that includes stringent safety measures, effective waste management strategies, enhanced security protocols, and transparent communication with the public.”
Going small
If we do venture into generating energy with nuclear technology, it is not likely that Malaysians will see those typical monolithic nuclear power plant silos emerging on the landscape.
Rather, the government is keen on small modular reactors (SMRs), which the International Atomic Energy Agency says have a power capacity of up to 300MW per unit – that’s a third of the generating capacity of conventional nuclear power reactors. (MW stands for megawatt, one million watts.)
Nik Nazmi says SMRs require less land per unit of energy produced, which means less stress on the environment.
“SMRs in particular can be an attractive low-carbon option because they can be deployed quickly and in various locations.
“They can be scaled up or down more easily than their larger counterparts. This makes them a good option for a country like Malaysia, which may wish to gradually increase its nuclear power,” he says.
In terms of safety, Nik Nazmi says that SMR technology has a promising outlook.
“By design, an SMR is equipped with the latest passive safety features, which means that in the event of an emergency, the plant is designed to safely shut down without any active human intervention.
“Such design typically relies on natural forces such as gravity and natural convection to accomplish safety functions without requiring any power source.
“In terms of location, a thorough siting assessment will be required to determine the best location for any nuclear plants. However, as an SMR is much smaller in size and footprint compared with conventional power plants, it is more flexible regarding location.”
The nitty-gritty
Dr Azrudi Mustapha is the managing director of a nuclear technology design company and is behind a patented design for a low-pressure water SMR.
He says the construction of a large nuclear reactor would be time-consuming, taking an average of a decade depending on location and design, among others.
ALSO READ: The science of relief
Constructing reactors, whether conventional or SMR, is costly, with prices increasing over the decades due to the tightening of regulations globally since the 1980s despite the proven safety record, says Azrudi. For instance, in 2021, it was reported that Rolls-Royce received a government grant and cash injection from private firms to start an SMR project. At that time, it was estimated that an SMR would cost £2bil (RM11.6bil today).
However, Azrudi believes the successful construction and operation of an SMR can result in better financing facilities compared with a conventional reactor.
Azrudi explains: Let’s say you have two reactors, one conventional large reactor of 1500MW and a 300MW SMR. It might take 10 years to build the large reactor but it would only take two to three years to build the first SMR unit. With the SMR generating energy, the operator could then provide proof of revenue and gain better financing rates for a second and consequent units. They might even finish five SMRs (giving 1,500MW) before the large reactor is even completed.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Get 20% OFF The Star Digital Access
Cancel anytime. Ad-free. Unlimited access with perks.
