Malaysia going Nuclear

[Tavarisch]

The thread title is a bit misleading. So, PLEASE READ THIS FIRST!

There is a plan to build a nuclear power plant in Malaysia. A tentative date has been set : Post 2020. The cost in US dollars? A projected 3.1 billion.

The government says it will be done not of probability, but out of necessity.

Everyone is welcome to object or agree to this decision. Personally, I think it's a step forward for Malaysia. With what all the declining supply of our petroleum (thanks to you Brits for exploitation :D ) and inflation and every other possible bad thing related to the economy, I think this will attempt to alleviate our problems. I sincerely hope though that they have controlled methods to ensure a meltdown doesn't happen. I don't want our country to be South East Asia's Chernobyl.

You are also welcome to post your reaction to this and make projected reactions of surrounding nations. The US won't be happy about this I think. Singapore should definitely go nuclear though, given that they are relatively small I think one plant would be enough to power up the whole city/nation. They've got the funding.

Here is the article that I read from :

http://www.post1.net/lowem/entry/malaysia_looking_at_building_its_first_nuclear_pow er_plant

[Waylander]

I assume it is going to be hard for Singapore if they want to find a place which is at least some km away from their populated areas... :D

Putting a nuclear pwer plant into a relatively low populated area is much more comfortable than putting it right into your 4million city state.

[Tavarisch]

I assume it is going to be hard for Singapore if they want to find a place which is at least some km away from their populated areas... :D

Putting a nuclear pwer plant into a relatively low populated area is much more comfortable than putting it right into your 4million city state.

Yeah, but I'm sure they can find some place to put it. Maybe they can do land reclamation like we are doing in Penang?

[Red]

Yeah, but I'm sure they can find some place to put it. Maybe they can do land reclamation like we are doing in Penang?

Underground.

http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20081205-105863.html

There has been some noises from both Indonesia and Malaysia and other Asean countries about going Nuclear. But i think it is far off into the future. Many of these countries are beseted by various economic, growth and financial problems. More importantly, they have yet to reach the technological maturity to build these plants well and maintain them. I do not foreclose the possibility of one built out of nationalistic needs. But the latter country would have to bear the burden and risk of a nuclear fall-out. Alternatively, they could opt for foreign plants. But that would be costly and possibly out of reach of most Asean countries.

[Red]

You are also welcome to post your reaction to this and make projected reactions of surrounding nations. The US won't be happy about this I think.

Why is that? I thought there is a difference between building relatively harmless civilian plants as compared to building plants which can be used to produce nuclear weapons. Of course, no one will tolerate Malaysia with nuclear armaments.

[Grim901]

Why is that? I thought there is a difference between building relatively harmless civilian plants as compared to building plants which can be used to produce nuclear weapons. Of course, no one will tolerate Malaysia with nuclear armaments.

I don't see America having a problem with it. Malaysia is a fairly stable, modern country. And there is a difference between reactors and weapons, as long as the whole thing isn't done in secrecy (see N. Korea and Iran) the international community won't mind.

[nevidimka]

Nothing new. Indonesia is also planning to go Nuclear. Personally I dont like Nuclear stations inside ASEAN, because the countries are so close together, a fallout will affect the whole ASEAN through no fault of the other countries. Europe, up to scandinavia was affected from a reactor in Ukraine, imagine what will happen to ASEAN countries all closely spaced together? That is my biggest worry.

Lets hope that whoever goes nuclear in ASEAN shall never suffer that fate.

But if there is no other way due to the diminishing OIL supply, then it is a unwanted necessity. B4 that how much of the plants producing energy using OIL, can be covered by a 1000MW reactor?

[Tavarisch]

I don't see America having a problem with it. Malaysia is a fairly stable, modern country. And there is a difference between reactors and weapons, as long as the whole thing isn't done in secrecy (see N. Korea and Iran) the international community won't mind.


Malaysian Politics? Stable?

I beg to differ I'm afraid. Our political system is a pyramid on it's tip. We've got so much infighting in Parliament, so many unnecessary religious and ethnic disputes. Corruption is as they say in Malay, "berleluasa". It's uncontrollable. Even the Anti-Corruption agency is rumored to be corrupted. If you had enough evidence, you could probably implicate the whole government. It's all linked. It's not gonna be long before someone will throw a wrench into our crippling political machine. And once that happens, Boom civil war.

And the thing about the US being unhappy.... I don't think we can say the same about Syria now can we? But I understand the situation, mainly being that Syria is within close proximity to Israel. There are some instances though where the US was unhappy with us. Anwar Ibrahmim's case for instance. He's got US Senators backing him up. In fact, I recall that Condolezza Rice made an official statement against our way of treating his case.

[nevidimka]

Btw, doesnt Malaysia have a nuclear research facility named Tun Hussein Onn nuclear facility or something? I remember reading it a long time ago.

[Chino]

I assume it is going to be hard for Singapore if they want to find a place which is at least some km away from their populated areas... :D

Putting a nuclear pwer plant into a relatively low populated area is much more comfortable than putting it right into your 4million city state.

How thoughtful of you.

Unfortunately...

IIRC I read somewhere long ago - when Malaysia first talked about going nuclear - Johore was one of the potential locations for the reactor.

To those who don't already know, Johore is the state closest to Singapore. How close? The stretch of sea separating us is about 2km wide at its narrowest.

They never pass up an opportunity to push our buttons.

More than 10 years ago, they built a huge oil refinery in Johore near Singapore. It is visible from my highrise apartment that's deep in the middle of Singapore.

At night, our sky, never very dark, is now even brighter as the bloody place belches flame and smoke 24/7.

[Red]

You must be staying somewhere in Ang Mo Kio. Line of sight guess...You can`t really see from Woodlands or West of the Causeway. I see it often from regular fishing trips to the Kelongs off Mihad Jetty; before it was demolished :( I think you can see it from the Bottle-Neck Tree Village.

[nevidimka]

How thoughtful of you.

Unfortunately...

IIRC I read somewhere long ago - when Malaysia first talked about going nuclear - Johore was one of the potential locations for the reactor.

To those who don't already know, Johore is the state closest to Singapore. How close? The stretch of sea separating us is about 2km wide at its narrowest.

They never pass up an opportunity to push our buttons.

More than 10 years ago, they built a huge oil refinery in Johore near Singapore. It is visible from my highrise apartment that's deep in the middle of Singapore.

At night, our sky, never very dark, is now even brighter as the bloody place belches flame and smoke 24/7.


Why is selecting Johor pushing your buttons? Johor seems like a perfect place for the reactor. In terms of transport, shipment, electrical grid, etc2.

Its not Malaysia's fault if "being deep inside Singapore" is still a stone's throw away due to Singapore's size, or lack of it. :onfloorl:

And lastly, it gives you an experience of how it looks like when your country has Oil. Not too bad isn't it?

[Red]

Does it matter where you put it? A fall-out from any reactor(assuming) in Singapore or Malaysia will affect just about anywhere in the peninsula and Singapore and parts of Sumatra. Malaysia is small. Singapore is even smaller. Now, Im not an expert on this but I recall reading newer and safer reactors which will ensure that the possibility is practically nil. Also; why would you want to build a key power plant within reach of a potential foe?:D Just look where Syria and Iran built thiers. I just love the talk that goes around amongst politicians up north and in the region. Sometimes, a little reality check will do wonders.

I could not agree with you on the part about oil. It is a stark reminder that we should persistently and consistently work smart to be successful. Considering that we do relatively well and earn relatively more(than many countries who have oil) in the end is pretty darn good. An example is that much of that oil around the world eventually goes to Singapore to be refined so we get a substantial portion of that black gold profits whislt having nothing. :) We should keep at it.

[dragonfire]

On a side note was just wondering if Malaysia is a signatory of the CTBT, and if there were any other countries in the vicinity (South East Asia) who are not signatories ?

Clean Energy Resources like Nuclear Power will be very critical for developing nations - so - go Malaysia

Although I am not deeply aware of the regional geo-politics, am sure if Malaysia becomes Power Surplus then Singapore can buy power from Malaysia without having to invest in Capex intensive ventures like Nuc Power generation

[the road runner]

Interesting topic
I think nuclear power is the way to go for the world.The only problem is where do you put your nuclear waste?Every reactor will produce waste,and what do you do with that waste?Send it to Singapore/Malaysia/Indonesia/Australia?
I think that if you are going to build a nuclear reactor, you should have already answered the question of were to store the waste before you construct the reactor.

So my question is where will you store the nuclear waste:confused:?

[nevidimka]

Does it matter where you put it? A fall-out from any reactor(assuming) in Singapore or Malaysia will affect just about anywhere in the peninsula and Singapore and parts of Sumatra. Malaysia is small. Singapore is even smaller. Now, Im not an expert on this but I recall reading newer and safer reactors which will ensure that the possibility is practically nil. Also; why would you want to build a key power plant within reach of a potential foe?:D Just look where Syria and Iran built thiers. I just love the talk that goes around amongst politicians up north and in the region. Sometimes, a little reality check will do wonders.

I could not agree with you on the part about oil. It is a stark reminder that we should persistently and consistently work smart to be successful. Considering that we do relatively well and earn relatively more(than many countries who have oil) in the end is pretty darn good. An example is that much of that oil around the world eventually goes to Singapore to be refined so we get a substantial portion of that black gold profits whislt having nothing. :) We should keep at it.

So what? Singapore is gonna be dumb enough to bom a nuclear reactor that sits right on its border? Looks like its not just the politicians up north that needs a reality check. Syria and Iran is not building their nuclear reactors legally. So if Malaysia is to go ahead it will have full international approval and will be completed. There wont be an opportunity to bomb it halfway.

Getting the profit out of anothers work? Is it like Singapore not sending a single warship to the Somalia when it depends on shipping for its survival? ( or did it?)

[nevidimka]

Interesting topic
I think nuclear power is the way to go for the world.The only problem is where do you put your nuclear waste?Every reactor will produce waste,and what do you do with that waste?Send it to Singapore/Malaysia/Indonesia/Australia?
I think that if you are going to build a nuclear reactor, you should have already answered the question of were to store the waste before you construct the reactor.

So my question is where will you store the nuclear waste:confused:?

You will always have to store your own waste, or you could have an agreement with Russia to send it there for reprocessing if I'm not mistaken. but I believe if you own a reactor, you should store your own waste.

[nevidimka]

How thoughtful of you.

Unfortunately...

IIRC I read somewhere long ago - when Malaysia first talked about going nuclear - Johore was one of the potential locations for the reactor.

To those who don't already know, Johore is the state closest to Singapore. How close? The stretch of sea separating us is about 2km wide at its narrowest.

They never pass up an opportunity to push our buttons.

More than 10 years ago, they built a huge oil refinery in Johore near Singapore. It is visible from my highrise apartment that's deep in the middle of Singapore.

At night, our sky, never very dark, is now even brighter as the bloody place belches flame and smoke 24/7.

Can you get a picture of it in the night? Maybe we can more clearly assess your grouses. :D

[Uhu]

"Going nuclear" nowadays is - to sum it up - idotic. It's OK for countries that have nuclear power plants to keep them running but it's a shortsighted and a huge waste of money to built them and the needed infrastructure for it up from scratch. Like oil fissible material is a limited resource an the consumption already outruns the production by over 50% - the remaining currently comes from recycled nuclear weapons. This means the price of fissible material will rise, if not skyrock in the next years.

Does Malaysia have any notable reserves of uranium? I guess not. Does it have the facilites to process the nuclear fuel from it? To reprocess the spent fuel?
No and no. So Malaysia will have to spent HUGE amounts of money not only to built the power plant, but also to operate it. Money that's better spent in investigating and building up renewable energy sources that have a future, something that nuclear fission HAS NOT.

The best estimates I've ever seen is that we have enough fission fuel for about 160 year - which includes optimistic, highly speculaive guesses of uranium reserves not known yet and uranium mining costs 325% higher than we have now.
Current mines will be exhausted in 25 to 45 years.

[Red]

So what? Singapore is gonna be dumb enough to bom a nuclear reactor that sits right on its border? Looks like its not just the politicians up north that needs a reality check. Syria and Iran is not building their nuclear reactors legally. So if Malaysia is to go ahead it will have full international approval and will be completed. There wont be an opportunity to bomb it halfway.

When I wrote that the politicians up north needs a reality check, I mean that it does not matter where you place the nuclear reactors as radiation leaks can affect the whole peninsula.

Further,I believe a nuclear plant is not going to blow up like a nuclear bomb. There is a difference.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf06.html

In the event that there is global objection to the on-going construction of reactors(assuming it is in the hands of a rogue goverment or not) it would not be too smart to build them so close to a potential foe; would you not think so? :D Hence; the reference to Syria and Iran. And now, I think you should include Iraq as well.

Spec-ops teams can even take over them.

Getting the profit out of anothers work? Is it like Singapore not sending a single warship to the Somalia when it depends on shipping for its survival? ( or did it?)

You mean you do not want to work smart and be competitive? Ever heard of the free market?

Singapore has been sending ships to Persian Gulf long before you sent ships to protect your ships from pirates.
And they will be sending ships to Gulf of Eden as part of US led coalition ships. Feel free to join us.

[Red]

"Going nuclear" nowadays is - to sum it up - idotic. It's OK for countries that have nuclear power plants to keep them running but it's a shortsighted and a huge waste of money to built them and the needed infrastructure for it up from scratch. Like oil fissible material is a limited resource an the consumption already outruns the production by over 50% - the remaining currently comes from recycled nuclear weapons. This means the price of fissible material will rise, if not skyrock in the next years.

It has not happened and probably would not be the case for decades. Everyone should shelve this together with the list of fantastical stuffs on the to do list which, admittedly, might not happen as well. It is just too common.

2-3 decades henceforth; if the ASEAN countries remain as they are, they will be in trouble.

[nevidimka]

When I wrote that the politicians up north needs a reality check, I mean that it does not matter where you place the nuclear reactors as radiation leaks can affect the whole peninsula.

Further,I believe a nuclear plant is not going to blow up like a nuclear bomb. There is a difference.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf06.html

In the event that there is global objection to the on-going construction of reactors(assuming it is in the hands of a rogue goverment or not) it would not be too smart to build them so close to a potential foe; would you not think so? :D Hence; the reference to Syria and Iran. And now, I think you should include Iraq as well.

Spec-ops teams can even take over them.



You mean you do not want to work smart and be competitive? Ever heard of the free market?

Singapore has been sending ships to Persian Gulf long before you sent ships to protect your ships from pirates.
And they will be sending ships to Gulf of Eden as part of US led coalition ships. Feel free to join us.


If the Spec ops team survives that is....
In war time or heightened political situation, vital assets like the Nuke reactor will have heightened security.

Also doesn't matter whether reactors can blow to being bombed or not, trying to bomb a reactor that is close to a Opponents home, is highly risky.

Syria's reactor was still not completed, and Irans as well, which is why Israel is itching to bomb it now.

And you are taking that rogue gov theory way too seriously.

The pirates are a recent serious flashpoint, and from what I can see Singapore decided to send its warship starting from this year. Congrats on joining the world effort.

[Red]

If the Spec ops team survives that is....
In war time or heightened political situation, vital assets like the Nuke reactor will have heightened security.

Also doesn't matter whether reactors can blow to being bombed or not, trying to bomb a reactor that is close to a Opponents home, is highly risky.

Syria's reactor was still not completed, and Irans as well, which is why Israel is itching to bomb it now.

You are starting to get my point. You are not going to take such risks by building such critical assets in a location which can be easily penetrated/attacked whilst it is being completed. Will you build your key naval base so in the Straits of Johor facing Singapore? I doubt it.

It is true such places will be heavily defended. Put enough spec ops teams and you will get your goal. Point is; why even put the plant in a position where it can be easily reached in the first place by air, land and sea.

If both sides are not going to do anything about the plants, a war(assuming there is) will still continue. Power can be cut by going for the power grid and lines.

And you are taking that rogue gov theory way too seriously.

It is an assumption that may yet happen.

The pirates are a recent serious flashpoint, and from what I can see Singapore decided to send its warship starting from this year. Congrats on joining the world effort.

Yes. In support of our friends and allies; as is the case in the Persian Gulf since 2002. We were probably asked to join to task force the US is building. There will be greater synergy and organization. Is Malaysia in it?

[Tavarisch]

Given the mindset of the Malaysian population, there is no way our government can turn rogue. We Malays are, in general, lazy and unproductive. It's a sad fact that I am reluctant to admit. We have a select few who are doing what they can, but overall their effort is moot. I do not intend to insult my fellow brethren. We make good administrators but we suck at capitalizing in the terms of finance. No single influential leader can make us move without changing our habits and mindset. Believe me, I know.

The only event that I recall Malays moving at all was the 1-4 March of 1946, and even then that was out of necessity. The chances of the so-called PAS turning radical is very low, given that Nik Aziz is also a man of peace. The only militant problem here is Jemaah Islamiah.


The Chinese here don't have a reason to replace our current government and in the event that they do, the PRC is their to back their regime. Indians on the other hand are not that militant, so long as we allow them to practice their religion peacefully, which we are doing.

[Red]

I think we should not foreclose any possibility. There are enough elements in PAS to make you think otherwise. I am not sure what the correlation between laziness is to being warmongering and acquiring weapons of mass destruction. It can happen. I will have to disagree about the good administrators part. My personal experience is that it is horrible without some money involved.

[Tavarisch]

I think we should not foreclose any possibility. There are enough elements in PAS to make you think otherwise. I am not sure what the correlation between laziness is to being warmongering and acquiring weapons of mass destruction. It can happen. I will have to disagree about the good administrators part. My personal experience is that it is horrible without some money involved.

I can't help but laugh at how true the end part of your comment is.:onfloorl:

I wasn't referring to our modern Federation government; it was our pre-Federation governments. Mainly the former Sultanates. Seeing as how Malacca was, at one time, one of the better trading ports of the 15th century. Unless of course, all the bull-crap in our textbooks are propaganda, which sometimes is. (They poorly depict communism in our textbooks. Yes, in most cases it is bad, but the book over-exaggerates. And most importantly, the Sultan is not to blame for the fall of Kedah to Francis Light, when he indeed was the one who was foolish enough to trust the Englishmen)

And laziness does have everything to do with warmongering. If you've got people who just simply won't do anything, nothing can get done. It's much easier if you get some fit bloke to do a job than a lazy bloke. You need people who are always hardworking and on the move if you want a successful revolution.

Acquiring WMDs? Malaysia? I'm sorry, but I'm afraid there are people here who have never heard of the word. You'd be surprised really. They know what nukes are, but when you say WMD.....

[Red]

can't help but laugh at how true the end part of your comment is.

I wanted to start a small business up north but I gave up after I realised that to get things running smoothly I would need to leverage on some good contacts and that involves moolah. I did that to a certain extent but I realised later that it is not worth the trouble since I would not make much in the end.

The other annoying thing is that the Traffic Police seems to have an unusual fetish for Singaporean cars and supplanting the courts as roadside Magistrates.

And laziness does have everything to do with warmongering.

I hope this is true. Expensive and powerful weapons and tech in the hands of lazy and ignorant folks sound dangerous enough to me; especially if they think if they are right or become leaders. I know the literati in Malaysia is large but they are being sidelined somewhat.

[nevidimka]

You are starting to get my point. You are not going to take such risks by building such critical assets in a location which can be easily penetrated/attacked whilst it is being completed. Will you build your key naval base so in the Straits of Johor facing Singapore? I doubt it.

It is true such places will be heavily defended. Put enough spec ops teams and you will get your goal. Point is; why even put the plant in a position where it can be easily reached in the first place by air, land and sea.

If both sides are not going to do anything about the plants, a war(assuming there is) will still continue. Power can be cut by going for the power grid and lines.

It is an assumption that may yet happen.

Yes. In support of our friends and allies; as is the case in the Persian Gulf since 2002. We were probably asked to join to task force the US is building. There will be greater synergy and organization. Is Malaysia in it?

You are assuming a war scenario between Singapore and Malaysia. If a reactor can be a target, that would mean any power generation facility will be a target. The Politicians probably never envisaged a war scenario when they planned a reactor down south compared to the hugely populated KL area or the north where its quite far from other facilities. Malaysia sees Singapore as Friends you see...:D

I'm not sure about Persian Gulf. I don't believe Mysia is involved, and I think you know that well too. Malaysia never sees itself as an ally to US that needs to join its every quest everywhere, neither would our help needed. The Somalia problem is a problem that is affecting the world, and since shipping is very important to Malaysia economy, the gov got involved, that too after the kidnapping.

Pas will never be militant, plus they will never control the whole of Mysia.

And btw, Bribery in business happens everywhere. including the US. Some of the big decisions in US history happened through bribes, just see the movie "The Aviator" for example. Its just human nature.


Going back to nuclear power, I think the gov should explore every other source like wind/solar/wave power before they look at nuclear power. Nuclear is just a big headache. Next Tenaga would charge the consumers service charge for storing the deadly waste. What a joke.

[Tavarisch]

What does Tenaga NOT charge us with anyway? :onfloorl:

Even though it's true that bribery is everywhere, in the US it doesn't happen on the lowest levels of the Government. I mean come on, they ask for 20RM for speeding. Seriously. It insults me.

[Red]

The Politicians probably never envisaged a war scenario when they planned a reactor down south compared to the hugely populated KL area or the north where its quite far from other facilities. Malaysia sees Singapore as Friends you see...

Was`nt that partly what I`ve said. They need a reality check. :D It is undeniably safer to put them far away from prying eyes and certainly potential foes; especially since Malaysia would be without power if it is hit or captured. It becomes a critical installation. Also, I wrote about the possibility of festering global objections whilst the installation is built. Again, it does not make sense to build it so that the on-going construction can be easily halted or bombed. These are important considerations.

I'm not sure about Persian Gulf. I don't believe Mysia is involved, and I think you know that well too. Malaysia never sees itself as an ally to US that needs to join its every quest everywhere, neither would our help needed. The Somalia problem is a problem that is affecting the world, and since shipping is very important to Malaysia economy, the gov got involved, that too after the kidnapping.

I was not talking about the Persian Gulf. Specifically, I asked if Malaysia has joined the US-led task force off the Coast of Eden; CTF-151. That would help ease the burden on the RMN as she has only a few ships to rotate for Ops Fajar currently.

And btw, Bribery in business happens everywhere. including the US. Some of the big decisions in US history happened through bribes, just see the movie "The Aviator" for example. Its just human nature.

Corruption is everywhere. The point is to limit it and not allow it to fester or worst; accept it as a norm. It is no secret that the most competitive and successful countries in the world are also the least corrupted. You do not want to have a society where people routinely sell out on thier own fellow citizens and country. You do not want leaders who are on the payroll of foreign powers; wittingly or otherwise.

[nevidimka]

Was`nt that partly what I`ve said. They need a reality check. :D It is undeniably safer to put them far away from prying eyes and certainly potential foes; especially since Malaysia would be without power if it is hit or captured. It becomes a critical installation. Also, I wrote about the possibility of festering global objections whilst the installation is built. Again, it does not make sense to build it so that the on-going construction can be easily halted or bombed. These are important considerations.
There wont be global objection considering Malaysia is a signatory of CTBT? and its a private energy project. It wont be built underground trying to hide it from the world.



I was not talking about the Persian Gulf. Specifically, I asked if Malaysia has joined the US-led task force off the Coast of Eden; CTF-151. That would help ease the burden on the RMN as she has only a few ships to rotate for Ops Fajar currently.
I don't know.


Corruption is everywhere. The point is to limit it and not allow it to fester or worst; accept it as a norm. It is no secret that the most competitive and successful countries in the world are also the least corrupted. You do not want to have a society where people routinely sell out on thier own fellow citizens and country. You do not want leaders who are on the payroll of foreign powers; wittingly or otherwise.
I concur.

[cm07]

rather than go nuclear, i believe that Malaysia will probably be more effective with bio-diesel and similar renewable resources since there's plenty of land to grow such crops. In addition to combating unemployment and forest fires, (with sufficient R&D), it can propel Malaysia to the forefront of renewable energy.

The same theory can apply to Indonesia.

On the other hand, the loss of primary forest and wildlife species, should such agriculture be rampant and uncontrolled, will be devastating and heart breaking to treehuggers.

[Dzirhan]

I was not talking about the Persian Gulf. Specifically, I asked if Malaysia has joined the US-led task force off the Coast of Eden; CTF-151. That would help ease the burden on the RMN as she has only a few ships to rotate for Ops Fajar currently.



Sidetracking here, Malaysia is not joining CTF-151 though it is keeping in touch, sharing info etc with it. The RMN mission in Aden is solely to protect/escort ships belonging to Malaysian shipping company MISC which travels through the area.

Personally I think this discussion is a bit moot as I doubt a nuclear power plant will be built anytime soon, we've got a fair number of environmental and anti-nuclear activists here and the public has been largely conditioned to the view that nuclear power plants are undesirable, given the government's popularity problem with the public, it's doubtful any such move will be undertaken.

[Chino]

Personally I think this discussion is a bit moot as I doubt a nuclear power plant will be built anytime soon, we've got a fair number of environmental and anti-nuclear activists here and the public has been largely conditioned to the view that nuclear power plants are undesirable, given the government's popularity problem with the public, it's doubtful any such move will be undertaken.

I certainly hope you are right. Though there hasn't been a major accident for some decades, Chernobyl is still fresh on many people's minds.

Like many people keep saying, it's time to cut down on wastage i.e. use less power. Or build green options. The first thing to go should be cars that run on petrol, as alternatives are already available.

Fossil fuel may be killing the planet slowly. But nuclear power may do that in a much shorter time.

[Crunchy]

Vietnam is also planning to build 4 nuclear power plants.
Construction of the first will start 2015. It should be completed in 2020.

Rumors said that the Russians got the deal, but recently there are reports that Westinghouse (now part of Toshiba) is pushing ahead.

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssConsumerGoodsAndRetailNews/idUSHAN4042220090219

http://english.vietnamnet.vn/tech/2008/06/787969/

According to official papers VN plans to develop the full cirlce of civilian nuclear technology for peaceful use. :D

But the small research reactor in Dalat was running with weapon-capable uranium 'til some years ago, before the material was returned to russia.
Also it is known that VN had/has some low-profile research program on its' SCUD missiles.....


I think no ASEAN member states currently wants to develop some nuclear capabilties, but with civilian use: there is a potential for longterm military use.

:rolleyes:

[Tavarisch]

I certainly hope you are right. Though there hasn't been a major accident for some decades, Chernobyl is still fresh on many people's minds.

Like many people keep saying, it's time to cut down on wastage i.e. use less power. Or build green options. The first thing to go should be cars that run on petrol, as alternatives are already available.

Fossil fuel may be killing the planet slowly. But nuclear power may do that in a much shorter time.

Alternatives? Politicians only speak of alternatives..... Do you honestly think they want them? What's making money for most of them in the first place? (Fossil fuel industry..,. DUH!!!)

I for one though, would definitely like to have alternatives. And why would nuclear power kill the Earth first? It doesn't exhume any hazardous materials except for the waste products at the end of the fission/fusion. If we can learn how to remove nuclear waste properly, it shouldn't be a problem.

Chernobyl was caused by human error and old technology. If we get modern technology, I don't think we are gonna see another Chernobyl in the foreseeable future.

[nevidimka]

Alternatives? Politicians only speak of alternatives..... Do you honestly think they want them? What's making money for most of them in the first place? (Fossil fuel industry..,. DUH!!!)

I for one though, would definitely like to have alternatives. And why would nuclear power kill the Earth first? It doesn't exhume any hazardous materials except for the waste products at the end of the fission/fusion. If we can learn how to remove nuclear waste properly, it shouldn't be a problem.

Chernobyl was caused by human error and old technology. If we get modern technology, I don't think we are gonna see another Chernobyl in the foreseeable future.

Correction, Chernobyl was caused by human error and oversight in building the reactor. The technology for the Chernobyl design was enough to avoid that catastrophe.

[DavidDCM]

If we can learn how to remove nuclear waste properly, it shouldn't be a problem.


Noone found a proper way of doing this so far. Even burying it 1000 metres down in the earth is not unproblematic. And this stuff remains dangerous for a couple thousand years.
Nuclear energy is a comfortable thing, I agree (better than coal-fired plants or so), but if there are sufficient alternatives (yes, that word again :D), then they should be pursued rather than nuclear. Malaysia is sunny and riverine country, isn't it possible to make a great amount of power by solar and hydro-electricity? More stuff like the Bakun dam project.

[nevidimka]

Noone found a proper way of doing this so far. Even burying it 1000 metres down in the earth is not unproblematic. And this stuff remains dangerous for a couple thousand years.
Nuclear energy is a comfortable thing, I agree (better than coal-fired plants or so), but if there are sufficient alternatives (yes, that word again :D), then they should be pursued rather than nuclear. Malaysia is sunny and riverine country, isn't it possible to make a great amount of power by solar and hydro-electricity? More stuff like the Bakun dam project.

Yea, many rivers, but also more importantly, much valuable forest covering these rivers. The amount of forest/habitat lost due to the sinking is unacceptable. Its not like we don't have enough problem with Illegal logging already. The Bakun farce is due to this environment damage.

Solar is a good alternative, But I'm still sceptical about the power generation capability for this technology. Can it compete with Hydro or Nuclear reactor capacity?

[DavidDCM]

Compete, no, nothing can compete in efficiency with a nuclear power plant I think.
A big solar power plant would need a really big area where you raise these solar panels. It's more a thing for individual households. You can install these things on your roof and in this way create a certain amount of your electricity yourself. This lowers the overall amount of electricity needed in the country, if enough people participate.
This concept has become quite popular here in Germany during the last ~10 years. Today you see many houses with solar panels on the roof like in the photo that I attached. And in Malaysia there's like 10 times more sun than here in Germany. So a solar panel would much more effective there. But I really have no idea how much it would really bring.

[Waylander]

I sometimes have to do with these solar panels due to my work and the new ones are rather good.
Enough energy production to feed a fair amount of energy back into the system.
Actually one roughly calculates that the panels on a normal house are paying for the investment within 10 years just by feeding some energy into the system (Ok the price for this is a little bit subsidized).

[nevidimka]

Compete, no, nothing can compete in efficiency with a nuclear power plant I think.
A big solar power plant would need a really big area where you raise these solar panels. It's more a thing for individual households. You can install these things on your roof and in this way create a certain amount of your electricity yourself. This lowers the overall amount of electricity needed in the country, if enough people participate.
This concept has become quite popular here in Germany during the last ~10 years. Today you see many houses with solar panels on the roof like in the photo that I attached. And in Malaysia there's like 10 times more sun than here in Germany. So a solar panel would much more effective there. But I really have no idea how much it would really bring.


Those things aren't cheap, but I like the idea. Maybe the gov should make it into law, to force ppl living in expensive houses/housing estates/kondos to put them up.

But the whether here is hot and humid, a lot of rainfall. I suspect it could have an issue with wear and tear.

[Tavarisch]

Those things aren't cheap, but I like the idea. Maybe the gov should make it into law, to force ppl living in expensive houses/housing estates/kondos to put them up.

But the whether here is hot and humid, a lot of rainfall. I suspect it could have an issue with wear and tear.

Wear and tear is definitely a problem. It costs a lot to replace them I hear.

And the chances of making this into a law are really low. Consider this, most of the influential people in Malaysia are rich. Coincidentally, they are also greedy and uncaring. Greed+Carelessness+Wealth = No purchase of Solar Panels.

Sometimes, I wish I could just shoot a few of these Yang Berhormats. Really arrogant bastards if you ask me. They get to run red lights too.

[Waylander]

Subsiding them might be much more usefull than trying to create a new law.
Isn't Malaysia also, at least partly, located on the pacific ring of fire?

Geothermal energy might also be an alternative.

[Tavarisch]

Subsiding them might be much more usefull than trying to create a new law.
Isn't Malaysia also, at least partly, located on the pacific ring of fire?

Geothermal energy might also be an alternative.

Nope, according to our textbooks, we are NOT in the Lingkaran Api Pasifik.

[nevidimka]

Subsiding them might be much more usefull than trying to create a new law.
Isn't Malaysia also, at least partly, located on the pacific ring of fire?

Geothermal energy might also be an alternative.

While we are not in the Pacific ring of fire, we do have geothermal spots around the country. But I'm not sure if they are huge enough for power generation.

[Zzims]

Given the mindset of the Malaysian population, there is no way our government can turn rogue. We Malays are, in general, lazy and unproductive. It's a sad fact that I am reluctant to admit. We have a select few who are doing what they can, but overall their effort is moot. I do not intend to insult my fellow brethren. We make good administrators but we suck at capitalizing in the terms of finance. No single influential leader can make us move without changing our habits and mindset. Believe me, I know.

The only event that I recall Malays moving at all was the 1-4 March of 1946, and even then that was out of necessity. The chances of the so-called PAS turning radical is very low, given that Nik Aziz is also a man of peace. The only militant problem here is Jemaah Islamiah.


The Chinese here don't have a reason to replace our current government and in the event that they do, the PRC is their to back their regime. Indians on the other hand are not that militant, so long as we allow them to practice their religion peacefully, which we are doing.

Hollow assumptions at best, that I would dismiss completely, Try not to generalize people. You might be Malay. Doesnt give you the right to opinionated others through your own actions. Agreeable that your consider yourself lazy and unproductive. I know alot of Malays whom are hard-working and trying to make a change for themselves and others.

And no, Chinese nor the Indians have the ability to form a goverment through due process based on their numbers alone. Its a mixing process of sort, all for power or none at all.

Malaysian Politics? Stable?

I beg to differ I'm afraid. Our political system is a pyramid on it's tip. We've got so much infighting in Parliament, so many unnecessary religious and ethnic disputes. Corruption is as they say in Malay, "berleluasa". It's uncontrollable. Even the Anti-Corruption agency is rumored to be corrupted. If you had enough evidence, you could probably implicate the whole government. It's all linked. It's not gonna be long before someone will throw a wrench into our crippling political machine. And once that happens, Boom civil war.

And the thing about the US being unhappy.... I don't think we can say the same about Syria now can we? But I understand the situation, mainly being that Syria is within close proximity to Israel. There are some instances though where the US was unhappy with us. Anwar Ibrahmim's case for instance. He's got US Senators backing him up. In fact, I recall that Condolezza Rice made an official statement against our way of treating his case.

Evidently I agree that corruption is a huge problem. Eradicating it is a a priority. However thought we might be at odds with each other, simply put we still govern with abit more civility when compared to others. Stability can be judge in many different ways. I'd say Malaysia as a whole has the stability to sort out our problems with to say not least the required amount of maturity. And no a Civil War, wouldn't happen. There is just too many variables at stake, for us and the region. While I would see the US meddling in everyone's problems, but I forsee that going as far as vocal support for Anwar Ibrahim. Unwise to stack your chips with the US at the moment.

I think we should not foreclose any possibility. There are enough elements in PAS to make you think otherwise. I am not sure what the correlation between laziness is to being warmongering and acquiring weapons of mass destruction. It can happen. I will have to disagree about the good administrators part. My personal experience is that it is horrible without some money involved.

I for one wont compared the task and burden of Malaysian and Singaporean leaders have had to carry. As Its agreeable "Its horrible without some money involved" I see that remark going both ways North and South.


You will always have to store your own waste, or you could have an agreement with Russia to send it there for reprocessing if I'm not mistaken. but I believe if you own a reactor, you should store your own waste.

I agree absolutely. Tho the building and maintenance of nuclear facility in Malaysia might be concern due to lack in experience and know-how, its easily fixed by a a decade or two of intense research and techno-hopping. My main concern is the middle-man/interested politician. Cutting corners when building a nuclear facility is a precursor something much-much worse. I support the notion of Malaysian going nuclear.

[Red]

There wont be global objection considering Malaysia is a signatory of CTBT? and its a private energy project. It wont be built underground trying to hide it from the world.

I would not discount that from happening. A private energy project? All the more reason for it to be subjected constant checks. You are not getting it. You would not build key installations so close to your borders. What exactly is the difference between building it above ground or underground when it is properly and regularly approved/checked by global authorities? And how is it hiding when everyone knows about it.

[Red]

I for one wont compared the task and burden of Malaysian and Singaporean leaders have had to carry. As Its agreeable "Its horrible without some money involved" I see that remark going both ways North and South.

Both Malaysia and Singapore have thier respective limitations and challenges. That is no excuse for inefficiency. Yes, corruption exists in both countries. Here`s the index;

http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2008

I am intimately interested in this given the business that I was doing previously.

[nevidimka]

I would not discount that from happening. A private energy project? All the more reason for it to be subjected constant checks. You are not getting it. You would not build key installations so close to your borders. What exactly is the difference between building it above ground or underground when it is properly and regularly approved/checked by global authorities? And how is it hiding when everyone knows about it.


What do you mean we are not getting it? Do you mean the gov wont be building it, or Malaysia wont be allowed to build a nuclear power plant?

And of course nuclear facilities are put through constant checks by the IAEA, that's part and parcel of having a nuclear deal. I do not see this as an obstacle in any way considering we want to generate electricity and not build nuclear weapons.

Also I dont think you understand what you are saying, you are contradicting yourself.

[Red]

What do you mean we are not getting it? Do you mean the gov wont be building it, or Malaysia wont be allowed to build a nuclear power plant?

Who`s "we"? I said Malaysia will not build the plant(if ever) so close to her borders. Do you not understand that? Refer to your posts much earlier.

And of course nuclear facilities are put through constant checks by the IAEA, that's part and parcel of having a nuclear deal. I do not see this as an obstacle in any way considering we want to generate electricity and not build nuclear weapons.

It would be good if that is to happen. Otherwise, it simply becomes a potential target.

Also I dont think you understand what you are saying, you are contradicting yourself.

No. My opinion is that you have issues fathoming what people are saying.

[nevidimka]

I would not discount that from happening. A private energy project? All the more reason for it to be subjected constant checks. You are not getting it. You would not build key installations so close to your borders. What exactly is the difference between building it above ground or underground when it is properly and regularly approved/checked by global authorities? And how is it hiding when everyone knows about it.


Admin Text deleted. That tone and response was completely unnecessary.

Who else builds nuke reactor underground and try to shield it from international attention like Syria? If it is known at all, that's because US keeps close tabs on Syria's activities. You are just not making sense on your response to my original post.

[Tavarisch]

Oh cut the crap man. I said if Malaysia built the reactor, its for pvt power generation purposes, not some illegal crap being done by Iran or Syria, so that it can fit into your "Singapore under nuke threat" wet dream agenda.

Who else builds nuke reactor underground and try to shield it from international attention like Syria? If it is known at all, that's because US keeps close tabs on Syria's activities. You are just not making sense on your response to my original post.

Let's try to be polite here. Judging by your tone, you don't look like you are gonna play nice. We don't want a war here. (Ironically, this is a defense thread)

And, I don't think Singapore is gonna react badly to this. It's not like we are gonna dump our waste on them.......

I understand that the reactor poses a threat if an accident happens. But, that's life. I surely want to have clean air for my kids. This fossil fuel industry is really killing us.

[gf0012-aust]

Before anyone else responds to this post:

Stay on topic
Stay polite
Read the forum rules.

Any breaches will see threads that don't comply being deleted

[OPSSG]

I am not against nuclear power in concept but the devil is in the details. I would like to bring up 3 points for your consideration, given our track record in the region:


1. Business Opportunity:

In 2008, Japan's Hitachi and US giant General Electric team up to sell midsize nuclear reactors (http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/Hitachi_GE_to_develop_smaller_nuclear_reactors_999 .html) to meet growing demand for power facilities in Southeast Asia, a Hitachi spokesman said. So it is a business opportunity for these MNCs and that all the countries in Southeast Asia have to buy our nuclear technology from abroad. Please keep in mind the debacle of the Philippine Bataan Nuclear Energy plant and its failure leaving the Filipinos with a debt of US$2.2 billion (see point 3 (iii) for relevant link).


2. Japan Leading Nuclear Energy Country:

Japan, which generates 29 percent of its power (http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/2659) from nuclear energy, has two plants under construction with 10 more planned. More than that, as Gavan McCormack observes, Japan positions itself as a “plutonium superpower,” not only as the world’s most committed nuclear country but, even as one “nuclear obsessed.” By this it is meant that, alone among non-nuclear weapon states, Japan pursues the full nuclear cycle in which plutonium is used as fuel after the reprocessing of spent reactor waste, just as Japan has accumulated more than 45 tonnes of plutonium or almost one fifth of the global stock of civil plutonium.


3. Earthquake and Other Risks Like Terrorists:

(i) Asia is prone to shattering earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunamis - a continuing challenge for nuclear power regulators and managers will be seismic hazard and the associated risk of catastrophic radiation leakage. The 12 May 2009 earthquake in China (http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/06/10/asia-gears-nuclear-power.html) that destroyed large swathes of southwestern Sichuan province killing more than 67,000 people, is a reminder, if one were needed, of how suddenly a tremor can strike and how much damage it can do.

(ii) The risks of nuclear power plants in geologically unstable zones was dramatically highlighted by the impact of an earthquake upon the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant in Niigata Prefecture on 16 July 2007. Fortified to withstand earthquakes as strong as 6.5 on the Richter scale, the plant nevertheless suffered a fire and leakage... But in the past two years, three incidents occurred--at the Onagawa Plant (August 2005); the Shika Plant (March 2007); and the Kashiwazaki Plant, respectively. In each case the maximum ground motion was greater than seismic design criteria of the plants. And I believe that Japanese standards of nuclear safety is the highest we can strive for in Southeast Asia.

(iii) There is an article on the promises and pitfalls (http://www.rsis.edu.sg/publications/Perspective/RSIS0782007.pdf) for Southeast Asia. These risks are to be managed. I hope that all countries contemplating nuclear power each have a good crisis management plan. You decide if you want our officials to manage such projects given the inevitability of human error. Please note that the Russians are playing a leading role in encouraging nuclear energy use in Indonesia and Myanmar. I am also reminded of the Russian safety record that has improved tremendously since Chernobyl.

[Tavarisch]

Malaysia doesn't have Earthquakes IIRC.

Aside from monsoons which happen in their respective seasons. These aren't even earthquakes and assuming that they were to threaten our plant all we have to do is move it inland.

I don't see how we are geologically unstable. I am not sure of Borneo but Semenanjung is definitely clear of geologically instability. So, this puts this factor out of the question. For Malaysia at least.

[OPSSG]

Let's try to be polite here. Judging by your tone, you don't look like you are gonna play nice. We don't want a war here. (Ironically, this is a defense thread)

Thanks for being a voice of moderation.

Malaysia doesn't have Earthquakes IIRC.

I am aware that Malaysia doesn't have Earthquakes. Please try to read and apply what I wrote in the intended context, which was intended to be illustrative and not literal.:D

You have not understood my point, which was, the inevitability of human error. It was Japanese human error (when properly understood and commonly called the unknown-unknowns) that resulted in specifying seismic design criteria that was inadequate for maximum ground motion actually encountered.

I live in Singapore, our peoples are kindred cousins with a shared history and related geography. So please give me a bit of credit? :rolleyes:

The most compelling ideology in the world today is not religion. It is success. We are burning away our future in Indonesia, with the forest fires (from my point of view, there must be more that Singapore can do and is not doing). We in ASEAN are divided by mistrust. And we are sales targets for arms and nuclear power plant salesmen who have their own agenda. What have we succeed in doing together (save talk and not shoot each other in ASEAN)? We in our region do not have a record of success in managing corruption or good stewardship of our environment. Do we have the complex regulatory environment necessary to ensure the safe use of nuclear power in Southeast Asia? That is why the devil is in the details.

[Tavarisch]

Thanks for being a voice of moderation.



I am aware that Malaysia doesn't have Earthquakes. Please try to read and apply what I wrote in the intended context, which was intended to be illustrative and not literal.:D

You have not understood my point, which was, the inevitability of human error. It was Japanese human error (when properly understood and commonly called the unknown-unknowns) that resulted in specifying seismic design criteria that was inadequate for maximum ground motion actually encountered.

I live in Singapore, our peoples are kindred cousins with a shared history and related geography. So please give me a bit of credit? :rolleyes:

The most compelling ideology in the world today is not religion. It is success. We are burning away our future in Indonesia, with the forest fires (from my point of view, there must be more that Singapore can do and is not doing). We in ASEAN are divided by mistrust. And we are sales targets for arms and nuclear power plant salesmen who have their own agenda. What have we succeed in doing together (save talk and not shoot each other in ASEAN)? We in our region do not have a record of success in managing corruption or good stewardship of our environment. Do we have the complex regulatory environment necessary to ensure the safe use of nuclear power in Southeast Asia? That is why the devil is in the details.


I agree. We SEA-ans have not done anything together that is of significance. Save for, as you say, not shooting at each other. There must be something we can do to build up some trust.....

Humans will always be humans. I never said there was perfect one and if such human were to exist, then our purpose of existence is moot. As people would say, we should learn from the mistakes of our past.

Chernobyl is a woeful example of human error. IIRC, they didn't coordinate a test properly or something that lead to a fatal blow. Then appeared the 30km Zone with mutant zombies and three-headed pigs. (JK :onfloorl: )

The best thing to do for once is to trust each other. I know trust doesn't come with a nice price tag, but there must be something that we can do.

Maybe, just maybe, we could make this a joint thing? I mean scientists from Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia should have this big conference and start talking about a purely SEA-an Nuclear Power Plant.

[Ananda]

We in our region do not have a record of success in managing corruption or good stewardship of our environment. Do we have the complex regulatory environment necessary to ensure the safe use of nuclear power in Southeast Asia? That is why the devil is in the details.

Indonesia since the 60's already operating small research nuclear reactors. We have three now (in Bandung, Jogjakarta, and Serpong-Jakarta). All in densely populated urban area. The largest in Serpong is a 30 MW reactor. In fact the one in Serpong also included with nuclear fuel enrichment facility (off course not for weapon grade).

It may be small, but considering that those three located in Urban area (in Bandung less than 500 m from urban population), and with ZERO accident for overall 40 years in operation, show that safe nuclear protocols still can be conducted even with hugely inefficient buerocratic environment like here in Indonesia. Afterall small nuclear reactor is in principle demand the same safety protocols as the large ones (IAEA standard).

For us, the plan for our first commercialy reactor ( 4 x 300 - 500 MW) in mount muria has been conducted since the 80's, on and off base on political situation and will.

At short only two main reason why it's not in full motion,
1. The costs, it gain more support after the huge increase on oil price,
2. We don't have sufficient uranium deposits in here, thus has to relly with outside supply. Something that nationalist in here do not like.

Enviroment activists off course show Vocal oppositions, but in the end if the price of energy keep soaring, it will come out eventually.

[tosho daimos]

the nuclear is safe to use if it properly handle, very2 good security, proper maintainance...
( i always nucleared myself with lots of chilies... hehehe :D )

[nevidimka]

Let's try to be polite here. Judging by your tone, you don't look like you are gonna play nice. We don't want a war here. (Ironically, this is a defense thread)

And, I don't think Singapore is gonna react badly to this. It's not like we are gonna dump our waste on them.......

I understand that the reactor poses a threat if an accident happens. But, that's life. I surely want to have clean air for my kids. This fossil fuel industry is really killing us.

Haha, that may be true. :D
But it warrants a statement that looks paint the nuclear power generator as something being built with ill intention, as you can see by the suggestion that " it will have more reasons for it to be on constant checks" on Red's post.

Regarding Ananda's claims, it does make the option look safe, although at a smaller scale. Malaysia also have a research facility with a nuclear reactor since 1982. We use TRIGA Mark 2 type research reactor.