Technical Communications

Project Report
TECB 213
Technical Communications
Semester II 2010/2011
Section : 01
Lecturer: Mr. Ng Yu Jin

.....Nuclear Energy in Malaysia.....

Group Members:
YEW WENG KEAN LEADER (EP 083519)
TIANG SHING HUEI (AL 081093)
RONALD TAN HUAI-SHENG (AL 081135)

March 18, 2011

Mr. Ng Yu Jin
Institute of Liberal Studies
Universiti Tenaga Nasional
43009 Kajang, Selangor

Dear Mr. Ng Yu Jin:

We are happy to present to you the enclosed report, titled Nuclear Energy in Malaysia, which
you have commissioned us to prepare at the beginning of the semester. The report contains our
research regarding the issue of nuclear energy in Malaysia, public acceptance towards having
nuclear power plant in Malaysia and also the factors that influence the decisions of Malaysians
regarding the nuclear energy issue.
Our research focuses mainly on the advantages of implementing nuclear energy in Malaysia and
the reasons why nuclear energy appears to be the better alternative as compared to the current
energy sources that we are having now. Apart from that, we have also found out via our research
about public acceptance towards having a nuclear power plant in Malaysia and the reason for
their opinions about this new alternative.
We hope that you find our report useful in meeting the requirements of technical communication
subject. If you have any questions regarding our findings, please feel free to contact us.

Yours sincerely,

Shing Huei
Tiang Shing Huei

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
ABSTRAK
CHAPTER I
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7

Page
Number
i
ii
iii
iv

INTRODUCTION
The background of the study
Statement of the problem
Objectives of the study
Research questions
Significance of the study
Limitation of the study
Operational definitions

1
2
3
3
4
4
5

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

10

CHAPTER IV
4.1
4.2
4.3

DISCUSSION
Introduction
Data collected from survey
Data analysis

12
12
17

CHAPTER V
5.1
5.2
5.3

CONCLUSION
Major findings from data analysis
Significance of the findings
Recommendations

29
30
30

REFERENCES
APPENDIX

32
33

iii

ABSTRACT

With the increasing demand for energy year after year, Malaysia is lacking competitive and
sustainable energy resources beyond the year 2020. The current energy sources that we are
having now, which include coal and gas, will not be able to cope with the energy demand in
years to come. Hence, the Malaysian government has made the decision to embrace the idea that
the country needs to implement nuclear energy to meet its growing energy needs. Besides the
rising need for energy, the exorbitant price of oil has as well contributed to the decision of
having our own nuclear power plant in Malaysia. However, in order to implement nuclear energy
in Malaysia, public acceptance plays an important role. This research paper, besides presenting
the advantages of nuclear energy as compared to the other alternatives, also provides the findings
of the perceptions and opinions of the public regarding the issue of nuclear energy in Malaysia
through questionnaires and interviews. The results of this study can educate the public better
about nuclear power and ultimately gain public acceptance in order to build a nuclear power
plant in Malaysia.

iv

ABSTRAK

Disebabkan keperluan tenaga yang semakin menaik, Malaysia kini memerlukan satu alternative
yang baru untuk mengganti sumber tenaga yang kita sedang gunakan sekarang. Sumber-sumber
ini yang merangkumi penggunaan bahan api dan gas tidak akan dapat menyaingi keperluan
tenaga pada tahun 2020. Oleh sebab itulah, kerajaan Malaysia telah membuat keputusan untuk
melaksanakan cadangan untuk pembinaan loji nuclear di Malaysia. Selain daripada kenaikan
penggunaan tenaga pada masa hadapan, harga minyak yang semakin meningkat juga
menyebabkan perlunya Malaysia mencari tenaga alternatif yang baru. Walaupun pelaksanaan
tenaga nuklear itu penting untuk masa depan negara kita, kita masih memerlukan sokongan
daripada penduduk Malaysia untuk membina loji nuklear yang kemungkinan besar akan
mempengaruhi kehidupan mereka. Kertas kajian ini bertujuan untuk membentangkan kebaikan
tenaga nuklear apabila dibanding dengan sumber tenaga yang lain di samping membincangkan
tentang pandangan orang ramai terhadap pelaksanaan tenaga nuklear di Malaysia. Keputusan
kajian ini dapat membantu memberi orang ramai sedikit sebanyak informasi tentang tenaga
nuklear dan seterusnya diharap agar penduduk Malaysia akan menyokong pembinaan loji
nuklear kepunyaan kita sendiri.

Chapter 1
Introduction

1.1

The Background of the Study

Developed countries had started using nuclear energy and there was no reason why
Malaysians could not be open about it., said Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) chief
executive officer Datuk Seri Che Khalib Mohamad Noh. According to him, the energy
company has submitted a preliminary proposal, prepared together with the Malaysian
Nuclear Agency and the Natural Resources and Energy Ministry, for the Government
to consider. (Khalib, 2010)
According to the World Nuclear Association, in 2009 approximately 13 to 14 percent of
the worlds electricity came from nuclear. (Ritch, 2010) Worldwide, countries like the
United States of America, France, and Japan are using nuclear power to generate
electricity in their countries. Nuclear power is a growing trend worldwide and countries
are adapting it because it is one of the cheapest and cleanest energy for long-term
consideration. Malaysia had a nuclear development program about three decades ago but
was placed aside because the oil price was cheap and there was not a need for an
alternative energy. (Hassan, 2010) Today however, looking at the hike in oil prices and
the fact that Malaysia is going to be a net importer of oil in around three to five years, we
can no longer rely merely upon the current energy sources. Besides the hike in oil prices,
there is also a need for Malaysia to cater the demand for energy after 2020. In Malaysia,
about 60 percent of electricity is generated via the use of natural gas and another 24

percent of electricity generated by the use of coal. (Hassan, 2010) The hydro power
contribution towards the countrys need of electricity is negligible. The high reliance
towards natural gas and coal not only contribute to high carbon emission but also critical
in term of strategy. All of these resources will be in critical state after 2020. (n4m, 2010)
There is therefore a need to conduct this research, gather public views, educate the public
better about nuclear power and ultimately gain public acceptance in order to build a
nuclear power plant in Malaysia.

1.2

Statement of the Problem

Even though nuclear power is proven to be a clean and safe energy, and that there are
various advantages of using nuclear power (Miller, 2004), public approval is a question
to be dealt with. People are aware of accidents happened to nuclear power plants such as
Three Miles Island in the USA in the late 1970s and Chernobyl in Ukraine in 1986 and
they are concerned about the implications building a nuclear power plant might bring to
the country and its citizens. Ravi Krishnaswamy, the director of energy and power
systems practice at Frost and Sullivan Asia-Pasific, Singapore, says he believes that the
safety features of nuclear power plants have increased multi-fold over the last several
decades, especially after some major nuclear power plants accidents. Like any other
technology, nuclear power has its own risks and rewards. (Krishnaswamy R., 2009)
Through this research, we hope to expose to the public about the advantages that the
nuclear energy would bring to our country.

1.3

Objectives of the Study

This research is aimed to examine the benefit of nuclear energy as well as to educate the
public on replacing the current energy sources with nuclear energy. Even though nuclear
energy is a growing trend worldwide, most people do not have a thorough understanding
about nuclear energy and its capabilities. Nuclear accidents such as Chernobyls and
Three Miles Islands have implanted in peoples mind the immense danger of nuclear
energy. Despite the negative impression however, nuclear energy is one of the cleanest
energy available. This research also aims to gather views and opinions from the public
about the issues of having a nuclear power plant in Malaysia. As the decision of
switching from our current energy source, which is coal and fuel, to nuclear energy is
going to affect the public the most, in order to implement the idea, we must first gain the
acceptance and agreement from most of the Malaysian citizens.

1.4

Research Questions
This research intends to provide an answer to the following questions:

What is the public perception towards the implementation of nuclear energy in Malaysia?

Why do some of the people object to the idea of implementing nuclear energy in
Malaysia?

As compared to the current energy sources that we are using now such as coal and gas, is
nuclear energy the better option for Malaysia in the future?

1.5

Significance of the Study

This research is significant because it enables the public to learn more about nuclear
energy and thus giving them the opportunity to reconsider about the having a nuclearpowered Malaysia. Nuclear power is the solution to the rising demand of energy and the
hike in oil price, it also helps to lower down the cost of electricity bill for Malaysias
household as nuclear power plants can generate a stable base load of electricity 24 hours,
7 days a week, with shutdowns only every 18 months to service and re-fuel, during their
50-60 year lifetime (n4m, 2010). Public needs to have a wider and more thorough
knowledge about nuclear power so that they too, after considering the pros and cons, can
place a fair judgment towards the implementation of nuclear energy in Malaysia.

1.6

Limitation of the Study

This research is limited to and done within the Kuala Lumpur area as it is the most
advanced city in Malaysia where people will have a higher exposure towards the issue of
nuclear power if compared to the other areas in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur, according to
the government statistics, has a literacy rate of 97.5% in the year of 2000, which is the
highest in any state in Malaysia. (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2002) Besides, it is
also the place where most of the notable institutions and universities are located in. Most
residents earning a living in the city of Kuala Lumpur are thus more likely to have higher
educational backgrounds, and that indicates a higher credibility in them providing us with
more reliable results.

1.7

Operational Definition
Nuclear energy originates from the splitting of uranium atoms in a process called fission.
At the power plant, the fission process is used to generate heat for producing steam,
which is used by a turbine to generate electricity. (n4m, 2010) Nuclear power is the
generation of electricity from nuclear energy.

Chapter 2
Literature Review
The Malaysian government has been receiving criticisms from the public ever since the
suggestion of implementing nuclear power plant in our country. In this chapter, we are going to
review a number of research and reports done previously by the other researchers. Among the
main aims of these reviews are to study the opinions and solutions provided by the other
professionals as well as to assure public acceptance on the issue.
Nuclear energy is a rather new and fresh idea nowadays as compared to the fossil fuels, coals,
natural gas and hydropower. The public in general does not possess deep understanding and
comprehensive knowledge on the characteristics of nuclear energy. Thus, they are normally fear
of the negative impacts and influences brought by the nuclear energy and do not accept or take in
this comparatively cutting-edge technology or risks into their lives.
Resistance to nuclear energy development is the latest version of this irrational
fear of progress and change, the expression of modern pastoralists and nuclear
Luddites.
(Gamson and Modigliani, 1989)
From the above, we can see the common prejudices of the public towards a whole-new
technology, in this case, nuclear energy. According to Gamson and Modigliani (1989:4), people
often overlook the advantages of a new product while magnifying its drawbacks. Furthermore,
the lack of confidence and also doubts in the public eventually lead to the resistance of nuclear
energy development and public acceptance.

Certainly nuclear energy development is not free of problems, but problems can
be solved, as the history of technological progress shows.
(Gamson and Modigliani, 1989)
Gamson and Modigliani also pointed out that the problems arise from the development of
nuclear energy should not be an excuse as solutions can be formulated at the end of the day.
Scientists and experts are always looking for the best solution to a question and it is believed that
the risks of nuclear power plant can be reduced to a minimal in the coming future.
The world today possesses a trend of high energy demand and countries all around the world are
currently struggling to cope up with the public demand. The sustainability and power provided
by the nuclear energy is the answer to future energy development and better nation's
productivity. As such, they strongly encouraged the use of nuclear energy as a means to hold up
the economic development and to secure the welfare of the poor as well as the coming
generations.
On the other hand, in order to ensure the smooth implementation of nuclear energy in the
country, the activists or government agencies involved must first ensure public confidence and
acceptance regarding the issue. There are various perspectives that we need to look into and take
consideration before making final decision as this involves the safety and interest of a nation and
public.
First and foremost, according to Meserve (2000), all parties from various backgrounds should be
involved in the decision-making and development of nuclear energy and given a chance to raise
their doubts. Government should also provide a right path for the public to raise their concerns
and opinions. As such, public concerns can be addressed as well as examined properly and

considered upon any kind of decision-making.

In addition, interested companies, organizations or government agencies should also work
together and play a role in the establishment of law and regulations as an effort to further
enhance public acceptance. They must all come to a consensus on the development and
consideration of regulatory processes and the decision must be fair to every party.
Also, according to Meserve, there is a necessity to open up any regulatory finding and judgment
for the public to justify and scrutinize. This would in turn ensure the justice and equality of rights
or interest among all parties.
As to that sector of the public that is not inalterably opposed to nuclear power...
providing all safeguards available under the present state of scientific knowledge.
(Whitney, 1974)
According to Whitney (1974:5), full involvement of the public in the regulatory system and
decision-making of nuclear energy would further strengthen their confidence and acceptance. All
possible precautionary measures and safeguards should be done according to scientific
understanding without fail. Licensing process as well as rules and regulations drawn should also
safeguard and address to the basic human rights and concerns of the public.
With respect to that sector of the public opposing any nuclear applications...
sound

and

(Whitney, 1974)

will

withstand

legal

attack

and

judicial

review.

It is believed that the participation of the public, protection from the lawmakers as well as strict
law enforcement would lead to public acceptance and permission over nuclear energy
development in the near future. The government plays a significant role in assuring the
regulatory justice and upholding all parties interest.

10

Chapter 3
Methodology

Our research aims to obtain public views towards the implementation of nuclear power in
Malaysia as well as to find out the benefits of having a nuclear-powered Malaysia. In order
collect data for our research and achieve our research objective, we conduct surveys by handing
out questionnaires to our targeted group and interview professionals in the field of nuclear power
who are able to provide us with useful facts of nuclear energy. We choose to conduct surveys as
this is the faster and more efficient way to gain opinions and views from the public as compared
to other means of collecting data available. We also conduct interviews with professionals from
the field of nuclear energy as besides being able to provide us with their knowledge and opinions
of nuclear power in Malaysia, they can also express their views on the topic of public acceptance
regarding nuclear power in Malaysia, which are valuable sources that will contribute greatly to
our research.
For the surveys, we first limit our group of people who are going to answer our questionnaires to
those who live in the city and have a considerable amount of knowledge regarding nuclear power.
This will ensure the reliability of the results as people who are more knowledgeable of nuclear
energy are able to provide us with opinions that are not affected by rumors and common beliefs.
We also limit people who are going to complete our questionnaires to those who are most likely
to get affected in various aspects by the implementation of nuclear energy in Malaysia so as to
ensure the reliability of the survey as people who are going to be affected are able to provide real
concerns and worries as well as reasons of objection towards nuclear energy.

11

Before we conduct the survey and hand out our questionnaires to our targeted group, we
anticipate problems that might occur, for instance inaccuracy of background information,
dishonesty in answering the questions in the given questionnaire and rejection to answer the
questionnaires. To prevent the aforementioned problems from occurring, we come out with
several solutions. Firstly, for our questionnaires, we include only background information that is
going to play a significant role in affecting our results, for example age, educational background,
location and so on. Besides we will not ask for information revealing the identity of people
answering the questionnaires as well to ensure our targeted group feel secured enough to answer
our questionnaires honestly. This in turn ensures the validity of the information that we can
obtain from our targeted group. As most people might reject doing a questionnaire that will not
benefit them at all, we decide to give people who spare their time to do our questionnaires a
simple gift of appreciation.
Besides conducting surveys, we have interviews with professionals from the field of nuclear
energy as well. These are the people who will be able to provide us with a handful of useful facts
and information about the pros and cons of nuclear power. As these professionals are wellequipped with knowledge regarding nuclear energy, they can play a truly significant role in
conveying to the public credible information about nuclear energy as well as the beneficial role
nuclear power can play in Malaysia. On top of that, the professionals are also able to share with
the public about their experiences dealing with nuclear energy and by doing so, help the public to
understand better about the pros and cons of having nuclear energy in Malaysia.

12

Chapter 4
Discussion

4.0

Introduction
In this chapter, we are going to analyze and discuss all the data obtained from our data
collected through our methodology. Through our analysis of data from the survey, we are
going to elaborate further on the proven facts whilst comparing it with the public
perception.

4.1

Data collected from survey

The sample of our questionnaire and also some of the questionnaires from our
respondents can be found in the appendix. Our survey consists of only closed-ended and
Likert scale questions only as mentioned in the previous chapter. Now, we are going to
explain why we chose the following questions to be included in our survey and also the
results we obtained from our respondents.
The first two questions were background questions asking for nationality and age. We
asked for nationality of the respondents because our research covers the implementation
of nuclear energy in Malaysia. Hence, to avoid invalid results, we will filter out the
results from non-Malaysians. However, our result yielded a 100% Malaysians
respondents and this signifies the validity of our results. The next question was regarding
the age of the respondents. From our data collected, we managed to obtain the following
result.

13

Age
40-50
2%

50-60
8%

>60
2%

30-40
26%

18-30
54%

Figure 1 Pie chart of age group

Since the research in on the implementation of nuclear energy in the near future, we
wanted to target particularly age groups from 18 to 40 because they are the next
generation who will be affected if the implementation of nuclear energy took place. As
shown in Figure 1, 80% of our respondents were within that age group and that shows the
high validity in our results as we can obtain the perception from majority of the public
that will be affected from the implementation of nuclear energy.
The third question asked for the perception of the public towards the implementation of
nuclear energy using Likert scale. This question is an important part of the survey as it is
a significant part of our research as we seek to determine the public perception of nuclear
energy in Malaysia. The following table shows the result we obtained from our data
collected. We asked for the perception of the public regardless of whether it is positive
or negative as we placed the questions in random order.

14

Table 1 Public perception towards nuclear energy

Perception of Nuclear Energy
Economic stability
Energy diversity
Radioactive waste problem
Threat of potential accident
Reducing climate change
Cleaner air
Reliable electricity
Efficiency

Absolutely Strongly
agree
agree
20
28
31
28
24
16
19
23
18
23
20
32
40
27
45
27

Agree

Disagree

29
36
47
45
35
31
31
23

20
3
13
13
21
14
2
5

Strongly
disagree
3
2
0
0
3
3
0
0

The fourth, fifth and sixth question are interrelated questions asking whether the public
support or object the implementation of nuclear energy in Malaysia and also the reasons
for their response.

Implementation of nuclear energy

47%
Support
53%

Figure 2 Public support towards implementation of nuclear energy

Object

15

Reasons for support

10%

19%

Safe performance
Growing evidence of need
Growing awareness of
nuclear energy's benefit
44%

27%

Positive attitude of the

industry

Figure 3 Reasons for supporting the implementation of nuclear energy

Reasons for objecting

Nuclear plant safety &
accident risk

1% 1%
23%

30%

Siting of nuclear power

plants
Radioactive waste
disposal
Nuclear weapon
proliferation threat
Mismanagement

11%
34%

Other alternatives
available

Figure 4 Reasons for objecting the implementation of nuclear energy

As shown in Figure 2, we obtained a support of 53% from the public towards the
implementation of nuclear energy. This is not significant enough as the implementation
requires the support from the majority of the public.

16

The final Likert scale question asked for their opinions on general statements regarding
nuclear energy in Malaysia. Their opinions help us conclude the public perception
towards implementation of nuclear energy in Malaysia as a whole and also assist our
research in providing recommendations as well.
Table 2 Public opinion on general statements regarding nuclear energy in Malaysia

Nuclear energy can be used as one

of the ways to provide electricity in
Malaysia.
The implementation of nuclear
power in Malaysia is safe.
Nuclear energy is the better option
for Malaysia in the future compared
to current energy sources such as
coal and gas that we are using now.
The Malaysian government is
transparent
enough
in
communicating this initiative to the
public.

Absolutely
agree

Strongly
agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree

48

24

21

13

19

29

34

37

18

27

15

15

34

35

10

From Table 2, the majority of the public absolutely agreed with the statements that
nuclear energy can be used as one of the ways to provide electricity and also the better
option for Malaysia. However, the public disagreed that implementation of nuclear power
in Malaysia is safe. They also disagreed that the Malaysian government is transparent
enough in communicating this initiative to the public.
All the data collected were then analyzed and discussed in the following subchapter
based on the information we obtained through interview, site visits and workshops
attended.

17

4.2

Data Analysis
Besides questionnaires, we attended workshop on nuclear energy option to enhance our
knowledge on nuclear energy. This workshop was organized by the Malaysian Nuclear
Society at UNITEN Residence Hotel. We also did site visits to Malaysian Nuclear
Agency (MNA) and interviewed Mohamad Ali, the Head of Corporate Communications
of MNA to obtain more information on nuclear energy and also views from an expert
who is actively involved in disseminating the correct information to the public. Now,
from the knowledge we gain through the interviews, site visits and workshops, we are
going to discuss the results that we obtained from the data collected.
From Table 1, the perception of the public was obtained and the data was analyzed.
These perceptions can be divided into 2 categories which are positive perception and also
negative perception. There are 6 positive perceptions and 2 negative perceptions. One of
the positive perceptions was energy diversity. The public agrees with this as a total of
95% of the public agreed, strongly agreed or absolutely agreed with this perception. At
the moment, Malaysia is relying heavily on coal and gas as their major source of
electricity, 63% of Malaysia total electricity generation is from gas while 30% is from
coal. This shows the reliance of Malaysia towards gas and coal and how vulnerable
Malaysia is to the fluctuating prices of gas and coal in the highly volatile market. For
example, in recent events, there was a major flood in Queensland, Australia which caused
the supply of coal to drop. This in return, caused the prices of coal to soar due to the high
demand but shortage in supply. Hence, Malaysia needs to diversify its energy mix by
including nuclear power as one of the ways to generate electricity. Besides that, with the
amount of coal and gas dwindling year by year, it is expected that coal and gas to run out

18

within 20-30 years. So, Malaysia also needs to diversify its energy mix to preserve the
fossil fuels such as coal and gas for future generations. Hence, these are some or reasons
why there is a high perception that nuclear can help Malaysia achieve energy diversity.
Another positive perception is that nuclear energy can produce reliable electricity. The
majority of the public also agreed with this as 40% absolutely agreed. Indeed, nuclear
energy is one of the most reliable electricity in the world. It can produce electricity 24
hours a day, 7 days a week without interruption. This is one of the main reason why
nuclear is chosen as the base-load generator for many countries all over the world. Baseload power is the amount of power needed for a continuous supply of electricity in the
country or in the particular region involved. In a few years, there is a need for a new
base-load generator as the supply of coal and gas will continue to dwindle and the need
for nuclear to replace them as the main base-load generator in the near future. Thus, this
is the main reason why the public have a high perception that nuclear energy can produce
reliable electricity.
The next positive perception is the efficiency of nuclear energy as 45% of the public
absolutely agreed with this perception. Generally, a 1000MW coal power plant requires
about 2,000,000 metric tons of coal while 1000MW nuclear power plant only requires 30
metric tons of uranium. This show how efficient nuclear energy is because even such
small amount of uranium can produce large amount of energy. The thermal efficiency of
a nuclear power plant is also much higher compared to coal and gas power plants. For
example, thermal efficiency of a nuclear power plant is averaged around 44% whereas
the thermal efficiency of a coal and gas power plant rarely exceeds 40%. Hence, the
public have the right perception that nuclear energy is efficient.

19

Besides that, a total of 77% agreed, strongly agreed or absolutely agreed that nuclear
energy can help Malaysia achieve economic stability. As mentioned earlier, we need
reduce our reliance on coal and gas so that we have a more diversified energy mix. With
nuclear into the mix, our electricity price wont be vulnerable to the volatile market price.
Furthermore, nuclear only needs 30 tons of uranium a year, but 100 tons of uranium is
required for it to operate initially to last a period of about 3 years. Within that period of 3
years, the price of electricity generated from nuclear power plant is fixed and can help
stabilize the overall electricity price. So, the public also have the right perception that
nuclear energy can achieve economic stability for Malaysia.
The last 2 positive perceptions are nuclear energy can produce cleaner air and also reduce
climate change for Malaysia. 32% of the public strongly agreed that nuclear energy can
produce cleaner air while 35% agreed that nuclear energy can reduce the climate change
in Malaysia. A nuclear power plant actually does not produce any emission of carbon
dioxide gas. For example, the production chain of nuclear power, from the mining of
uranium to the disposal of nuclear waste, the amount of carbon produced is only 6g per
kilowatt hour. However, the production chain of coal power, the amount of carbon
produced is about 1kg of carbon per kilowatt hour. With relatively no amount of carbon
produced from nuclear power compared to coal power, nuclear energy is seen as a clean
energy. With increasing awareness of global warming and climate change, the world has
agreed that the use of fossil fuels must be reduced and be replaced with low-emission
energy sources with is as explained earlier, nuclear energy. Nuclear energy hence can
reduce climate change and this is why the public agreed to these 2 positive perceptions.

20

However, there are two negative perceptions from Table 1. The first of the two negative
perceptions is the radioactive waste problem. 47% from the public agreed that radioactive
waste would be a problem if Malaysia were to implement nuclear power. From our
workshop, we discussed that one of the possible reasons for this is because Tun Dr.
Mahathir Mohamad, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, publically announced that
Scientist do not know enough about nuclear waste as one of the reason for objecting
the implementation of nuclear power plant. This influenced a lot of Malaysians into
thinking that nuclear waste is a problem related to nuclear. Another possible reason was
that the word radioactive is infamously known for causing cancer and other health
effects. Today, with all the advancement in technology, the nuclear industry is well
equipped with the knowledge to handle the disposal of radioactive waste. Proper waste
disposal procedures are followed when dealing with radioactive waste. From the waste,
or more well known as spent fuel, 97% of the spent fuel consists of low-level waste and
immediate level waste. These wastes can be stored at near surface repositories without
harming the public. After few years, these wastes can be reused as uranium again when
their radioactivity level had already decreased. The other 3% is made up of high-level
waste which has to be stored in deep geological depositories for a few decades before the
radioactivity level completely decreased. However, once the radioactivity level decreased,
these wastes can be then reused as plutonium which is a very rare element. A total of
only 12,000 metric tons is produced from nuclear power worldwide, so the amount
Malaysia need to handle for its first power plant is relatively small. So, the radioactive
waste is actually not a problem but the public have a different perception is probably due
to the reasons discussed earlier.

21

Besides that, nuclear energy is also believed to have a threat of potential accident as
agreed by 45% of the public. One of the reasons is believed to be that many have the
perception that nuclear power plant can produce an explosion like an atom bomb. This is
probably due to the atom bomb disaster that struck Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan that
have changed the mindset of the public. However, in reality, the composition of materials
used as fuel for power generation and the materials found in an atom bomb are very
different. Another possible reason for the public to have that perception is probably due
to the accident in Chernobyl, the most devastating accident in the history of nuclear
energy. Although this accident is admitted to have caused the release of radioactive
materials in the air, but this is after several small explosions and not a big explosion like
an atom bomb. The safety features of a nuclear power plant has multifold since
Chernobyl in 1986 and have been proven in experienced operations for more than 13,000
reactor years, reactor years being the total number of years of operation for each reactor
all over the world.

Hence, nuclear power is proven to have very minimal threat of

potential accident after years and years of operations but the public opposed perception is
due to previous accidents which have changed their mindset.
From Figure 2, we found out that only 53% of the public supports the implementation of
nuclear energy in Malaysia while 47% objects. This shows that the public support is not
very high if Malaysia were to implement its first nuclear power plant by 2021. From our
survey, we also ask their reasons for supporting or objecting to the implementation of
nuclear energy in Malaysia. Now, firstly, we will discuss the public reasons for
supporting the implementation.

22

From Figure 3, 44% who supports gave the reason that there is a growing evidence of
need. There is indeed a need to implement nuclear energy as one of the reasons was to
diversify its energy mix which was discussed earlier. Nuclear energy is also seen as one
of the main candidate to be next base load energy source for Malaysia in the future as it
can also produce reliable electricity. Although from Tenaga Nasional Berhad(TNB)
Annual Report 2010, Malaysia is producing 40% excess power at the moment, which is
expected to meet even the countrys projected demand in 2020, the country needs to plan
ahead as a nuclear power plant takes a total of about 10 years of planning and
construction before it is operational. Hence, for Malaysia to be a developed nation by the
year 2020, there is a need to plan ahead as most of our neighboring South East Asean
countries have all already started their planning for the first nuclear power plant.
Another reason for their support is the growing awareness of nuclear energys benefit
with 27% of the public gave this reason. As mentioned by our expert during the interview,
this is one of the main reasons why other countries around the world choose to implement
nuclear energy as one of their country main electricity source. For example, the people of
Japan, even though they were hit by atom bombs during the World War II, are more open
to accepting the idea of nuclear energy because they realize the benefits of nuclear energy.
Some of the benefits are the ones discussed earlier, which were nuclear energy is the
cheap and clean and also helps in reducing the climate change. This shows that if there is
also a growing awareness of nuclear energys benefit in Malaysia but not enough to yield
a strong support towards its implementation.
The next reason for support, with 19% of the public giving this reason, is the positive
attitude of the industry. The nuclear industry have been going strong for about 20 years

23

with many countries that have a strong commitment to nuclear energy planning to expand
their nuclear energy generation. Besides that, developing nations around the world are
planning to go nuclear as a result of this nuclear renaissance. Hence, this is one of the
reasons why the public supports the implementation of nuclear energy.
From Figure 2, we found out that only 10% of the public that support stated the safe
performance of nuclear energy as one of the reasons of support whereas 30% of the
public that object gave the reason that nuclear plant is not safe and pose accident risk.
Although these 2 are contradicting reasons, it is important to know where the public stand,
whether they think it is safe or not safe. From our data, we can see clearly that most of
the public are worried of the safety and the accident risk nuclear energy pose.

Figure 5 Comparative Radiation Exposures with Other Sources

Source: Malaysian Nuclear Agency

24

From the above figure, it can be seen clearly that there is only the amount of radiation
exposed in an x-ray examination is 2000 more higher than anyone who lives nearby a
nuclear power plant. This shows that any resident can stay safely beside a nuclear power
plant and would not have any risk to any radiation exposure as it is very minimal. Besides
that, the use of nuclear energy has only an accident risk of 0.007%. This shows that the
use of nuclear energy has been very safe and the threat of potential accident is considered
very minimal as discussed earlier. Just recently, however, there was a major earthquake
in Japan which recorded in an 8.9 on the Richter scale. This caused the nuclear power
plant in Fukushima Dai-Chi, Japan to shut down as the system would automatically. The
design was flawless in the sense that it managed to withstand an earthquake of magnitude
8.9 (the biggest of which that struck Japan in previous years was only an 8.2). After the
plant shuts down, the fuel rods will continue to give out residual heat, which require the
cooling system to cool it down. At the beginning, after the earthquake struck, the backup
generators managed to kick in and supply the necessary power for the plant to cool down
the rods. However, due to the tsunami, which was 7m high, all 13 backup generators
were wiped out, which caused the plant powerless to cool down the rods. However, in the
worst case scenario, if a meltdown of the fuel rods of the nuclear power plant were to
occur, the radioactive gases will be contained as part of the safety features of a nuclear
power plant. Comparing this with the Chernobyl disaster 25 years ago, this incident
proves that the safety of a nuclear power plant has improved tremendously. With the
experience gained from this latest nuclear accident, we now have the knowledge to better
handle this kind of catastrophe in the future as well. This accident underlines how safe a
nuclear power plant is and how strong the structure is in withstanding earthquakes and

25

other natural disasters. Hence, the public should broaden their views on nuclear power
and not be blinded by all the wrong information disseminated and broadcasted all over
the Internet.
The next reason for the public to object the implementation of nuclear energy is siting of
nuclear power plants as 11% chose this reason. The amount of land needed to build a
nuclear power plant is only about 100 acres. Generally, a nuclear power plant requires a
lot of water which is needed to cool the reactor and hence, the suitable location for a
nuclear power plant to be built would be near the coast, either the East coast or the West
coast of the Malaysian peninsular. However, the exact location of a nuclear power plant
has not been pre-determined as the government has not finalized the site of the nuclear
power plant. Thus, we will only discuss about the public reasoning for objecting the
implementation of nuclear energy. The public is worried they would be exposed to
radiation if a nuclear power plant were to be build in their neighborhood but as
mentioned earlier, the amount of radiation exposed is very minimal.
Another reason for object was the nuclear weapon proliferation threat posed by the
implementation of nuclear energy with 23% of the public citing this reason. This can be
seen clearly in nations that have a long history of military conflict. However, Malaysia
has never been involved in any military conflict which shows that Malaysia is a peaceful
nation that pursues good relations with neighboring countries. Although from nuclear
energy, the plutonium obtained can be used to make nuclear weapons, the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) can detect from the satellite if there is any activity
related to nuclear weapons production in any countries that are pursuing nuclear energy.

26

The biggest majority from the public that object, 34% in fact, stated again that radioactive
waste disposal as one of the reason for their objection. As discussed earlier, radioactive
waste is not a problem if the proper procedure and guidelines are followed. However,
mismanagement and maintenance is an issue that comes into mind when dealing with
these wastes. As mentioned by 1% of our respondents, this is problem when it comes to
Malaysians. This is because Malaysians are infamously known for their lack of
responsibility and ignorance when it comes to maintenance. However, the government is
well aware of this problem and is taking the initiative to send student to other countries
that are practicing nuclear power to gain the experience and knowledge. This is done so
that when they return to Malaysia, they will have the expertise to manage a nuclear power
plant and its wastes. With the proper training, the mismanagement of waste can be solved
and it will not be an issue when we are handling our first nuclear power plants. Another
solution, as suggested by our expert, is that for our first nuclear power plant, Malaysia
should import foreign experts to manage it. During this period of time, local trainees can
be sent and placed under these foreign experts and learn the experience to handle the
nuclear power plant until we can finally run a nuclear power plant on our own.
Lastly, 1% of the public stated that Malaysia should not implement nuclear energy,
instead, look into other options available that can be developed to meet our needs such as
solar, wind and hydro energy. Hydro energy contributes about 6% of the countrys
electricity generation and most potential places to tap hydro energy have almost been
found. Wind energy, on the other hand is not reliable as it depends solely on wind to
supply it power. The wind speed in Malaysia is far too low compared to high wind areas
in the United States. Solar energy however, has the potential to supply enough power in

27

the future as the planning for the first solar power plant in Malaysia has already begun.
Currently though, Malaysia is the third largest solar cells producer in the world but it is
only used in small scale applications such as street lamps. With the current technology of
solar power, it would require a vast amount of space to be able to done in large-scale.
Solar energy is also unable to supply electricity 24 hours a day as solar cells produce
electricity only when the sun shines. These facts show that other options available at the
moment are not feasible enough to be done in a large scale. As quoted from Moore
EditorialNuclear energy is the only large-scale cost-effective energy source that can
reduce these [greenhouse gas] emissions while continuing to satisfy a growing demand
for power. And these days it can do it safely. (Moore, 2006)
The final part of our analysis will be based on Figure 2, where we will discuss on the
public opinions on some of the general statements regarding nuclear energy in Malaysia.
First of all, 48% of the public absolutely agreed that nuclear energy can be used as one of
the ways to generate electricity in Malaysia. Besides that, 37% of the public also
absolutely agreed that nuclear energy is the better option for Malaysia in the future
compared to current energy sources such as coal and gas. These statements are true
because nuclear energy is the only energy source that can be done on a large-scale
compared with the fossil fuels that we are using now which are coal and gas. Hence, the
public shows that they too understand that nuclear energy can contribute to Malaysias
electricity generation in the future. However, 34% disagreed that the implementation of
nuclear energy in Malaysia is safe. This shows that the public does not believed in the
safety of nuclear power plants if it were to be implemented in Malaysia. As mentioned
earlier, nuclear energy has a good safety record and would not harm anyone who resides

28

near a nuclear power plant. So, this kind of information must be disseminated to the
public so that they know the facts and figures to support the implementation of nuclear
energy in Malaysia. Such information can be communicated to the public by the
government. However, 35% of the public disagreed that the Malaysian government is
transparent enough in communicating this initiative to the public. This shows that the
Malaysian government is not doing enough in explaining the black and white on the
implementation of nuclear energy which contributes to the lack of support towards it.

29

Chapter 5
Conclusion

5.1

Major findings from data analysis

After a long analysis of all the data obtained, we have concluded that the public generally
does not hold good perceptions towards nuclear energy. Although with the growing
awareness all around the world of nuclear energys benefit, the public constantly have a
bad image on nuclear energy as they tend to look at all the negative and wrong
perceptions of nuclear energy. This is possibly due to the Internet which plays a major
role in providing the public with a lot of wrong perception towards nuclear energy. The
public, however, should be more knowledgeable on the topic so that they are not fooled
by all the negative information broadcasted all the Internet and mass media.
Besides that, the public needs to know about the negligible disadvantages of nuclear
energy. From our findings, all the reasons mentioned by the public for objecting the
implementation of nuclear energy are well discussed in our analysis and it was concluded
that their reasons for objecting are not significant enough. Some of their reasons for
objecting such as the nuclear weapon proliferation threat are non-applicable to
Malaysians as Malaysia never has a history of military conflicts. The pros and cons of
nuclear energy are well documented within our report and serve to educate the public
better with the precise and correct information towards nuclear energy.

30

In a nutshell, more support is needed from the public if the implementation of Malaysias
first nuclear power plant were to take place. For that to happen, the public must have a
better understanding on nuclear energy and not shelve the idea. Although the public
support towards nuclear energy is low at the moment, the perception of the public can
change over a period of time if the government plays a role in disseminating the public
with the correct and precise information. This can convince the public better and to
support the implementation of nuclear energy in Malaysia.

5.2

Significance of the findings

From our research, the public will now have a wider knowledge of nuclear power. As we
discuss on all the perceptions of nuclear energy, we also learned some of major reasons
why the public think the way that they do towards the negative perceptions. With a
clearer understanding on the bigger picture, the public will realize the importance of
nuclear energy and also learn more on the negligible disadvantages of nuclear energy.
The public can then decide for themselves, after weighing in the pros and the cons, if
nuclear energy should be implemented in Malaysia or not.

5.3

Recommendations
From our findings, we have come out with several recommendations based on the data
with obtained. One of our recommendations is that the Malaysian government should be
more transparent in communicating this initiative to the public. The government should

31

not be doing the whole implementation of nuclear energy in secrecy but continuously
giving out the correct and precise information to the public. This in return will build
confidence and trust of the public, and hence, support the implementation of nuclear
energy in Malaysia.
Our second recommendation is that nuclear energy is the better option for Malaysia in the
future compared to the current energy sources that we are using now such as coal and gas.
As the demand for an energy source to replace the Malaysias base-load electricity
generation, nuclear energy is seen as the best candidate to replace the current energy
sources. This can help reduce our reliance towards fossil fuels as it will run out within the
next 20-30 years. Besides that, if nuclear energy were to be implemented, Malaysias
energy generation can be complimented further by adding solar energy into the mix as the
sun shines in Malaysia throughout the day which is suitable to supply electricity during
peak load. With that, the entire electricity generation would be clean and would reduce
the climate change as well. Hence, we strongly recommend the public to support the
implementation of nuclear energy as it is the better option.

32

References
Azmi, H.(2010, May 8). Malaysia needs nuclear plant. Utusan online. Retrieved from
http://ww2.utusan.com.my/utusan/special.asp?pr=theMessenger&y=2010&dt=0508&pub
=theMessenger&sec=Features&pg=fe_02.htm
Gamson, W.A., Modigliani, A. (1989) Media discourse and public opinion towards nuclear
power. American Journal of Sociology, Volume 95, Number 1, 1-37
Miller, D. W.
(2004, April 14). Advantages of nuclear power. Retrieved from
http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller13.html
Khalib, C. (2010, September 23). TNB boss: Public must approve nuclear power plant. The Star
online. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.my/news/story.asp?sec=nation&file=/2010/
9/23/nation/7082641
Khalib, C. (2011, January 15). Nuclear energy is the answer. Suruhanjaya Tenaga. Retrieved
from
http://www.st.gov.my/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5668:
nuclear-energy-is-the-answer-says-tnb-chief&catid=794:energy-news&Itemid=1201
&lang=en
Krishnaswamy, R. (2009, May 30). Nuclear power-are we ready? The Star online. Retrieved
from http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/5/30/business/4004635&sec=
business
Menon, R. (Interviewer) & Mohammad, D. (Interviewee). (2011, March 18). Long road to
nuclear energy[Interview transcript]. Retrieved from http://www.sun2surf.com/article
=cfm?id=43118
Meserve R. A. (2000, November 13). Nuclear safety and Public Acceptance in the United States.
Retrived
from
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission
/speeches/2000/s00-27.html
n4m.

(2010, December 15). Nuclear energy: An

http://nuke4malaysia.com/nuclear-energy-an-overview/

overview.

Retrieved

from

Ritch, J. (2010) The Necessity of Nuclear Power: A Global and Environmental Imperative.
Retrieved from http://www.world-nuclear.org/John_Ritch/The_Necessity_of _Nuclear
_Power.html
Whitney, S.C. (1974). Enhancing Public Acceptance of Nuclear Decision making. William and
Mary Law Review, Volume 15, Issue 3, Article 6. Retrieved from
http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol15/iss3/6

33

Appendix
Interview transcript
1. We faced the problem of public acceptance when we come to the issue of having nuclear
power plants in Malaysia. In your opinion, why does this happen and how we can solve
this problem?

In nuclear, anything nuclear is taboo to the public, not to say nuclear power alone, even
the nuclear subject is taboo as well especially to Malaysians. But in some developed
countries, the people are more mature in educating themselves. So, their public
acceptance is more manageable. For example, like Japan, even though they have the
experience of World War II (atom bombs like Hiroshima and Nagasaki), they go into
nuclear power immediately after World War II. This is because their people are more
open and rational in accepting this technology. They know the problem of this technology
but they also know how to get the benefits from this technology. So, nuclear also have
many benefits but the only problem is mainly the level of knowledge of the people. So,
this is why we are tackling more on perception than the actual fact. In the actual fact, as
you know, nuclear is developed and the technology is developing and also the
communities all over the world are reaping the benefits of nuclear. So, I think public
acceptance is always a problem but we continue to educate the public about the benefits
of nuclear because for me, the decision if not by Malaysian Nuclear Agency (MNA) but
the decision is by the public and also by our government but our role is providing them
with the right information, the pros and cons of nuclear, our Nuclear Power Program,

34

meaning now we will concentrate our program on disseminating the information to the
public, the good and the bad side of nuclear.

2. Do you think the government in other countries plays a role in changing the perception of
the people compared to the government in Malaysia?

Yes, we can learn a lot from countries which are successful in nuclear power, for
example, like Japan and Korea but the most successful nation in the world is France.
France generate about 80% of their power from nuclear compared to Germany who have
a big problem with perception as far as nuclear is concern. The German public is very
negative to nuclear as compared to the French but Germany is buying power from France
even though they know that the electricity generation is from nuclear. Because of that,
German power cost is one of the most expensive in the world and also they spend billions
and billions of dollars on renewable energy such as solar but produce very little
electricity. So, this is all in the dilemma that the whole world is facing because the task is
to provide the power for the nation. So, that is the challenge but what are the options
available in terms of power generation? We have very little option but one of the most
established options is nuclear. So, our role in MNA is to provide the public and the
government the facts and figure of this option and for them to decide whether nuclear is
the better option for Malaysia. The decision of power generation is on the Energy
Commission and our duty is to educate them on the pros and cons of nuclear power
generation for them to compare with other sources of energy. So, our role is also to

35

provide the necessary manpower when needed but my personal opinion is that we are
moving closer and closer towards implementing nuclear energy in Malaysia.

3. If Malaysia were to have its own nuclear power plant in the future, where do you think it
can be best located and where do we get the supplies and workforce from?

In terms of location, first it has to be nearer to the coastal area meaning that now the best
choice is either in the west coast or the east coast. So, it have to be along the coast of the
Peninsular Malaysia but the location has not been decided as the decision is on the
government. For the workforce, especially for the first or second power plant, maybe
Malaysia will depend on the workforce from of the supplier of the technology. This is for
us to learn the hands-on experience from our first power plant. For the subsequent plants,
perhaps it would be more localized and focus more on local development. Of course,
MNA also have the experience in running nuclear plant but we may require having some
hands-on experience before we can go on our own. For example, like in Korea, it all
started from foreign designs and workers, but now they are all Korean workers and they
even add on to their own design. So, we can look to the development part of it.

4. However, dont you think that within this few years, we can send some of our workforce
overseas for their hands-on training?

Yes, actually the program has already been started from last year to learn hands-on
experience. But until now, we havent even awarded the contract to the supplier. So, there

36

is a timeline from when we award the contract until the plant is built and operational.
Within that particular timeline, we can then decide again whether we should run with a
foreign workforce or from our own workforce.
5. Is nuclear energy the best substitute to coal and gas that we are currently using for fuel
generation in Malaysia?

Nuclear power does have some distinct advantages and benefits over coal. For example, a
1,000MW coal power plant requires 2,000,000 metric tons of coal compared to 30 metric
tons of uranium. This is not a small amount as it involves a lot of logistics as well.
However, for uranium, we only require 30 tons of it per year, and normally for a 1,000
MW nuclear power plant, we restock 100 tons of fuel to run for 3 years continuously. So,
this means if there was a shortage of uranium somewhere within that 3 years, the supply
is not affected as it is not required whereas for coal, a shortage in coal would result in a
lower supply. So, this is one of the advantages of nuclear power. The second advantage is
that the price of coal keep fluctuating but the price of uranium is fixed within those 3
years. Besides that, in some cold countries, nuclear power plant is built very close to the
beach. This is because in that area, the water is warmer where people can swim during
the cold weather. The people appreciate the warm water very much and this also shows
how safe nuclear power is.