Theresa Rodriguez-Moodie | Jamaica’s nuclear ambitions

The term ‘nuclear energy’ often evokes memories of past disasters — Three Mile Island (1979), Chernobyl (1986), and Fukushima (2011). These catastrophic events, largely due to human error and poor management, left scars that extended far beyond the direct human health impacts; they eroded public trust in nuclear energy worldwide and led to increased scrutiny and regulation.

Despite advancements in safety technology and procedures, the memories of these incidents continue to influence perceptions of nuclear energy. Now, as the Government of Jamaica (GoJ) considers nuclear energy as part of its strategy to combat the climate crisis, a pressing question emerges: is this truly the best path for Jamaica?

NUCLEAR ENERGY’S TRADE-OFFS

Nuclear energy is often labelled ‘clean’ because it produces negligible carbon emissions compared to fossil fuels, which would help Jamaica reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. This type of energy, however, generates highly toxic, long-lived radioactive waste which poses an expensive challenge to store, transport or treat. Further, nuclear power is not renewable; it relies on finite materials like uranium and thorium which also produce risks for mining and transport.

Then, there is the cost. Nuclear power plants are among the most expensive and time-consuming energy projects, far outpacing renewable alternatives like solar or wind farms. This raises questions about whether the time and resources required for nuclear energy are justified, especially when Jamaica has abundant renewable energy potential.

SAFER BUT STILL RISKY

Proponents highlight advancements in nuclear technology, particularly small modular reactors (SMRs), which are touted as safer, more flexible, and quicker to deploy than traditional reactors.

Despite these advancements, however, the risks associated with nuclear energy persist and human error cannot be eliminated entirely. Radiation leaks, accidents, and waste management challenges remain significant concerns.

IS NUCLEAR THE ANSWER?

Jamaica has committed to ambitious climate targets under the Paris Agreement which is a legally binding international treaty on climate change. Through this Agreement it aims to peak emissions by 2025 and cut them by 43 per cent by 2030 compared to 2010 levels. Jamaica has set an ambitious target of 60 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.

While nuclear energy could play a role in reducing emissions, its high costs, regulatory hurdles, and public acceptance challenges make it a complex, risky and time-intensive solution. Before committing to this path, the GoJ must adequately and transparently explore whether cleaner, more sustainable, and accessible alternatives can better meet our nation’s needs.

JAMAICA’S NUCLEAR INTEREST

Nuclear energy has been on Jamaica’s radar for over a decade, referenced in the Vision 2030 Energy Sector Plan and the 2009 National Energy Policy. Since then, Jamaica has created the Hazardous Substances Regulatory Authority (HSRA), an independent body overseeing nuclear safety. The HSRA enforces the 2015 Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection Act with support from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which promotes the safe and peaceful use of nuclear energy.

Then in October 2022 it was announced that Jamaican businessman Michael Lee-Chin signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Canadian Nuclear Laboratory to promote nuclear technology as the means to decarbonise electricity production across the world. Fast forward to October 2024: Jamaica signed an MOU with Canadian companies Canadian Nuclear Laboratories Ltd and Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd for the advancement of nuclear technologies adoption in Jamaica. The government has suggested that this investment will eventually lead to cheaper energy and reduced emissions. Jamaicans learned about this development through media reports rather than direct engagement.

Prime Minister Andrew Holness has acknowledged safety concerns, assuring the public that nuclear exploration will be approached with “caution, care, and the utmost regard for the well-being of our people and environment.” Transparency and meaningful public consultation, however, has not materialised to date.

MORE THAN JUST TICKING A BOX

Learning about critical infrastructure projects through news headlines is not public engagement. The recent Scientific Research Council conference on nuclear energy, held at the Jamaica Conference Centre, was a paid event geared towards academics, professionals, industry and policy makers—not a forum for public dialogue.

True engagement will require inclusive, jargon-free consultations that cater to various audiences and present a balanced view of nuclear energy’s benefits, risks, and trade-offs in comparison to renewable sources, such as wind and solar power. People must leave these sessions with a clear understanding of why nuclear is being considered over readily available renewable options.

Government of Jamaica should approach nuclear energy with caution, ensuring a thorough assessment of its risks and benefits; prioritising transparent and inclusive consultation. Given the complexities of nuclear power, it is crucial for the Jamaican people to be a part of this conversation.

Theresa Rodriguez-Moodie, PhD, is an environmental scientist and the CEO of the Jamaica Environment Trust. Send feedback to jamaicaenvironmenttrust@gmail.com and columns@gleanerjm.com