PM Lawrence Wong at the Energy Market Authority's 25th Anniversary Gala Dinner

My Cabinet Colleagues
Chairman, and Chief Executive of EMA
Excellencies
Distinguished Guests
Ladies and Gentlemen

I am delighted to join all of you this evening to celebrate EMA’s 25^th anniversary.

It is especially meaningful for me personally, because of the time I had spent in EMA. Seeing so many former colleagues, old friends and familiar faces tonight brings back many fond memories.

25 years may not seem like a very long time. But in our energy sector, it is enough to witness a generation of profound transformation.

Tribute to EMA

Before EMA was established in 2001, Singapore’s power sector looked very different from what it is today.

Back then, PUB managed the entire system – from generation to transmission and distribution. We ran it as best as we could then. But we eventually realised that there was scope to do better, and that greater efficiency and innovation could be achieved through competition and market discipline.

And that is why we undertook a major restructuring of the sector. We corporatised and privatised the power assets. We placed the national grid under Singapore Power. We opened up power generation to commercial players. And we progressively liberalised the wholesale and retail electricity markets to give consumers more choice.

At the same time, we established EMA to oversee this newly liberalised sector – to set up and enforce the rules, to ensure fair competition, and to safeguard the reliability and security of our power supply.

Over time, EMA’s role evolved beyond that of a regulator. It also took on the broader responsibility of ensuring Singapore’s energy security. One example was during the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. The LNG terminal could not proceed on a commercial basis. And so EMA stepped in to build and operate the terminal, and now, LNG is a cornerstone of Singapore’s energy security. More recently, EMA established Singapore GasCo to centrally procure gas for the entire power sector. This could not have come at a better time. Because when the Middle East conflict disrupted our supplies from Qatar, the company was able to move quickly to secure alternative LNG cargoes.

So, this approach of harnessing market forces where they work best, while intervening when strategic needs require it has served Singapore well. Our energy system remains strong and resilient. Our power infrastructure is amongst the most reliable in the world. And we have achieved this while keeping electricity prices in Singapore broadly competitive.

Of course, none of this happened by chance. It required long-term planning, difficult decisions, and importantly close partnership between the Government, industry, and the Labour Movement. So tonight, I want to thank all of you — past and present — for your many contributions to Singapore’s energy journey. Thank you very much.

Looking Ahead

The next 25 years will be even more challenging than the last.

Recent events remind us how vulnerable the world is to disruption. A conflict thousands of kilometres away can quickly ripple through global energy markets, especially when critical chokepoints are involved.

So we cannot just rely on markets alone to secure our supply chains. Efficiency still matters. But resilience matters as well. And increasingly, we will need to invest more deliberately in energy resilience and security.

At the same time, we face the mounting challenge of climate change. The risks are becoming more severe. Yet around the world, momentum for climate action is slowing. And the longer we delay, the harder and more costly the eventual transition will become.

For Singapore, navigating these twin challenges will not be easy. Because we import nearly all our energy, so we remain exposed to global supply disruptions. And because we have limited renewable resources of our own, and so our pathways to decarbonisation are limited. Basically there is no single solution for Singapore. There is no silver bullet. Instead we will need a portfolio of solutions. That also means our energy strategy has to be more deliberate, more diversified, and more forward-looking than before. We cannot depend on any single fuel source, supplier, or technology. We have to pursue multiple pathways at the same time – balancing security, affordability, and sustainability.

So let me share the broad strokes of this energy strategy.

First, in the medium term, natural gas will continue to anchor our energy mix. That is why we are building our second LNG terminal. This will give Singapore the capacity to meet all of our natural gas needs through LNG.

And with Singapore GasCo as the central procurer of gas, we will also be able to think more strategically about our gas mix. We can build a more diversified gas portfolio. That means different contract durations, different supply sources, and even different pricing indices. Similar to managing a financial portfolio — because diversification helps reduce risks and makes the overall system more resilient.

Second, just as we import natural gas, we will also import electricity. We already have an interconnector with Malaysia, which we have expanded to import more power. We welcome more of such power links, drawing from a wider and more diverse range of sources.

In fact, there is very strong interest to sell power to Singapore. But progress so far has been slow because these projects are inherently complex. They are capital-intensive undertakings, requiring subsea cables that cross multiple maritime boundaries and jurisdictions, each with its own regulatory and legal requirements.

We also need to update our electricity market rules to support such imports. Ideally, imported electricity should flow through our national grid – which means it must compete in the electricity market, where electricity is despatched based on cost competitiveness. Then we will have to think through a number of issues. For example, we will have to consider the implications for reserves and overall grid stability. We will also need to consider how  developers can have greater certainty of long-term revenue streams in order to secure project financing. And EMA is studying how the market framework can be updated to address these issues, and enable import projects to be commercially viable.

As we do so, we will also seek to preserve competition and cost discipline. That means: If importers bring in conventional, fossil-fuel generated energy, then it should not cost more than what we can generate ourselves in Singapore using natural gas. Or if importers were to bring in low-carbon energy, we ought to recognise the value of its green attributes. But the premium over fossil fuel-generated energy must still be competitive relative to other decarbonisation pathways, like carbon credits.

So on that basis, we hope that Singapore importers will be able to advance their commercial discussions with overseas project developers, and eventually reach viable arrangements.

Third, we must continue to pursue solutions to generate low-carbon energy within Singapore itself.

What are the options available to us today?

The most obvious one is solar. In the last five years, we have multiplied solar capacity almost five-fold. And we will continue to maximise every available surface – rooftops, reservoirs, and vacant land. But even if we do so, solar energy can still meet only a limited share of our total power demand.

Another option is hydrogen. We have a pilot project on Jurong Island to test the use of ammonia, which is a hydrogen carrier, for energy generation. And the newer Combined Cycle Gas Turbines are designed to be hydrogen-ready. That means they can take in a blend of natural gas and hydrogen, and reduce their carbon emissions in the process. But there are fundamental constraints in scaling up hydrogen for energy generation. The reason is straightforward. To use hydrogen, you first have to produce it. Then you have to liquefy it, convert it into ammonia, ship across oceans, convert it back again, and finally burn it to generate energy. At every stage of this process, energy is lost. Technology can help improve parts of the process. But it cannot eliminate these losses altogether. So this will constrain the role that hydrogen can play in large-scale power generation for some time to come.

That is why we continue to study other options. And nuclear energy is one of them.

Globally, there is renewed interest in nuclear energy. Because electricity demand is rising sharply around the world – as countries electrify transport and industry, and as AI and data centres consume ever larger amounts of energy. Every country is grappling with the same question: how to secure enough reliable baseload power, while still reducing carbon emissions. 

Nuclear energy is well positioned to meet this demand. It is highly reliable, low-carbon, independent of weather conditions, and extremely energy dense. A single uranium fuel pellet, the size of your fingertip, packs a tremendous amount of energy – the equivalent of one tonne of coal, or 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas (basically enough to fill about one-fifth of an Olympic sized swimming pool).

In some ways this is a return to normal. Because in the mid-1990s, nuclear energy generated around 18% of the world’s electricity. That share has fallen to around 9% now, especially after a series of nuclear accidents raised public concerns about safety. But reactor technologies and safety systems have advanced considerably. Newer designs incorporate stronger containment, better engineering, and enhanced safety features. So as countries everywhere look for reliable and low-carbon energy, we are now seeing the strongest pipeline of new nuclear projects in decades.

This means that nuclear energy’s share of global electricity generation is likely to rise again over time. In our own region, many of our ASEAN neighbours – including Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines and Thailand – are studying nuclear energy. Vietnam is among the most advanced, and plans to deploy nuclear energy in the 2030s. Not very far from now.

Singapore started this journey, we started looking at nuclear energy more than a decade ago. And since then, we have been building up our own capabilities, especially in nuclear safety. We have been sending people to learn about nuclear energy, and they have come back and we have built up capabilities over time. We have also been learning from countries with established civilian nuclear programmes to better understand the latest technologies and the regulatory frameworks needed to manage them safely.

Next year, we plan to embark on the first phase of the Integrated Nuclear Infrastructure Review set out by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

This is part of a structured process for countries considering civilian nuclear programmes.

Under this process, the IAEA provides independent expert reviews to assess whether countries have the expertise, institutions and frameworks to adopt nuclear energy responsibly.  

And in this first phase, the IAEA will bring together a team of experts to visit Singapore, to make an independent assessment of our capabilities across 19 key areas, like nuclear safety, radioactive waste management, and emergency planning.

So the review will help determine whether Singapore has the expertise, institutions and frameworks to make an informed decision on nuclear energy.

Let me be clear what this means – and what it does not mean.

This is not a decision to deploy nuclear energy in Singapore.

The purpose of the first phase of the review is to assess whether Singapore is ready to make an informed decision on nuclear energy deployment. The emphasis is on being ready to make an informed decision.

And this is only the first phase. Should a country decide to deploy nuclear energy, there is still a second phase to assess its readiness to invite bids to construct a plant, and a third phase to evaluate whether it is ready to safely commission and operate its plant.

Now based on the experience of other countries that have gone through this process, the entire preparatory process, and the actual infrastructure development, can take well over 15 years. So this is very much a long-term commitment and undertaking.

For Singapore, the considerations are even more demanding because of our unique circumstances. Safety will always be our overriding priority. As a small and densely populated city-state, we have no margin for error. So we must be confident not just in the technology itself, but in the entire supporting ecosystem around it – regulation, security, emergency response, and waste management amongst other things.

That is also why we are focussing on newer reactor technologies, including Small Modular Reactors, as well as other advanced designs with enhanced safety features. These technologies are promising but many are still at an early stage of deployment. It will take time for them to mature, for operational experience to accumulate, and for international safety standards and regulatory frameworks to develop further.

Nevertheless, we must begin the hard work now – to study global developments carefully, build our own capabilities steadily, and proceed systematically, step by step.

We will approach this rigorously and thoroughly. And as we embark on this journey, we will keep the public, we will keep Singaporeans informed throughout the process. When we complete the first phase of the review, we will share openly the IAEA’s independent findings, including any risks and challenges highlighted, as well as the overall assessment of Singapore’s readiness and progress.

Along the way, be it through the IAEA review or our own further studies, there may well be findings that lead us to conclude that nuclear is not the right path for Singapore. If so, we will accept that conclusion. But even then, the effort will not be wasted. Because the capabilities we build and the knowledge we accumulate will still be valuable, especially as nuclear power becomes part of the energy mix in Southeast Asia.

So these are the pathways we are pursuing for Singapore’s energy future: strengthening our natural gas system, expanding electricity imports, and developing low-carbon energy sources, from solar to hydrogen, and potentially even nuclear energy. As I said earlier, there is no single silver bullet. Every pathway comes with constraints and trade-offs. But our responsibility is to plan ahead and build resilience early — so that Singapore can continue to enjoy secure, reliable and increasingly clean energy for the future.

Conclusion

EMA’s role has grown significantly over the past 25 years. You began primarily as a market regulator. Today you are also an active architect of Singapore’s energy future – strengthening resilience, advancing decarbonisation and planning for the long-term.

This work demands deep technical expertise, sound judgment and the ability to plan and think decades ahead. Much of it happens quietly behind the scenes. When things go well, people hardly notice. They take it for granted. Things have to go well in Singapore. But when things do not go well, when a disruption happens, when there is no reliable power, everything comes to a halt. So your work underpins our economy, our society and the daily lives of every Singaporean.

Energy security is a key priority for the government. It is a key priority on our agenda. So the government will continue to provide our full support to EMA for this very important work. Minister Tan See Leng has been very active in overseeing the energy portfolio with focus and resolve, together with the team at MTI and partners across the sector. Compared to the time when I was at EMA, I see our overall capabilities have grown and the scope of EMA work has also expanded significantly. And looking at the team today, and the strong partnerships that we have forged across government, industry and the Labour Movement, I am confident that MTI and EMA are well prepared for the challenges ahead.

For the past 25 years, all of you have kept the lights on for Singapore. Together we will continue to power Singapore – securely and sustainably – for many more years to come. Thank you very much. Happy 25^th Anniversary!