Why Is Jamaica Placating Lee-Chin's Nuclear Hawking?

Before Another Pound, Yuan, Ruble or Dollar is Spent: Seven Questions Jamaica Must Answer on SMRs

By Dennis A. Minott, PhD

July 18, 2026

Jamaica's proposed foray into Small Modular Nuclear Reactors is acquiring the veneer of official policy. In October 2024, the Government signed an MOU with Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and Canadian Nuclear Laboratories. In June 2026, Energy Minister Daryl Vaz reportedly declared Jamaica was actively advancing plans to become one of the world's smaller developing states utilising nuclear energy. Weeks later, Prime Minister Andrew Holness again exhorted Jamaicans to embrace nuclear technology as a panacea for energy insecurity. Meanwhile, Michael Lee-Chin's Portland Holdings has penned yet another nuclear-related memorandum—this time with Türkiye-based Nuclean—to explore reactor projects. The web of political advocacy, commercial alignment, and institutional momentum is palpably widening.

This is precisely when citizens must demand absolute clarity. The issue is not whether nuclear science is inherently malevolent; Jamaica has benefited from peaceful nuclear applications in medicine, agriculture, and research. The true issue is basic governance: whether Jamaica—a small, heavily indebted, hurricane-exposed, and seismically active island with a fragile grid—should expend scarce public resources investigating an immature, potentially ruinous technology before proving it suitable, affordable, or even necessary.

Before another public dollar is spent, seven questions require straightforward answers.

Question 1. How Much Has Jamaica Already Expended?

The Government should publish a full accounting of all expenditure connected with this initiative since inception: overseas travel, consultants' fees, legal advice, technical studies, conferences, training, and civil service hours. Has any foreign government, reactor vendor, or commercial intermediary funded travel or services for Jamaican officials? Exploration is never "free." A programme can consume millions in preliminary studies long before Parliament votes on construction. Who authorised this expenditure, under which budgetary heading, and what measurable public benefit has Jamaica received?

Question 2. Where is the Mandate to Pursue Nuclear Electricity?

When did the Jamaican electorate approve nuclear power as a national priority? Was it featured prominently in a governing manifesto? Has Parliament debated and voted upon it? Has there been genuine, widespread public consultation? The International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) framework for embarking on a new nuclear-power programme demands robust national legislation, independent regulators, emergency response systems, safeguards, security arrangements, and complex waste-management plans. This is a profound, multigenerational commitment—not a casual side project. A memorandum is not a mandate.

Question 3. Which Precise Reactor is Under Consideration—and Has it Ever Operated Commercially?

"SMR" is a broad marketing category encompassing dozens of distinct reactor designs, fuels, coolants, and stages of development. The IAEA describes SMRs as reactors producing up to 300 megawatts per unit, noting more than 80 concepts worldwide—the vast majority remaining on paper or in developmental infancy. Only a tiny fraction operate commercially; prominent Western designs remain in licensing limbo. Which exact design is Jamaica investigating? Has that model operated commercially anywhere for at least five years? What are its demonstrated capital costs, capacity factors, and decommissioning liabilities? Jamaica cannot afford to become a tropical testing laboratory for a foreign vendor's unfinished prototype.

Question 4. Can Jamaica's Grid Safely Accommodate This Technology?

Jamaica's peak electricity demand is measured in hundreds, not thousands, of megawatts. An SMR rated at 150MW or 300MW would represent a disproportionate share of our system. Every grid must survive the sudden loss of its largest generating unit—the N-1 security principle. If a reactor trips unexpectedly, does Jamaica possess the spinning reserve, fast-start generation, or battery storage to prevent total frequency collapse and cascading blackouts? Where is the published, independent grid-integration study? What would it cost consumers to keep massive backup capacity online every hour to insure against a nuclear trip? Our grid obeys the laws of physics, not the poetry of salesmanship.

Question 5. What is the Full Lifetime Cost—and Who Carries the Risk?

Jamaicans deserve a transparent, independently audited cost comparison based on electricity delivered to our grid. This calculation must integrate construction, imported specialist labour, financing, insurance, security, fuel, transmission upgrades, regulation, emergency preparedness, spent-fuel storage, and decommissioning. Who will finance this? Will it require a sovereign guarantee saddling future generations with debt? The International Energy Agency acknowledges that SMR competitiveness relies heavily on heavy government support and mass production. The advertised economics are hypothetical. We must compare a binding nuclear proposal with a diversified portfolio of solar, wind, biomass, storage, and efficiency. Renewable pathways deserve at least the same state attention currently lavished on nuclear exploration.

Question 6. Where Will the Reactor, Waste, and Emergency Infrastructure Go?

Which coastal or inland locations are being eyed? What rigorous seismic, tsunami, hurricane, and erosion assessments have been conducted? Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) research confirms Jamaica's seismic vulnerability, with Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) of 0.30g–0.40g in eastern parishes and faults capable of events exceeding magnitude 7.0 (WHOI, "Geohazard Risks in Jamaica," 2013). Where will cooling water come from during severe drought? What is the plan for spent nuclear fuel? Will it remain on our small island indefinitely? Has any foreign nation offered a legally binding repatriation agreement for waste? Who will secure this material for centuries, and at what cost? A promotional government cannot act as unbiased watchdog. Until a fiercely independent nuclear regulator is established and funded, all talk of "safe" nuclear electricity is premature.

Question 7. Why is Nuclear Speculation Trumping Immediate, Available Solutions?

Jamaicans suffer today from punishingly high electricity bills, frequent outages, and extreme weather risks. Grid automation, distributed rooftop solar, microgrids, biomass, and storage can deliver relief within months, not decades. By contrast, proponents speak in timelines of distant deployment. Every senior engineer assigned to nuclear committees is diverted from modernising today's failing infrastructure. Every ministerial hour spent selling an imported dream is time stolen from removing bureaucratic barriers to immediate renewable solutions.

The Bottom Line: Proponents will argue that SMRs represent the only path to cheap, reliable baseload power. Yet these claims remain unsubstantiated by any published analysis for Jamaica's specific island context. Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) documents that SMR capital expenditure ranges between $6,000 and $11,000 per kWe—far exceeding the $1,200 to $1,800 per kW for utility-scale solar with storage (IEEFA, "SMR Cost Overruns," 2024). The burden of proof rests entirely upon those proposing that a small island nation assume nuclear obligations lasting longer than the lives of the politicians promoting them.

These seven questions are dictates of fiscal responsibility, engineering discipline, and democratic accountability. If the Government possesses persuasive, data-backed answers, let them publish them immediately. Release the financial models, technical assumptions, meeting minutes, and conflict-of-interest declarations.

Until then, there should be an immediate pause on all discretionary public expenditure connected with nuclear energy. Jamaica is under no obligation to subsidise foreign reactor vendors, satisfy billionaires' ambitions, or become a guinea pig for technologies wealthier nations have yet to prove at scale.