I can see why that could be considered a risk compared to using plain
JDBC: to use JPA, you need a container or library that implements JPA, because JPA is not implemented in the standard JDK. You'd for example need to include Hibernate or some other implementation of JPA into your project.
However, in my opinion using JPA is still much better than using plain JDBC. With plain JDBC, you'll have to write a lot of low-level code by hand to convert from objects to SQL statements and back. In any non-trivial application, it will be much more work to use plain JDBC than JPA, and using JDBC will become a maintenance nightmare. Using JDBC vs using JPA is like programming in assembly language vs programming in a higher-level language.