Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine a case of companies cooperating with the State to prevent a public controversy over nuclear power following the Fukushima disaster and achieve mutually beneficial policy outcomes. It analyses the private and public communication of pro-nuclear corporate, political and regulatory actors.

Drawing on the political economy theory, the study examines how actors mobilised power by accessing an existing social network to agree a joint public communication strategy in order to ensure public support for the continuation of nuclear power generation in the UK. It traces discursive frames from their inception in private communication to their reproduction in public communication and their dissemination via the media.

The study provides evidence of pro-nuclear actors cooperating behind the scenes to achieve consistent public pro-nuclear messaging. It finds evidence of four discursive frames: avoiding knee-jerk reactions, lessons learned, safety and nuclear renaissance. In combination, they guide audiences’ evaluation of the consequences of the Fukushima disaster for the UK in favour of continuing the commercial use of nuclear energy.

The private e-mail exchange between pro-nuclear actors presents a unique opportunity to examine the mobilisation of less visible forms of power in the form of agenda setting (manipulation) and discursive framing (domination) in order to influence policy outcomes and shape public opinion on nuclear energy. This is problematic because it constitutes a lack of transparency and accountability on part of the State with respect to policy outcomes and restricts the civic space by curtailing the articulation of alternative interests and voices.

An economic assessment was performed of the potential for clean energy options to contribute to the power and desalination needs in the State of Kuwait over the next 20 to 40 years. The paper aims to summarize two analyses that were performed for the Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research to develop a strategy promoting renewable energy and evaluating alternative technologies including nuclear energy.

The analyses were performed using a power and water model for Kuwait that was constructed using the International Energy Agency – Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme (IEA‐ETSAP) TIMES modeling framework. Data provided by the Ministry of Electricity and Water (MEW) and the Kuwait Petroleum Company (KPC) characterizes the projected demand for power and water; the existing and planned power generation and water desalination plants, including the expected retirement of existing plants; and future fossil fuel prices and availability. New power generation options – including renewable energy (RE), nuclear, combined cycle gas turbines (CCGT) and reheat steam power plants (RHSPP) – were compared in this least‐cost optimization framework.

The model results indicate that by 2030 the cost‐effective RE share is 11 percent of electricity generation in the reference case and 8 percent in the case with the nuclear option. The RE technologies alone provide a 2030 net‐back value compared to the reference case of US$2.35 billion, while in the nuclear case they increase the 2030 net‐back value by an additional US$1.5 billion. Increasing the RE share, as a government policy, to 10 percent, 15 percent and 20 percent, decreases the 2030 netback benefit by US$1.0, $3.6 and $8.3 billion, respectively.

Sensitivity runs based on scenarios that assume higher RE costs or lower availability, lower demand growth, lower oil and gas prices, higher nuclear plant investment costs, and RE capacity credit were analyzed.

The analysis provides a compelling economic basis for initiating a renewable energy program in the State of Kuwait. However, these forecasted benefits will only materialize to the extent the projected RE investments are achieved if they begin in earnest soon.

The analysis identifies a cost‐effective share of renewable energy use in Kuwait as about 11 percent of electricity generation in 2030. The investment in renewable energy provides the State of Kuwait with a net‐back value of US$2.35 billion, due to the fuel savings that are generated by using renewables.

Braiding organization theory and argumentation theory, the paper seeks to unfold how organizations act as social loci for the production, diffusion and development of arguments.

A Swedish association dedicated to the defense and promotion of nuclear power, Miljövänner För Kärnkraft (approximately Environmentalists for Nuclear Power) serves as a case study, describing the association's argumentative activity with a particular focus on its argument that “nuclear power is environment friendly as it produces no greenhouse gas emissions”.

The manner in which the association contextualizes this key argument illustrates the inter‐relationships that exist between organizing and arguing.

Organizing and arguing belong to each other's conditions of possibility, and it is therefore argued that an understanding of the organized character of argumentation is symmetrical to the argumentative character of organizing.

In recognition of the urgency of the global need to reduce CO₂ emissions from the electricity sector, the purpose of this paper is to analyze the cost‐effectiveness of nuclear power and fossil‐fuel‐based power with and without the provision of carbon capture and storage in select, yet environmentally‐significant, group of countries – China, India, Russia, Korea, Pakistan, Poland, Argentina, Bulgaria and Romania.

The analyses are based on comparisons of electricity generation costs for nuclear and fossil‐fuel technologies. These costs, expressed in present value terms, are estimated on the basis of life‐cycle costs, employing detailed country‐specific technological and economic data and assumptions.

The analyses suggest that that the provision of carbon capture and storage is likely to result in a significant increase in the cost of electricity produced from fossil fuels (principally coal) in all countries represented in this paper. Such increase would completely erode the existing cost advantage enjoyed by fossil‐fuel power (in relation to nuclear power) in some countries (Argentina, Bulgaria, China, and India) and considerably enhance the existing cost‐advantage of nuclear power in other countries (Korea, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, and Russia).

Notwithstanding these limitations, the findings of this paper contribute appreciably to the emerging knowledge on this topic and provide useful foresight into the likely challenges of developing internationally acceptable policy prescriptions for mitigation CO₂ emissions from the electricity sector. At a mundane, yet important, level, this paper establishes a platform on which further analyses could be built.

Improved nuclear reactor configurations that address major concerns of environmentalists and safety analysts are discussed. In addition to social acceptance, these new modes of power generation have economic potential to become the dominant producers of energy in the twenty‐first century. The class of power generation with this promise is the high temperature gas reactor (HTGR); the variant we focus on is the pebble‐bed modular reactor (PBMR). We also focus on using nuclear power as an energy source for desalinating seawater. Finally, the case is made that HTGR reactors are ideal for supplying the high‐temperature heat needed for manufacturing molecular hydrogen, a leading candidate for clean fuel consumption. These three themes are developed in a broad context with the objective of recommending policy actions dealing with global warming, public health, and economic opportunity.

The nuclear battery technology depends on the spontaneous decay of the atomic nuclei of radioactive isotopes to generate electricity. One of the merits of a nuclear battery is its high-energy density, which can be around ten times higher than that of hydrogen fuel cells and a thousand times more than that of an electrochemical battery. A nuclear battery has an extremely long life and low maintenance and running costs coupled with applications in remote and hostile environmental environments. The rise of silicon technology has intensified research activities in the area of nuclear batteries. The paper aims to present a general overview of a nuclear battery.

This paper presents a general overview of a nuclear battery and will significantly reduce reliance on non-renewable energy source. The requirement for long-lived power supplies have necessitated the pragmatic shift toward the realization of cleaner, safer and renewable energy sources.

Nuclear battery is a safe enabling technology for many applications including military and commercial applications. They have very long operating life under harsh environmental conditions. These cells demonstrate high potential for use in low power applications under a broad range of temperatures.

The nuclear battery technology has been receiving considerable in-depth research for applications that require long-life power sources.

This paper aims to investigate the major causes of the nuclear power plant (NPP) disasters since 1950, elucidates the commonalities between them and recommends strategies to minimize the risk of NPP disasters.

This paper analyzes facts from five case studies: Chernobyl disaster, USSR 1986; Fukushima Daiichi disaster, Japan 2011; Three Mile Island incident, USA 1979; Chalk River Accident, Canada 1952; and SL-1 Accident, USA 1961. A qualitative approach is adopted to compare and contrast the major reasons that led to the accidents, and consequent social and technological impacts of the disasters on environment, society, economy and nuclear industry are analyzed.

Although each of the nuclear accidents is unique in terms of its occurrence and impacts, this research study found some common causes behind the accidents. Faulty system design, equipment failure, inadequate safety and warning systems, violation of safety regulations, lack of training of the nuclear operators and ignorance from the operators and regulators side were found to be the major common causes behind the accidents.

This paper recommends some of the nuclear disaster risk reduction strategies in terms of “lessons learned from the past accidents”. The findings of the research paper would serve as an information tool for the nuclear professionals for informed decision-making and planning for proper preventive measures well in advance so that the mistakes which led to the occurrence of accidents in the past are not repeated in the future.

Asks whether nuclear power is viable as a clean source of energy and an independent energy source and whether it should be used to attain targeted reductions in fossil fuels or as a method of electricity generation. Also considers whether nuclear energy should be used in preference to energy from a third country. Discusses problems such as technological safety, nuclear waste, costs and the individual energy policies of Member States. Cites the main issue as public perception as the subject is regarded as dangerous and secretive. Outlines how the debate in Europe is being re‐evaluated and with the evolution of new science and technology, the positive contribution of nuclear energy to sustainable development is a factor to be weighed in the balance.

The article aims to explore the potential for pebble‐bed high‐temperature gas reactor (HTGR) technology to meet possible future energy shortages.

The historical evolution of nuclear power is reviewed followed by empirical data that demonstrate the finite nature of oil and gas reserves. The characteristics of HTGR technology are then explored.

A pebble‐bed HTGR ameliorates nuclear waste disposal issues, does not disgorge large quantities of excess heat, is terrorist‐resistant, solves persistent problems concerning weapon proliferation, and is inherently safe.

The article makes the case for the US Department of Energy to take the lead in demonstrating a pebble‐bed HTGR plant to overcome industry reluctance to invest in this technology.

The potential of biotechnology to cure disease and feed the Third World has not eased public disquiet about its safety. In the rush to commercialization, can lessons be learnt from the introduction of nuclear power a generation ago? While France’s nuclear programme stayed on track, America’s was derailed by accidents and corporate secrecy. So is an industry under state control safer than one in private hands? And in the absence of clear evidence about the long‐term effects of genetic manipulation, how can we design a consultation process that addresses public concerns?