Search results

At different points in time, energy harnessed from nuclear technology for commercial purposes has been qualified as atoms for peace, too cheap to meter, unsafe, sustainable, and emission free. We explore how these associations – between nuclear technology (a category used in a descriptive way) and qualities such as emission free (a category used in an evaluative way) – are materially anchored, institutionally performed, socially relevant, and entrepreneurially negotiated. By considering all these factors, our analysis shows that it is possible to understand how and why categories and their meanings continue to change over time. We flesh out the implications of these observations and suggest avenues for future research.

The study investigates the effects of energy resource efficiency on the triple themes of sustainable development (economic, social and environmental dimensions). We adopt a quantitative research method, and the required macroeconomic data were extracted from World Development Indicators for a period of 30 years (1991–2020). The extracted data were analysed using correlation analysis and linear regression. Ultimately, the estimations from the three models produced mixed results. Energy resource efficiency (EFF) exerts a significant positive effect on economic sustainability (ECS), a significant negative effect on social sustainability (SOS) and a significant negative effect on environmental sustainability (EVS). However, claims on government (COG) exerted an insignificant negative effect on ECS, an insignificant negative effect on SOS and a significant positive effect on environmental sustainability (EVS). In practical terms, the findings are consistent with previous empirical studies, and they also validate X-efficiency theory (XET) and resource curse theory (RCT). The study concludes with implications, limitations and further research directions.

This article traces the regimes of worth that defined energy for centuries as a productive force of human and animal labor, an understanding that transformed in the 18th century to an “industrial-energy” regime of worth supporting an economy of mass production, consumption, and profit and more recently one centered on market forces and price. Industrial and market energy and the conventions and institutions that support them are currently in a period of discursive and material ferment; they are being challenged by different higher order principles of worth. We discuss eight emergent energy justifications that argue what kind of energy is – and is not – in the best interests of society.

Carbon emission is one of the most important problems of today. In this framework, it is important for countries to take the necessary actions to solve this problem. Energy use is one of the most important causes of carbon emissions. Choosing fossil fuels in this process increases the carbon emission problem. Therefore, it is understood that countries should be more sensitive about energy types. In this context, renewable energy (RE) sources are recommended by experts. However, due to some problems of these energy types, it does not seem possible to meet all energy needs from these sources. It is thought that nuclear energy will produce a permanent solution to the carbon emission problem. In this context, it is recommended that the use of nuclear energy be put on the agenda by countries.