Resolving community conflict in the nuclear power issue: a report and annotated bibliography (original) (raw)
Related papers
THE NUCLEAR POWER CHALLENGES, OR THE CHALLENGE OF A CONTROVERSY
Nuclear energy is a promising sustainable energy source that can significantly meet the world's increasing energy demands while reducing carbon emissions. Unlike fossil fuels, nuclear power does not release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, making it an ideal solution for countries striving to meet climate goals. Furthermore, nuclear energy can provide a stable and reliable energy source, which is critical for developing countries seeking to increase their energy independence and promote economic growth. Nuclear energy is still debatable, despite its advantages, because of worries about safety, the disposal of radioactive waste, and the possibility of the spread of nuclear weapons. Developing nations, in particular, have considerable difficulties implementing nuclear energy because of their lack of resources, inexperience, and unstable political environments. Therefore, while thinking about nuclear energy as a potential source of sustainable energy in underdeveloped nations, it is imperative to give safety, transparency, and accountability first priority. I covered nuclear power in my paper as a green energy source that relies on cutting-edge research and strict safety guidelines. Along with renewable sources, it should be a part of an energy transition strategy—not the major one. Achieving a successful energy transition necessitates finding a middle ground that addresses the disadvantages of nuclear power while maximizing its advantages.
2018
CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Theoretical definitions of 'public perception' and 'engagement' 2.1. Public perception 2.1.1. The research on public perception of technological risk 2.1.2. A conceptual model of factors underlying public perception of nuclear power 2.2. Engagement 2.2.1. Nuclear communication and engagement 2.2.2. The key role of trust 2.2.3. The difficult path towards participatory management in nuclear issues 2.3. An analytical framework based on the social dimensions of risk and their relation with engagement mechanisms 2.4. Methodology and sample 3. Public perception and engagement in the selected case studies 3.1. Perception of risks and benefits of nuclear power: Key findings 3.2. Political-institutional factors: Key findings regarding social trust 3.3. Socio-cultural factors underlying nuclear energy: key findings 3.4. Engagement activities in the selected case-studies 4. Concluding remarks References Annex I-Data analysis Annex II-Summary tables 227 D4.3 : Case studies reports: in-depth understanding of the mechanisms for effective interaction with civil society: selected case studies
1988
Nuclear energy is one of the most popular topics of today’s publication market. The literature about the pros and cons of nuclear power may easily fill a whole library. Is there anything new to add to this voluminous body of arguments and contra-arguments that would justify editing another book on nuclear energy? Andrew Blowers and David Pepper obviously felt that way and published a reader on Nuclear Power in Crisis. The book consists of 13 articles covering mainly the political, social and health aspects of nuclear power. Several of the chapters were papers presented at the Annual Conference of the Institute of British Geographers at Leeds, UK, in 1985.
Social issues and energy alternatives: the context of conflict over nuclear waste. Final report
This r epor t w as prepared by Battelle as an account of sponsored re s ear c h act ivit ies. Neither Sponsor nor Battelle nor any person a ctin g o n beha lf of either: (a) Makes any warranty or representation, ex press or im p lie d, with respect to the accu r acy, completeness, or us ef u lness of th e information contained in this report or that the u se o f an y inf ormation, apparatus, process, or composition disc lo sed in t h is r e p o r t ma y not infring e privately owned rights; or (b) Assumes an y liabili t ies with r espect to the use of, or for damages resulting from t h e use of , any information, apparatus, process, or composition disclo sed in t h is report. contributions from solar, wind and hydroelectric technologies. They also believe that there are serious disadvantages to conservation. Nuclear opponents, on the other hand, disagree that there are such limited prospects for solar and wind, although they are neutral on the prospects for increased hydro capacity. They also do not believe that conservation necessarily poses serious adverse consequences either for themselves or others.
Sociopolitical aspects of nuclear energy
1984
Since the technical risk and the perception of risk towards nuclear energy in particular is an important factor for the acceptance of nuclear energy we try to elaborate this topic in some detail. Further it is necessary to evaluate values associated with energy production in order to concentrate on essentials when introducing nuclear energy into to energy system of a country. It is, moreover, helpful to show the differences in attitudes towards nuclear energy in industrialized and developing countries, and finally to present a review of public attitudes towards nuclear energy in German'y since the end of World War II. It may be possible to take advantage of the experience gained in our country. As a result of these investigations we present a proposal for a special programme for information and education to facilitate the introduction of nuclear energy in developing countries and to create a level of acceptance which is necessary for this step of development in the field of ener...
Nuclear energy is one of the most popular topics of today's publication market. The literature about the pros and cons of nuclear power may easily fill a whole library. Is there anything new to add to this voluminous body of arguments and contra-arguments that would justify editing another book on nuclear energy? Andrew Blowers and David Pepper obviously felt that way and published a reader on Nuclear Power in Crisis. The book consists of 13 articles covering mainly the political, social and health aspects of nuclear power. Several of the chapters were papers presented at the
2019
Since its early days, nuclear power has been a highly contentious source of energy. Nuclear accidents have highlighted the risks of this technology, but their impact on perceptions and policy has varied considerably between countries and has generally been more variable and uncertain than frequently assumed. Across Europe and the USA, perceptions of the risks and benefits of nuclear energy primarily relate to environmental and health issues, safety, and costs. However, perceptions of nuclear power and the strength of anti-nuclear movements vary greatly between countries. Historical experiences and past conflicts continue to influence current debates. Throughout the history of nuclear power, involvement of the publicnationally and temporally-has been sporadic and varied.
Social and Ethical Considerations of Nuclear Power Development
2011
ABSTRACT A new urgency is emerging around nuclear power development and this urgency is accentuated by the post-tsunami events at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. This urgency extends beyond these dramatic events in Japan, however, to many other regions of the world and situations where nuclear power development is receiving renewed attention as an alternative to carbon-based energy sources.
Position Paper: Commercial Nuclear Power
Because of the sheer magnitude and urgency of the global climate challenge, the United States must consider all forms of energy-as long as they do not otherwise undermine international and environmental security. Unfortunately, the nuclear power industry in its present state suffers from too many security, safety, and environmental exposure problems and excessive costs to qualify as a leading means to combat global warming pollution. Large-scale nuclear plants remain uneconomic to build. And while the nuclear fuel cycle emits little global warming pollution, nuclear power still poses globally significant risks that need to be further reduced, including: • Diversion of "peaceful" nuclear facilities and materials to secret nuclear weapons programs; • Theft and terrorist use of nuclear materials; • Accidental releases of radioactivity, ranging from locally harmful to potentially catastrophic; • The vulnerability of some spent nuclear fuel storage pools to terrorist attack; • Occupational and public health risks associated with uranium mining and milling; and • Long-term leakage from underground repositories intended to isolate high-level radioactive waste and spent fuel from the human and natural environment for tens to hundreds of thousands of years. If and when the nuclear industry establishes-and includes within its future cost structure-a nuclear fuel production, utilization, and long-term waste disposal regime that fully protects international security, public health, the environment, and future generations, NRDC would not seek to exclude new nuclear generation from competing on a level playing field with other reduced-carbon energy sources. Specifically, this means that nuclear power, without further government subsidy, could compete in the market for reduced-carbon energy alternatives developed in response to a national cap on carbon emissions, or to a new federal carbon-intensity portfolio standard seeking reductions in carbon emissions from electric power generation. However, for nuclear power to qualify as a significant global carbon reducer, the international nuclear industry, the respective governments, and the International Atomic Energy Agency must ensure that: • Nuclear fuel cycles do not afford access, or the technical capabilities for access, to nuclear explosive materials, principally separated plutonium and highly enriched uranium; • The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty regulating nuclear power's peaceful use is reinterpreted to prohibit the spread of latent as well as overt nuclear weapons capabilities, by barring national ownership and control of uranium enrichment plants in non-weapon states; • The occupational and public health risks associated with uranium mining, milling, and the nuclear fuel cycle are remedied; and • Existing and planned discharges of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste will be safely sequestered in geologic repositories. Until such time as the nuclear industry is able to meet these requirements, NRDC favors more practical, economical, and environmentally sustainable approaches to reducing both U.S. and global carbon emissions, including clean, flexible, renewable energy and efficiency technologies.
Opinion polls show that public support for nuclear power has declined since the Fukushima crisis began, not only in Japan but also in other nations around the world. People oppose nuclear power for a variety of reasons, but the predominant concern is the perception that it is a risky technology. Some communities that are closely associated with it even suffer from stigmatization. The nuclear industry has tried a variety of strategies to break down public resistance to nuclear powerÑincluding information campaigns, risk comparisons, and efforts to promote nuclear power as a solution to climate change. None of these strategies has worked well, mostly because the public lacks trust in the nuclear industry. Public resistance to nuclear power is likely to continue, making it difficult to site and build new reactors. This resistance may be a major obstacle to the rapid expansion of nuclear power.