IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v99y2014icp121-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the impact of nuclear accidents on energy policy

Author

Listed:
  • Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna

Abstract

This paper investigates the effects of nuclear accidents on energy policy with the help of a panel dataset of 31 countries from 1965 to 2009, using annual data on the capacity of reactor construction starts, as well as the timing of three nuclear accidents scaled five or higher on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale. After determining the extent of the accident impact in the different countries, I find that neither the Three Mile Island (TMI) nor the Lucens accidents had a worldwide negative effect on construction starts, while Chernobyl did. Three Mile Island had a lasting impact in the United States, however. I show that the effect of Chernobyl wore off in certain geographical clusters, after ten to thirty years. An accident is likely to have a negative and long lasting impact in the country where it happened, and possibly in countries affected by the direct consequences. I find that nuclear capacity enlargement shows a significant lock-in effect, but it was also driven by primary energy consumption and energy security considerations in the past five decades.

Suggested Citation

  • Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna, 2014. "Measuring the impact of nuclear accidents on energy policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 121-129.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:99:y:2014:i:c:p:121-129
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.01.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800914000147
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laes, Erik & Meskens, Gaston & van der Sluijs, Jeroen P., 2011. "On the contribution of external cost calculations to energy system governance: The case of a potential large-scale nuclear accident," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5664-5673, September.
    2. Burke, Paul J., 2010. "Income, resources, and electricity mix," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 616-626, May.
    3. Zhou, Yun & Rengifo, Christhian & Chen, Peipei & Hinze, Jonathan, 2011. "Is China ready for its nuclear expansion?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 771-781, February.
    4. Felder, Frank A., 2009. "A critical assessment of energy accident studies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5744-5751, December.
    5. Zsuzsanna Csereklyei & Stefan Humer, 2012. "Modelling Primary Energy Consumption under Model Uncertainty," Department of Economics Working Papers wuwp147, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Department of Economics.
    6. Glaser, Alexander, 2011. "After Fukushima: Preparing for a More Uncertain Future of Nuclear Power," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 27-35, July.
    7. Thomas, Steve, 2012. "What will the Fukushima disaster change?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 12-17.
    8. M. Hashem Pesaran, 2007. "A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2), pages 265-312.
    9. Toth, Ferenc L. & Rogner, Hans-Holger, 2006. "Oil and nuclear power: Past, present, and future," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-25, January.
    10. Kopytko, Natalie & Perkins, John, 2011. "Climate change, nuclear power, and the adaptation-mitigation dilemma," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 318-333, January.
    11. Mez, Lutz, 2012. "Nuclear energy–Any solution for sustainability and climate protection?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 56-63.
    12. Harding, Jim, 2007. "Economics of Nuclear Power and Proliferation Risks in a Carbon-Constrained World," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(10), pages 65-76, December.
    13. Goodfellow, Martin J. & Williams, Hugo R. & Azapagic, Adisa, 2011. "Nuclear renaissance, public perception and design criteria: An exploratory review," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6199-6210, October.
    14. Romerio, Franco, 1998. "The risks of the nuclear policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 239-246, February.
    15. Ahearne, John F., 2011. "Prospects for nuclear energy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 572-580, July.
    16. Hayashi, Masatsugu & Hughes, Larry, 2013. "The policy responses to the Fukushima nuclear accident and their effect on Japanese energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 86-101.
    17. Judson, Ruth A. & Owen, Ann L., 1999. "Estimating dynamic panel data models: a guide for macroeconomists," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 9-15, October.
    18. Reynolds, Douglas B. & Kolodziej, Marek, 2008. "Former Soviet Union oil production and GDP decline: Granger causality and the multi-cycle Hubbert curve," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 271-289, March.
    19. Paul L. Joskow & John E. Parsons, 2012. "The Future of Nuclear Power After Fukushima," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    20. Hayashi, Masatsugu & Hughes, Larry, 2013. "The Fukushima nuclear accident and its effect on global energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 102-111.
    21. Davidson, Russell, 2009. "Econometric Theory and Methods: International Edition," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195391053.
    22. Apergis, Nicholas & Payne, James E. & Menyah, Kojo & Wolde-Rufael, Yemane, 2010. "On the causal dynamics between emissions, nuclear energy, renewable energy, and economic growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2255-2260, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna & Thurner, Paul W. & Bauer, Alexander & Küchenhoff, Helmut, 2016. "The effect of economic growth, oil prices, and the benefits of reactor standardization: Duration of nuclear power plant construction revisited," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 49-59.
    2. Jan Goebel & Christian Krekel & Tim Tiefenbach & Nicolas Ziebarth, 2015. "How natural disasters can affect environmental concerns, risk aversion, and even politics: evidence from Fukushima and three European countries," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 28(4), pages 1137-1180, October.
    3. Pfenninger, Stefan & Keirstead, James, 2015. "Comparing concentrating solar and nuclear power as baseload providers using the example of South Africa," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 303-314.
    4. Goebel, Jan & Krekel, Christian & Tiefenbach, Tim & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2013. "Natural Disaster, Policy Action, and Mental Well-Being: The Case of Fukushima," IZA Discussion Papers 7691, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    5. repec:eee:energy:v:152:y:2018:i:c:p:291-302 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Thurner, Paul W. & Mittermeier, Laura & Küchenhoff, Helmut, 2014. "How long does it take to build a nuclear power plant? A non-parametric event history approach with P-splines," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 163-171.
    7. Anke Kutschke & Alexandra Rese & Daniel Baier, 2016. "The Effects of Locational Factors on the Performance of Innovation Networks in the German Energy Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(12), pages 1-18, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Nuclear energy; Nuclear accidents; Energy policy;

    JEL classification:

    • C33 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection
    • Q43 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy and the Macroeconomy
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:99:y:2014:i:c:p:121-129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.