IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v164y2022ics0301421522000878.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The risks and impacts of nuclear decommissioning: Stakeholder reflections on the UK nuclear industry

Author

Listed:
  • Hirose, Rika
  • McCauley, Darren

Abstract

Nuclear decommissioning faces significant challenges on technical, financial, social and political grounds, requiring adequate technologies, sound funding, and solutions for management of generated waste, as well as a large and competent workforce. By examining the narratives of decommissioning gathered from experienced individuals, organisations and community leaders involved in the formal process at two different sites in the UK, this paper seeks to elucidate the multiple risks and impacts we are facing on the issues surrounding nuclear decommissioning. It calls for legislation based on clearer definition and transparency, to achieve a framework which is socially, economically, technically and morally defensible.

Suggested Citation

  • Hirose, Rika & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "The risks and impacts of nuclear decommissioning: Stakeholder reflections on the UK nuclear industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:164:y:2022:i:c:s0301421522000878
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2022.112862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421522000878
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2022.112862?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harris, Grant & Heptonstall, Phil & Gross, Robert & Handley, David, 2013. "Cost estimates for nuclear power in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 431-442.
    2. Thomas, Steve, 2006. "The British Model in Britain: Failing slowly," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 583-600, March.
    3. Colin Robinson & Eileen Marshall, 2006. "Can A New Nuclear Programme Be Justified?," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 64-70, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Levi, Peter G. & Pollitt, Michael G., 2015. "Cost trajectories of low carbon electricity generation technologies in the UK: A study of cost uncertainty," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 48-59.
    2. Lovering, Jessica R. & Yip, Arthur & Nordhaus, Ted, 2016. "Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 371-382.
    3. Schmeda-Lopez, Diego & McConnaughy, Thomas B. & McFarland, Eric W., 2018. "Radiation enhanced chemical production: Improving the value proposition of nuclear power," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 491-504.
    4. Boroumand, Raphaël Homayoun & Zachmann, Georg, 2012. "Retailers' risk management and vertical arrangements in electricity markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 465-472.
    5. Wang, Linyuan & Zhao, Lin & Mao, Guozhu & Zuo, Jian & Du, Huibin, 2017. "Way to accomplish low carbon development transformation: A bibliometric analysis during 1995–2014," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P1), pages 57-69.
    6. Thomas, Steve, 2010. "Competitive energy markets and nuclear power: Can we have both, do we want either?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 4903-4908, September.
    7. Connolly, D. & Lund, H. & Mathiesen, B.V., 2016. "Smart Energy Europe: The technical and economic impact of one potential 100% renewable energy scenario for the European Union," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1634-1653.
    8. Locatelli, Giorgio & Mancini, Mauro & Lotti, Giovanni, 2020. "A simple-to-implement real options method for the energy sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    9. Onifade, Temitope Tunbi, 2016. "Hybrid renewable energy support policy in the power sector: The contracts for difference and capacity market case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 390-401.
    10. Marcin Bukowski & Janusz Majewski & Agnieszka Sobolewska, 2023. "The Environmental Impact of Changes in the Structure of Electricity Sources in Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-22, January.
    11. Stephen D. Thomas, 2012. "Not Too Smart an Innovation: Britain's Plans to Switch Consumers to Smart Electricity and Gas Meters," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(6-7), pages 1057-1074, October.
    12. Haar, Laura N. & Jones, Trefor, 2008. "Misreading liberalisation and privatisation: The case of the US energy utilities in Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 2610-2619, July.
    13. Du, Limin & Mao, Jie & Shi, Jinchuan, 2009. "Assessing the impact of regulatory reforms on China's electricity generation industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 712-720, February.
    14. Vu, Khuong & Hartley, Kris, 2022. "Effects of digital transformation on electricity sector growth and productivity: A study of thirteen industrialized economies," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    15. Phil Johnstone & Andy Stirling, 2015. "Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories inGermany And the UK: From ‘Regimes’ to ‘Democracies’ in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-18, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    16. Sokołowski, Maciej M. & Heffron, Raphael J., 2022. "Defining and conceptualising energy policy failure: The when, where, why, and how," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    17. Matsuo, Yuhji & Nei, Hisanori, 2019. "An analysis of the historical trends in nuclear power plant construction costs: The Japanese experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 180-198.
    18. Gore, Olga & Viljainen, Satu & Makkonen, Mari & Kuleshov, Dmitry, 2012. "Russian electricity market reform: Deregulation or re-regulation?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 676-685.
    19. Boccard, Nicolas, 2014. "The cost of nuclear electricity: France after Fukushima," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 450-461.
    20. Karolina Safarzyńska & Jeroen Bergh, 2013. "An evolutionary model of energy transitions with interactive innovation-selection dynamics," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 271-293, April.

    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:enepol:v:164:y:2022:i:c:s0301421522000878. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.