IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v37y2009i12p5494-5508.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fourteen lessons learned from the successful nuclear power program of the Republic of Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Choi, Sungyeol
  • Jun, Eunju
  • Hwang, IlSoon
  • Starz, Anne
  • Mazour, Tom
  • Chang, SoonHeung
  • Burkart, Alex R.

Abstract

This paper summarized a development history and lessons of Korean nuclear power infrastructures from the beginning of the nuclear power program in 1956 to the localization of complete scope of PWR technology in 1990. The objective of this paper is to show the guideline on the issues that the development of a national infrastructure for nuclear power using the realistic experiences in order to help the developing countries newly starting nuclear power program as a long-term energy supply option. Development strategies and lessons learned from the successful Korean experience have been presented based on milestones structure of IAEA in order to help decision makers, advisers, senior managers and national planners of nuclear power program. Lessons for national nuclear power programs include considerations before launching a program, preparation and decision making, and the construction of the first nuclear power plant. Scope of these lessons includes knowledge and human resources management, financial and industrial infrastructure development, nuclear safety, legislative and regulatory experiences, fuel cycle and waste management, international cooperation. Fourteen lessons learned either positive or not are derived from the Korean case and are suggested for incorporation in the IAEA's efforts in support of developing countries' development of nuclear infrastructure and planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Choi, Sungyeol & Jun, Eunju & Hwang, IlSoon & Starz, Anne & Mazour, Tom & Chang, SoonHeung & Burkart, Alex R., 2009. "Fourteen lessons learned from the successful nuclear power program of the Republic of Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5494-5508, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:12:p:5494-5508
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(09)00599-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Hill, Lawrence J., 1992. "Pricing initiatives and development of the Korean power sector Policy lessons for developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 344-354, April.
    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. Lindley, Ben & Roulstone, Tony & Locatelli, Giorgio & Rooney, Matt, 2023. "Can fusion energy be cost-competitive and commercially viable? An analysis of magnetically confined reactors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    2. Beatriz Ferreira & Carla Curado & Mírian Oliveira, 2022. "The Contribution of Knowledge Management to Human Resource Development: a Systematic and Integrative Literature Review," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(3), pages 2319-2347, September.
    3. Jewell, Jessica & Vetier, Marta & Garcia-Cabrera, Daniel, 2019. "The international technological nuclear cooperation landscape: A new dataset and network analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 838-852.
    4. Roh, Seungkook & Lee, Jin Won, 2018. "Differentiated effects of risk perception dimensions on nuclear power acceptance in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 727-735.
    5. Giorgio Locatelli, 2018. "Why are Megaprojects, Including Nuclear Power Plants, Delivered Overbudget and Late? Reasons and Remedies," Papers 1802.07312, arXiv.org.
    6. Mignacca, Benito & Locatelli, Giorgio & Sainati, Tristano, 2020. "Deeds not words: Barriers and remedies for Small Modular nuclear Reactors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    7. 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.
    8. Mignacca, B. & Locatelli, G., 2020. "Economics and finance of Small Modular Reactors: A systematic review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Kim, Dong Wook & Chang, Hyun Joon, 2012. "Experience curve analysis on South Korean nuclear technology and comparative analysis with South Korean renewable technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 361-373.
    10. Lee, You-Kyung, 2020. "Sustainability of nuclear energy in Korea: From the users’ perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    11. Wang, Bing & Kocaoglu, Dundar F. & Daim, Tugrul U. & Yang, Jiting, 2010. "A decision model for energy resource selection in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7130-7141, November.
    12. Sirin, Selahattin Murat, 2010. "An assessment of Turkey's nuclear energy policy in light of South Korea's nuclear experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 6145-6152, October.
    13. Saleem H. Ali, 2014. "Social and Environmental Impact of the Rare Earth Industries," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-12, February.
    14. Kwak, Kiho & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2020. "Unpacking transnational industry legitimacy dynamics, windows of opportunity, and latecomers’ catch-up in complex product systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    15. Dalla Valle, Alessandra & Furlan, Claudia, 2014. "Diffusion of nuclear energy in some developing countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 143-153.
    16. Qingchang Li & Seungkook Roh & Jin Won Lee, 2020. "Segmenting the South Korean Public According to Their Preferred Direction for Electricity Mix Reform," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-17, October.
    17. Huang, Gillan Chi-Lun & Chen, Rung-Yi & Park, Byung-Bae, 2021. "Democratic innovations as a party tool: A comparative analysis of nuclear energy public participation in Taiwan and South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    18. Sangwon Lee & Jaewon Lim & Chan-Goo Yi, 2022. "The Improvement of the Regional Regulatory Governance System for Radiation Risk Management: Spatial Analysis on Radiation Hazards in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-24, January.

    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.

      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:37:y:2009:i:12:p:5494-5508. 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.