IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v10y2017i12p2169-d123388.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nuclear Power Learning and Deployment Rates; Disruption and Global Benefits Forgone

Author

Listed:
  • Peter A. Lang

    (Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory 2601, Australia)

Abstract

This paper presents evidence of the disruption of a transition from fossil fuels to nuclear power, and finds the benefits forgone as a consequence are substantial. Learning rates are presented for nuclear power in seven countries, comprising 58% of all power reactors ever built globally. Learning rates and deployment rates changed in the late-1960s and 1970s from rapidly falling costs and accelerating deployment to rapidly rising costs and stalled deployment. Historical nuclear global capacity, electricity generation and overnight construction costs are compared with the counterfactual that pre-disruption learning and deployment rates had continued to 2015. Had the early rates continued, nuclear power could now be around 10% of its current cost. The additional nuclear power could have substituted for 69,000–186,000 TWh of coal and gas generation, thereby avoiding up to 9.5 million deaths and 174 Gt CO 2 emissions. In 2015 alone, nuclear power could have replaced up to 100% of coal-generated and 76% of gas-generated electricity, thereby avoiding up to 540,000 deaths and 11 Gt CO 2 . Rapid progress was achieved in the past and could be again, with appropriate policies. Research is needed to identify impediments to progress, and policy is needed to remove them.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter A. Lang, 2017. "Nuclear Power Learning and Deployment Rates; Disruption and Global Benefits Forgone," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:10:y:2017:i:12:p:2169-:d:123388
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/12/2169/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/12/2169/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cropper, Maureen & Gamkhar, Shama & Malik, Kabir & Limonov, Alex & Partridge, Ian, 2012. "The Health Effects of Coal Electricity Generation in India," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-25, Resources for the Future.
    2. Hans-Holger Rogner & Alan McDonald & Keywan Riahi, 2008. "Long-term performance targets for nuclear energy. Part 2: Markets and learning rates," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 30(1/2/3/4), pages 77-101.
    3. Hans-Holger Rogner & Alan McDonald & Keywan Riahi, 2008. "Long-term performance targets for nuclear energy. Part 1: The global scenario context," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 30(1/2/3/4), pages 28-76.
    4. Grubler, Arnulf, 2010. "The costs of the French nuclear scale-up: A case of negative learning by doing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5174-5188, September.
    5. McNerney, James & Doyne Farmer, J. & Trancik, Jessika E., 2011. "Historical costs of coal-fired electricity and implications for the future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3042-3054, June.
    6. Lovering, Jessica R. & Nordhaus, Ted & Yip, Arthur, 2017. "Apples and oranges: Comparing nuclear construction costs across nations, time periods, and technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 650-654.
    7. Koomey, Jonathan & Hultman, Nathan E., 2007. "A reactor-level analysis of busbar costs for US nuclear plants, 1970-2005," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5630-5642, November.
    8. Koomey, Jonathan & Hultman, Nathan E. & Grubler, Arnulf, 2017. "A reply to “Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 640-643.
    9. Peter Alstone & Dimitry Gershenson & Daniel M. Kammen, 2015. "Decentralized energy systems for clean electricity access," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(4), pages 305-314, April.
    10. Cherp, Aleh & Vinichenko, Vadim & Jewell, Jessica & Suzuki, Masahiro & Antal, Miklós, 2017. "Comparing electricity transitions: A historical analysis of nuclear, wind and solar power in Germany and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 612-628.
    11. 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.
    12. Hirschberg, Stefan & Bauer, Christian & Burgherr, Peter & Cazzoli, Eric & Heck, Thomas & Spada, Matteo & Treyer, Karin, 2016. "Health effects of technologies for power generation: Contributions from normal operation, severe accidents and terrorist threat," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 373-387.
    13. Rubin, Edward S. & Azevedo, Inês M.L. & Jaramillo, Paulina & Yeh, Sonia, 2015. "A review of learning rates for electricity supply technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 198-218.
    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. Choi, Donghyun & Kim, Yeong Jae, 2023. "Local and global experience curves for lumpy and granular energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    2. Hossam A. Gabbar & Muhammad R. Abdussami & Md. Ibrahim Adham, 2020. "Micro Nuclear Reactors: Potential Replacements for Diesel Gensets within Micro Energy Grids," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-38, October.
    3. William Bodel & Kevin Hesketh & Grace McGlynn & Juan Matthews & Gregg Butler, 2021. "Generic Feasibility Assessment: Helping to Choose the Nuclear Piece of the Net Zero Jigsaw," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Reinhard Haas & Marlene Sayer & Amela Ajanovic & Hans Auer, 2023. "Technological learning: Lessons learned on energy technologies," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), March.
    5. Bi-Huei Tsai & Yao-Min Huang, 2023. "Comparing the Substitution of Nuclear Energy or Renewable Energy for Fossil Fuels between the United States and Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-16, June.
    6. Katarzyna Zawalińska & Jouko Kinnunen & Piotr Gradziuk & Dorota Celińska-Janowicz, 2020. "To Whom Should We Grant a Power Plant? Economic Effects of Investment in Nuclear Energy in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-26, May.
    7. Kim, Yeong Jae & Soh, Moonwon & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2022. "Identifying optimal financial budget distributions for the low-carbon energy transition between emerging and developed countries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).

    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. 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.
    2. Samadi, Sascha, 2018. "The experience curve theory and its application in the field of electricity generation technologies – A literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2346-2364.
    3. Wealer, B. & Bauer, S. & Hirschhausen, C.v. & Kemfert, C. & Göke, L., 2021. "Investing into third generation nuclear power plants - Review of recent trends and analysis of future investments using Monte Carlo Simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    4. Portugal-Pereira, J. & Ferreira, P. & Cunha, J. & Szklo, A. & Schaeffer, R. & Araújo, M., 2018. "Better late than never, but never late is better: Risk assessment of nuclear power construction projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 158-166.
    5. Sascha Samadi, 2016. "A Review of Factors Influencing the Cost Development of Electricity Generation Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-25, November.
    6. Elia, A. & Kamidelivand, M. & Rogan, F. & Ó Gallachóir, B., 2021. "Impacts of innovation on renewable energy technology cost reductions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    7. Thomas, Steve, 2019. "Is it the end of the line for Light Water Reactor technology or can China and Russia save the day?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 216-226.
    8. 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.
    9. Koomey, Jonathan & Hultman, Nathan E. & Grubler, Arnulf, 2017. "A reply to “Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 640-643.
    10. Froese, Sarah & Kunz, Nadja C. & Ramana, M.V., 2020. "Too small to be viable? The potential market for small modular reactors in mining and remote communities in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    11. Price, James & Keppo, Ilkka & Dodds, Paul E., 2023. "The role of new nuclear power in the UK's net-zero emissions energy system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 262(PA).
    12. Perrier, Quentin, 2018. "The second French nuclear bet," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 858-877.
    13. Minwoo Hyun & Aleh Cherp & Jessica Jewell & Yeong Jae Kim & Jiyong Eom, 2021. "Feasibility trade-offs in decarbonisation of power sector with high coal dependence: A case of Korea," Papers 2111.02872, arXiv.org.
    14. Choi, Donghyun & Kim, Yeong Jae, 2023. "Local and global experience curves for lumpy and granular energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    15. Kan, Xiaoming & Hedenus, Fredrik & Reichenberg, Lina, 2020. "The cost of a future low-carbon electricity system without nuclear power – the case of Sweden," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    16. Lovering, Jessica R. & Nordhaus, Ted & Yip, Arthur, 2017. "Apples and oranges: Comparing nuclear construction costs across nations, time periods, and technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 650-654.
    17. 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.
    18. Linares, Pedro & Conchado, Adela, 2013. "The economics of new nuclear power plants in liberalized electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(S1), pages 119-125.
    19. Yu Sang Chang & Dosoung Choi & Hann Earl Kim, 2017. "Dynamic Trends of Carbon Intensities among 127 Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-21, December.
    20. Farmer, J. Doyne & Lafond, François, 2016. "How predictable is technological progress?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 647-665.

    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:gam:jeners:v:10:y:2017:i:12:p:2169-:d:123388. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.