IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/minecn/v31y2018i1d10.1007_s13563-018-0148-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Three decades after Chernobyl: are Ukraine’s nuclear plants safe now?

Author

Listed:
  • Istvan Dobozi

    (World Bank)

  • Harold Wackman

    (World Bank)

Abstract

In the aftermath of the terrifying event, which spread radioactive emissions throughout the region, and following the breakup of the Soviet Union, the G7 nations expressed their concern about the remaining risks at Chernobyl NPP. The G7 asked the World Bank to lead a study of the feasibility and cost of closing the remaining high-risk Chernobyl-type reactors in six countries in the region, including Russia, and replacing them with alternative electricity capacity. We led this work in the Bank and recommended that these controversial reactors with inherently high safety risks should be closed by 2000 and the Chernobyl site enclosed with a permanent “sarchophagus”. We placed the extension and modernization of the rest of Ukraine’s nuclear industry in a broader context of power sector reforms, stressing the link between nuclear safety and utility finances, and the need for a strong nuclear safety culture. Safety risks stem not just from the Soviet-designed reactors, but from the institutional and political context in which they operate.

Suggested Citation

  • Istvan Dobozi & Harold Wackman, 2018. "Three decades after Chernobyl: are Ukraine’s nuclear plants safe now?," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 31(1), pages 219-220, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:minecn:v:31:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s13563-018-0148-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s13563-018-0148-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13563-018-0148-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13563-018-0148-9?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.

    More about this item

    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:spr:minecn:v:31:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s13563-018-0148-9. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.