IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00997005.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Three investment scenarios for future nuclear reactors in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Bianka Shoai Tehrani

    (LGI - Laboratoire Génie Industriel - EA 2606 - CentraleSupélec, Research Institute of Innovative Technology, Earth, System Analysis Group)

  • Pascal da Costa

    (LGI - Laboratoire Génie Industriel - EA 2606 - CentraleSupélec)

  • Danièle Attias

    (LGI - Laboratoire Génie Industriel - EA 2606 - CentraleSupélec)

Abstract

While nuclear power may experience a technological breakthrough in Europe with Generation IV nuclear reactors within a few decades (2040), several events and drivers could question this possibility: as the Fukushima accident, the climate issues and the electricity market liberalization. This paper analyzes how the necessary conditions for their industrial development from now up to 2040 can be either favorable or detrimental to future nuclear reactors compared with other technologies and according to four main investment drivers: 1) technical change, 2) policy, 3) market and 4) power company drivers. Twenty-four scenarios have been identified through structural analysis, with only three proving to be favorable to the development of future nuclear reactors.

Suggested Citation

  • Bianka Shoai Tehrani & Pascal da Costa & Danièle Attias, 2016. "Three investment scenarios for future nuclear reactors in Europe," Post-Print hal-00997005, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00997005
    DOI: 10.15173/esr.v23i1.3312
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-00997005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-00997005/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.15173/esr.v23i1.3312?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hughes, Nick & Strachan, Neil & Gross, Robert, 2013. "The structure of uncertainty in future low carbon pathways," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 45-54.
    2. Martin Chick, 2007. "Electricity and Energy Policy in Britain, France and the United States since 1945," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3650.
    3. Bergman, Jukka & Viljainen, Satu & Kassi, Tuomo & Partanen, Jarmo & Laaksonen, Petteri, 2006. "Managing the exploration of new operational and strategic activities using the scenario method--assessing future capabilities in the field of electricity distribution industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 46-61, November.
    4. Baumol, William J, 1977. "On the Proper Cost Tests for Natural Monopoly in a Multiproduct Industry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(5), pages 809-822, December.
    5. Schenk, Niels J. & Moll, Henri C., 2007. "The use of physical indicators for industrial energy demand scenarios," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 521-535, August.
    6. Henry, Claude, 1974. "Investment Decisions Under Uncertainty: The "Irreversibility Effect."," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(6), pages 1006-1012, December.
    7. Wang, GuoHong & Wang, YunXia & Zhao, Tao, 2008. "Analysis of interactions among the barriers to energy saving in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1879-1889, June.
    8. Joseph Coates & Philippe Durance & Michel Godet, 2010. "Strategic Foresight Issue," Post-Print hal-02864607, HAL.
    9. Markard, Jochen & Stadelmann, Martin & Truffer, Bernhard, 2009. "Prospective analysis of technological innovation systems: Identifying technological and organizational development options for biogas in Switzerland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 655-667, May.
    10. Philippe Durance & Michel Godet, 2010. "Scenario building: Uses and abuses," Post-Print hal-02864615, HAL.
    11. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 279-279.
    12. Pascal da Costa & Oualid Gharbi & Pierre Le Mouel & Florent Pratlong & Danielle Schirmann-Duclos & Paul Zagamé, 2010. "Macroeconomic assessment for the EU 'Climate Action and Renewable Energy Package'," Working Papers hal-00995798, HAL.
    13. Burton A. Weisbrod, 1964. "Collective-Consumption Services of Individual-Consumption Goods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 78(3), pages 471-477.
    14. 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).
    15. Didier Chabaud & Karim Messeghem, 2010. "Le paradigme de l'opportunité. Des fondements à la refondation," Revue française de gestion, Lavoisier, vol. 0(7), pages 93-112.
    16. Hughes, Nick & Strachan, Neil, 2010. "Methodological review of UK and international low carbon scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 6056-6065, October.
    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. Le Boennec, Rémy & Nicolaï, Isabelle & Da Costa, Pascal, 2019. "Assessing 50 innovative mobility offers in low-density areas: A French application using a two-step decision-aid method," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 13-25.

    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. Bianka Shoai Tehrani & Pascal Da Costa & Danièle Attias, 2014. "Three Investment Scenarios for Future Nuclear Reactors in Europe," Working Papers hal-00997005, HAL.
    2. Pascal da Costa & Bianka Shoai Tehrani, 2013. "An Analysis of the Investment Decisions on the European Electricity Markets, over the 1945-2013 Period," Working Papers hal-00995799, HAL.
    3. Chaudry, Modassar & Abeysekera, Muditha & Hosseini, Seyed Hamid Reza & Jenkins, Nick & Wu, Jianzhong, 2015. "Uncertainties in decarbonising heat in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 623-640.
    4. Langholz, Jeffrey A. & Lassoie, James P. & Lee, David & Chapman, Duane, 2000. "Economic considerations of privately owned parks," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 173-183, May.
    5. Kattirtzi, Michael & Winskel, Mark, 2020. "When experts disagree: Using the Policy Delphi method to analyse divergent expert expectations and preferences on UK energy futures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    6. Barton, John & Davies, Lloyd & Dooley, Ben & Foxon, Timothy J. & Galloway, Stuart & Hammond, Geoffrey P. & O’Grady, Áine & Robertson, Elizabeth & Thomson, Murray, 2018. "Transition pathways for a UK low-carbon electricity system: Comparing scenarios and technology implications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2779-2790.
    7. Chichilnisky, Graciela & Beltratti, Andrea & Heal, Geoffrey, 1998. "Uncertain future preferences and conservation," MPRA Paper 7912, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Coggins, Jay S. & Ramezani, Cyrus A., 1996. "AN ARBITRAGE-FREE APPROACH TO QUASI-OPTION VALUE; Proceedings of the Fifth Joint Conference on Agriculture, Food, and the Environment, June 17-18, 1996, Padova, Italy," Working Papers 14469, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    9. Alexandra Rauchs & Marc Willinger, 1996. "Expérimentations sur les choix séquentiels : application à " l'effet irréversibilité"," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 47(1), pages 51-71.
    10. Koppelaar, Rembrandt H.E.M. & Keirstead, James & Shah, Nilay & Woods, Jeremy, 2016. "A review of policy analysis purpose and capabilities of electricity system models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1531-1544.
    11. Dionne, Georges & Harrington, Scott, 2017. "Insurance and Insurance Markets," Working Papers 17-2, HEC Montreal, Canada Research Chair in Risk Management.
    12. Fisher, Anthony C & Peterson, Frederick M, 1976. "The Environment in Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 1-33, March.
    13. Jinhua Zhao & Catherine L. Kling, 2009. "Welfare Measures when Agents can Learn: A Unifying Theory," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(540), pages 1560-1585, October.
    14. Robertson, Elizabeth & O'Grady, Áine & Barton, John & Galloway, Stuart & Emmanuel-Yusuf, Damiete & Leach, Matthew & Hammond, Geoff & Thomson, Murray & Foxon, Tim, 2017. "Reconciling qualitative storylines and quantitative descriptions: An iterative approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 293-306.
    15. Zhao, Jinhua & Kling, Catherine L., 2001. "A new explanation for the WTP/WTA disparity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 293-300, December.
    16. Jackie Krafft & Isabelle Nicolaï, 1995. "Commitment Procedures In R&D Investments : An Examination Of Different Varieties," Post-Print hal-01799270, HAL.
    17. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2008. "Optimal diversity: Increasing returns versus recombinant innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 565-580, December.
    18. Coggins, Jay S. & Ramezani, Cyrus A., 1998. "An Arbitrage-Free Approach to Quasi-Option Value," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 103-125, March.
    19. Catherine Chambers & Paul Chambers & John Whitehead, 1997. "Historical resources, uncertainty and preservation values: An application of option and optimal stopping models," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 21(2), pages 51-61, June.
    20. Li, Francis G.N. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Strachan, Neil, 2015. "A review of socio-technical energy transition (STET) models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 290-305.

    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:hal:journl:hal-00997005. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.