IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/diw/diwwpp/dp1883.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Nuclear Power as a System Good: Organizational Models for Production along the Value-Added Chain

Author

Listed:
  • Ben Wealer
  • Christian von Hirschhausen

Abstract

Due to its technical complexity, the co-production of electricity generation and nuclear weapons, and its high fixed costs, nuclear power is a particularly complex commodity, which poses unusual challenges for state economic (or industrial, defense, innovation etc.) policy. As in other sectors, the question arises here, too, of an adequate division of private and public responsibilities, in other words "competition and planning", taking into account knowledge aspects, incentive structures, transaction costs and a fair distribution of revenues and burdens. The nuclear sector requires an upstream system of a knowledge base, institutional and physical infrastructure (sites, transport, waste storage, etc.) and legal and institutional infrastructure. In this paper we apply the "system good analysis" developed by Beckers et al. (2012) and Gizzi (2016) to the nuclear power sector and identify ideal-typical organizational models for the value-added stages of the so-called nuclear front-end (mining, conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication), constructing nuclear power plants, decommissioning and long-term storage as well as the respective interfaces between these stages. The main purpose of this overview paper is to assign tasks, rights and duties to organizations ("stakeholders") at the various stages of the value chain and to define the interface problems. We use an institutional economics approach, which focusses on the provisioning decisions and production between public authorities and private actors. In addition to a general overview, we focus on the back-end of the nuclear energy value chain, the decommissioning of facilities and the short- and long-term disposal of radioactive waste.

Suggested Citation

  • Ben Wealer & Christian von Hirschhausen, 2020. "Nuclear Power as a System Good: Organizational Models for Production along the Value-Added Chain," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1883, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp1883
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.793995.de/dp1883.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scherwath, Tim & Wealer, Ben & Mendelevitch, Roman, 2020. "Nuclear decommissioning after the German Nuclear Phase-Out an integrated view on new regulations and nuclear logistics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    2. Lucas W. Davis, 2012. "Prospects for Nuclear Power," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(1), pages 49-66, Winter.
    3. 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.
    4. Mez, Lutz, 2012. "Nuclear energy–Any solution for sustainability and climate protection?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 56-63.
    5. Steve Cohn, 1990. "The Political Economy of Nuclear Power (1945–1990): The Rise and Fall of an Official Technology," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 781-811, September.
    6. Monnet, Antoine & Gabriel, Sophie & Percebois, Jacques, 2017. "Analysis of the long-term availability of uranium: The influence of dynamic constraints and market competition," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 98-107.
    7. Lars Sorge & Claudia Kemfert & Christian von Hirschhausen & Ben Wealer, 2020. "Nuclear Power Worldwide: Development Plans in Newcomer Countries Negligible," DIW Weekly Report, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 10(11), pages 163-172.
    8. Hyatt, Neil C., 2017. "Plutonium management policy in the United Kingdom: The need for a dual track strategy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 303-309.
    9. Roman Mendelevitch & Thanh Thien Dang, 2016. "Nuclear Power and the Uranium Market: Are Reserves and Resources Sufficient?," DIW Roundup: Politik im Fokus 98, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    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. Alexander Wimmers & Rebekka Bärenbold & Muhammad Maladoh Bah & Rebecca Lordan-Perret & Björn Steigerwald & Christian von Hirschhausen & Hannes Weigt & Ben Wealer, 2023. "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Plants: Regulation, Financing, and Production," Data Documentation 104, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Christian von Hirschhausen, 2022. "Nuclear Power in the Twenty-first Century (Part II) - The Economic Value of Plutonium," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 2011, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    3. Steigerwald, Björn & Weibezahn, Jens & Slowik, Martin & von Hirschhausen, Christian, 2023. "Uncertainties in estimating production costs of future nuclear technologies: A model-based analysis of small modular reactors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 281(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. 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).
    2. Christian von Hirschhausen, 2022. "Nuclear Power in the Twenty-first Century (Part II) - The Economic Value of Plutonium," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 2011, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    3. Ben Wealer & Simon Bauer & Leonard Göke & Christian von Hirschhausen & Claudia Kemfert, 2019. "Economics of Nuclear Power Plant Investment: Monte Carlo Simulations of Generation III/III+ Investment Projects," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1833, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    4. Neumann, Anne & Sorge, Lars & von Hirschhausen, Christian & Wealer, Ben, 2020. "Democratic quality and nuclear power: Reviewing the global determinants for the introduction of nuclear energy in 166 countries," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 63.
    5. Mason, Charles F., 2014. "Uranium and nuclear power: The role of exploration information in framing public policy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 49-63.
    6. 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.
    7. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    8. Lucas Davis & Catherine Hausman, 2014. "The Value of Transmission in Electricity Markets: Evidence from a Nuclear Power Plant Closure," NBER Working Papers 20186, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Arnaut, Javier L., 2022. "The importance of uranium prices and structural shocks: Some implications for Greenland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    10. Alessandro Piazza & Fabrizio Perretti, 2015. "Categorical Stigma and Firm Disengagement: Nuclear Power Generation in the United States, 1970–2000," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 724-742, June.
    11. Sven-Olof Fridolfsson and Thomas P. Tangeras, 2015. "Nuclear Capacity Auctions," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3).
    12. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna, 2014. "Measuring the impact of nuclear accidents on energy policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 121-129.
    13. 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.
    14. Neidell, Matthew & Uchida, Shinsuke & Veronesi, Marcella, 2021. "The unintended effects from halting nuclear power production: Evidence from Fukushima Daiichi accident," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    15. Vicki Duscha & Katja Schumacher & Joachim Schleich & Pierre Buisson, 2014. "Costs of meeting international climate targets without nuclear power," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 327-352, May.
    16. Jean-Claude Berthélemy & Arnaud Millien, 2018. "Impact of Decentralized Electrification Projects on Sustainable Development: A Meta-Analysis," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01922517, HAL.
    17. Roger Fouquet, 2012. "Economics of Energy and Climate Change: Origins, Developments and Growth," Working Papers 2012-08, BC3.
    18. Mignacca, Benito & Locatelli, Giorgio & Velenturf, Anne, 2020. "Modularisation as enabler of circular economy in energy infrastructure," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    19. Hayashi, Masatsugu & Hughes, Larry, 2013. "The Fukushima nuclear accident and its effect on global energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 102-111.
    20. Augustine, Grace L. & Piazza, Alessandro, 2021. "Category Evolution under Conditions of Stigma: The Segregation of Abortion Provision into Specialist Clinics in the United States," OSF Preprints fzqa6, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Nuclear power; organizational models; institutional economics; transaction cost; decommissioning; nuclear waste management;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:diw:diwwpp:dp1883. 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: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    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.