IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v45y2012icp12-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What will the Fukushima disaster change?

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas, Steve

Abstract

Intuitively, the Fukushima disaster should have a major impact on the future of the nuclear industry. This paper argues that there are four possible answers to the question what will Fukushima change: everything because the nuclear industry cannot survive another Chernobyl; the impact will vary according to location; it is too early to determine the impact; and the nuclear industry was facing serious problems that Fukushima will do no more than exacerbate. We focus on the last answer, arguing that the new designs that were expected to be so attractive as to power a ‘Nuclear Renaissance’ were already failing. The promises that they would be safer, but simpler, therefore cheaper and more buildable were unachievable and the Renaissance in the West had already failed. If the nuclear industry is to have a future, it might be through a shift in locus from North America and Western Europe to China, Russia and India. However, it is not clear that these countries can avoid the techno-economic issues that have derailed the nuclear industry in the West. The prospect that the nuclear industry can be saved by a radical new generation of designs is a long way off and still a remote possibility.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas, Steve, 2012. "What will the Fukushima disaster change?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 12-17.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:45:y:2012:i:c:p:12-17
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.02.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421512001140
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.02.010?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas, Steve, 2011. "The Pebble Bed Modular Reactor: An obituary," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2431-2440, May.
    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. Nikolett Deutsch, 2017. "The Changing Role of Nuclear Power in the European Union: Reflections from Official Scenarios Released before and after the Fukushima Daiichi Accident," Theory Methodology Practice (TMP), Faculty of Economics, University of Miskolc, vol. 13(01), pages 17-36.
    2. Dagmar Kiyar & Bettina F. Wittneben, 2012. "Nuclear Energy in the European Union after Fukushima: Political and Economic Considerations," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 10(03), pages 09-15, November.
    3. Sena, Marcelo Fonseca Monteiro de & Rosa, Luiz Pinguelli & Szklo, Alexandre, 2013. "Will Venezuelan extra-heavy oil be a significant source of petroleum in the next decades?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 51-59.
    4. Bjoern Hagen & Adenike Opejin & K. David Pijawka, 2022. "Risk Perceptions and Amplification Effects over Time: Evaluating Fukushima Longitudinal Surveys," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Jan Goebel & Christian Krekel & Tim Tiefenbach & Nicolas Ziebarth, 2015. "How natural disasters can affect environmental concerns, risk aversion, and even politics: evidence from Fukushima and three European countries," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 28(4), pages 1137-1180, October.
    6. Sun, Chuanwang & Zhu, Xiting & Meng, Xiaochun, 2016. "Post-Fukushima public acceptance on resuming the nuclear power program in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 685-694.
    7. S. Taniguchi, Kazuhiro, 2022. "Why Fukushima? A diachronic and multilevel comparative institutional analysis of a nuclear disaster," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    8. Evangelia Karasmanaki & Spyridon Galatsidas & Georgios Tsantopoulos, 2019. "An Investigation of Factors Affecting the Willingness to Invest in Renewables among Environmental Students: A Logistic Regression Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-18, September.
    9. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna, 2014. "Measuring the impact of nuclear accidents on energy policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 121-129.
    10. Hartmann, Patrick & Apaolaza, Vanessa & D'Souza, Clare & Echebarria, Carmen & Barrutia, Jose M., 2013. "Nuclear power threats, public opposition and green electricity adoption: Effects of threat belief appraisal and fear arousal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1366-1376.
    11. Nam, Hoseok & Konishi, Satoshi & Nam, Ki-Woo, 2021. "Comparative analysis of decision making regarding nuclear policy after the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident: Case study in Germany and Japan," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    12. Furlan, Claudia & Guidolin, Mariangela & Guseo, Renato, 2016. "Has the Fukushima accident influenced short-term consumption in the evolution of nuclear energy? An analysis of the world and seven leading countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 37-49.
    13. repec:ces:ifodic:v:10:y:2012:i:3:p:19069666 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Huang, Lei & He, Ruoying & Yang, Qianqi & Chen, Jin & Zhou, Ying & Hammitt, James K. & Lu, Xi & Bi, Jun & Liu, Yang, 2018. "The changing risk perception towards nuclear power in China after the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 294-301.
    15. Verbruggen, Aviel, 2013. "Belgian nuclear power life extension and fuss about nuclear rents," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 91-97.
    16. Park, Eunil & Ohm, Jay Y., 2014. "Factors influencing the public intention to use renewable energy technologies in South Korea: Effects of the Fukushima nuclear accident," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 198-211.
    17. Nicola Paltrinieri & Nicolas Dechy & Ernesto Salzano & Mike Wardman & Valerio Cozzani, 2013. "Towards a new approach for the identification of atypical accident scenarios," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3-4), pages 337-354, April.
    18. Kalkbrenner, Bernhard J. & Yonezawa, Koichi & Roosen, Jutta, 2017. "Consumer preferences for electricity tariffs: Does proximity matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 413-424.
    19. Dagmar Kiyar & Bettina F. Wittneben, 2012. "Nuclear Energy in the European Union after Fukushima: Political and Economic Considerations," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 10(3), pages 09-15, November.
    20. Erman Çakıt & Andrzej Jan Olak & Atsuo Murata & Waldemar Karwowski & Omar Alrehaili & Tadeusz Marek, 2019. "Assessment of the perceived safety culture in the petrochemical industry in Japan: A cross-sectional study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-18, December.
    21. Phil Johnstone & Andy Stirling, 2015. "Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories inGermany And the UK: From ‘Regimes’ to ‘Democracies’ in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-18, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    22. Hayashi, Masatsugu & Hughes, Larry, 2013. "The policy responses to the Fukushima nuclear accident and their effect on Japanese energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 86-101.
    23. Heetae Kim & Jinwoo Bae & Seoin Baek & Donggyun Nam & Hyunsung Cho & Hyun Joon Chang, 2017. "Comparative Analysis between the Government Micro-Grid Plan and Computer Simulation Results Based on Real Data: The Practical Case for a South Korean Island," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-18, 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.
    1. Locatelli, Giorgio & Mancini, Mauro & Todeschini, Nicola, 2013. "Generation IV nuclear reactors: Current status and future prospects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1503-1520.
    2. Ramana, M.V. & Hopkins, Laura Berzak & Glaser, Alexander, 2013. "Licensing small modular reactors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 555-564.
    3. Stephen Thomas & M. V. Ramana, 2022. "A hopeless pursuit? National efforts to promote small modular nuclear reactors and revive nuclear power," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), July.
    4. Pfenninger, Stefan & Keirstead, James, 2015. "Comparing concentrating solar and nuclear power as baseload providers using the example of South Africa," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 303-314.
    5. Frederik Reitsma & Peter Woods & Martin Fairclough & Yongjin Kim & Harikrishnan Tulsidas & Luis Lopez & Yanhua Zheng & Ahmed Hussein & Gerd Brinkmann & Nils Haneklaus & Anand Rao Kacham & Tumuluri Sre, 2018. "On the Sustainability and Progress of Energy Neutral Mineral Processing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.

    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:45:y:2012:i:c:p:12-17. 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.