IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v90y2018icp90-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research status of nuclear power: A review

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Qiang
  • Li, Rongrong
  • He, Gang

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to provide the latest research information through atomic power literature analysis for people who are interested in research advancement on nuclear power, and to motivate more discussion and attention on nuclear power. The research on nuclear power has attracted much attention and the literature expanding substantially. This paper characterizes the nuclear power literature during 1996 and 2015 by archiving the data from Science Citation Index Expanded and its implications applying the bibliometric method at country level. Using the bibliometric techniques, we first investigate general spatial distribution, and then explore cross-country comparisons of scientific production, focusing on the country productivity distribution analysis, and institution analysis and research topics analysis. Furthermore, using the bibliometric indicators of the activity index and attractive index, we calculated citation score to further explore research efforts, influence and quality among the 10 most productive countries. First, the results indicate that the USA, Germany and Japan are the three top countries contributing to nuclear power literature, which published 24.34%, 11.04%, 10.87% of all literature, respectively. The great majority of countries come from America and Europe, and there are no African countries significantly involved in this area in the top 30 countries. Second, performance ranking of these countries by institutions echoes the countries’ publication performances. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is the leading institution by contributing/sponsoring 1061 articles. Overall, American, Japanese and South Korea institutions are the major ones, publishing nuclear power papers. Third, the correlation network and pattern of research topics forms five clusters, the hot and core research topic is model representing simulation. Fourth, we find that Japan holds the leading position with the highest research production, impact and citation score. England and France balance their cost and benefit situation. However, the USA is the only country whose research effort and impact has been continuously declining. China shows a sharp increase in research production but with declining citation score. China should improve production quality and citation score in this field.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Qiang & Li, Rongrong & He, Gang, 2018. "Research status of nuclear power: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 90-96.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:90:y:2018:i:c:p:90-96
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032118301345
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.044?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. Wang, Qiang & Li, Rongrong, 2017. "Research status of shale gas: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 715-720.
    2. Zhou, Yun, 2010. "Why is China going nuclear?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3755-3762, July.
    3. Luz M. Romo-Fernández & Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2013. "Co-word based thematic analysis of renewable energy (1990–2010)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(3), pages 743-765, December.
    4. Vujić, Jasmina & Bergmann, Ryan M. & Škoda, Radek & Miletić, Marija, 2012. "Small modular reactors: Simpler, safer, cheaper?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 288-295.
    5. Guo, Xiaopeng & Guo, Xiaodan, 2016. "Nuclear power development in China after the restart of new nuclear construction and approval: A system dynamics analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 999-1007.
    6. Wang, Qiang & Chen, Xi & Yi-chong, Xu, 2013. "Accident like the Fukushima unlikely in a country with effective nuclear regulation: Literature review and proposed guidelines," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 126-146.
    7. Thed N. Van Leeuwen & Martijn S. Visser & Henk F. Moed & Ton J. Nederhof & Anthony F. J. Van Raan, 2003. "The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(2), pages 257-280, June.
    8. Wolfgang Glänzel & Rickard Danell & Olle Persson, 2003. "The decline of Swedish neuroscience: Decomposing a bibliometric national science indicator," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(2), pages 197-213, June.
    9. Kang-Heon Lee & Min-Gil Kim & Jeong Ik Lee & Phill-Seung Lee, 2015. "Recent Advances in Ocean Nuclear Power Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-23, October.
    10. Mao, Guozhu & Liu, Xi & Du, Huibin & Zuo, Jian & Wang, Linyuan, 2015. "Way forward for alternative energy research: A bibliometric analysis during 1994–2013," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 276-286.
    11. Benoît Godin, 2006. "On the origins of bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(1), pages 109-133, July.
    12. Wang, Qiang & Li, Rongrong, 2016. "Natural gas from shale formation: A research profile," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1-6.
    13. Xiaojun Hu & Ronald Rousseau, 2009. "A comparative study of the difference in research performance in biomedical fields among selected Western and Asian countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 475-491, November.
    14. Qiang Wang, 2014. "China should aim for a total cap on emissions," Nature, Nature, vol. 512(7513), pages 115-115, August.
    15. Bensi Dong & Guoqiang Xu & Xiang Luo & Yi Cai & Wei Gao, 2012. "A bibliometric analysis of solar power research from 1991 to 2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 1101-1117, December.
    16. Wang, Qiang & Li, Rongrong, 2017. "Decline in China's coal consumption: An evidence of peak coal or a temporary blip?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 696-701.
    17. Francis Narin & Dominic Olivastro & Kimberly A. Stevens, 1994. "Bibliometrics/Theory, Practice and Problems," Evaluation Review, , vol. 18(1), pages 65-76, February.
    18. Li, Aijun & Lin, Boqiang, 2013. "Comparing climate policies to reduce carbon emissions in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 667-674.
    19. Rowinski, Marcin Karol & White, Timothy John & Zhao, Jiyun, 2015. "Small and Medium sized Reactors (SMR): A review of technology," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 643-656.
    20. Hao Qiu & Yi-Feng Chen, 2009. "Bibliometric analysis of biological invasions research during the period of 1991 to 2007," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 601-610, December.
    21. Chen, Kaihua & Guan, Jiancheng, 2011. "A bibliometric investigation of research performance in emerging nanobiopharmaceuticals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 233-247.
    22. Ming-Yueh Tsay, 2008. "A bibliometric analysis of hydrogen energy literature, 1965–2005," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(3), pages 421-438, June.
    23. Zeng, Ming & Wang, Shicheng & Duan, Jinhui & Sun, Jinghui & Zhong, Pengyuan & Zhang, Yingjie, 2016. "Review of nuclear power development in China: Environment analysis, historical stages, development status, problems and countermeasures," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1369-1383.
    24. Sims, Ralph E. H. & Rogner, Hans-Holger & Gregory, Ken, 2003. "Carbon emission and mitigation cost comparisons between fossil fuel, nuclear and renewable energy resources for electricity generation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(13), pages 1315-1326, October.
    25. Karakosta, Charikleia & Pappas, Charalampos & Marinakis, Vangelis & Psarras, John, 2013. "Renewable energy and nuclear power towards sustainable development: Characteristics and prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 187-197.
    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. Kiran Kaur & Kwan Hoong Ng & Ray Kemp & Yin Yee Ong & Zaharah Ramly & Ai Peng Koh, 2019. "Knowledge generation in the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 149-169, April.
    2. Sergey Kashurnikov & Valeriy Prasolov & Vladimir Gorbanyov & Rodion Rogulin, 2020. "Nuclear Power Production: The Future or the Past?," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(5), pages 131-141.
    3. Liu, Jiaxin & Yu, Deping & Yang, Taibo & Liu, Caixue & Wang, Guangjin & Liu, Xiaoming, 2023. "Discovering the causes for the change of the vibration characteristics of the core support barrel in PWR nuclear power plants: A combined investigation based on ex-core neutron noise analysis and nume," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    4. Luis Obregon & Cristhian Orozco & Josu Camargo & Jorge Duarte & Guillermo Valencia, 2019. "Research trend on Nuclear Energy from 2008 to 2018: A Bibliometric Analysis," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(6), pages 542-551.
    5. Andreo-Martínez, Pedro & Ortiz-Martínez, Víctor Manuel & García-Martínez, Nuria & de los Ríos, Antonia Pérez & Hernández-Fernández, Francisco José & Quesada-Medina, Joaquín, 2020. "Production of biodiesel under supercritical conditions: State of the art and bibliometric analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    6. Hu, Xiaoli & Zhu, Weiwei & Wei, Jiuchang, 2021. "Effects of information strategies on public acceptance of nuclear energy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(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. Rongrong Li & Min Su, 2017. "The Role of Natural Gas and Renewable Energy in Curbing Carbon Emission: Case Study of the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Yuzhen Liu & Caidi Li & Wentin Liu & Quanmin Dong, 2022. "Trends in Global Research on Seed Dispersal: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Xue-Ting Jiang & Rongrong Li, 2017. "Decoupling and Decomposition Analysis of Carbon Emissions from Electric Output in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-13, May.
    4. Rongrong Li & Xue-Ting Jiang, 2017. "Inequality of Carbon Intensity: Empirical Analysis of China 2000–2014," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-12, April.
    5. Weishu Liu & Mengdi Gu & Guangyuan Hu & Chao Li & Huchang Liao & Li Tang & Philip Shapira, 2014. "Profile of developments in biomass-based bioenergy research: a 20-year perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(2), pages 507-521, May.
    6. Xue-Ting Jiang & Min Su & Rongrong Li, 2018. "Decomposition Analysis in Electricity Sector Output from Carbon Emissions in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, September.
    7. Chen, Kaihua & Guan, Jiancheng, 2011. "A bibliometric investigation of research performance in emerging nanobiopharmaceuticals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 233-247.
    8. Wang, Qiang & Li, Rongrong, 2017. "Research status of shale gas: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 715-720.
    9. Rui Jiang & Rongrong Li, 2017. "Decomposition and Decoupling Analysis of Life-Cycle Carbon Emission in China’s Building Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    10. Wang, Qiang & Song, Xiaoxin, 2019. "Forecasting China's oil consumption: A comparison of novel nonlinear-dynamic grey model (GM), linear GM, nonlinear GM and metabolism GM," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 160-171.
    11. Shuyu Li & Rongrong Li, 2019. "Evaluating Energy Sustainability Using the Pressure-State-Response and Improved Matter-Element Extension Models: Case Study of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, January.
    12. Wang, Qiang & Jiang, Xue-ting & Li, Rongrong, 2017. "Comparative decoupling analysis of energy-related carbon emission from electric output of electricity sector in Shandong Province, China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 78-88.
    13. Shuyu Li & Rongrong Li, 2017. "Comparison of Forecasting Energy Consumption in Shandong, China Using the ARIMA Model, GM Model, and ARIMA-GM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-19, July.
    14. Xiaoping Zhu & Rongrong Li, 2017. "An Analysis of Decoupling and Influencing Factors of Carbon Emissions from the Transportation Sector in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-19, April.
    15. Yu, Sha & Yarlagadda, Brinda & Siegel, Jonas Elliott & Zhou, Sheng & Kim, Sonny, 2020. "The role of nuclear in China's energy future: Insights from integrated assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    16. Rui Jiang & Yulin Zhou & Rongrong Li, 2018. "Moving to a Low-Carbon Economy in China: Decoupling and Decomposition Analysis of Emission and Economy from a Sector Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-12, March.
    17. Rongrong Li & Rui Jiang, 2017. "Moving Low-Carbon Construction Industry in Jiangsu Province: Evidence from Decomposition and Decoupling Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-14, June.
    18. Qiang Wang & Rongrong Li & Rui Jiang, 2016. "Decoupling and Decomposition Analysis of Carbon Emissions from Industry: A Case Study from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, October.
    19. Lam, J. & Cheung, L. & Han, Y. & Wang, S., 2018. "China’s Response to Nuclear Safety Post-Fukushima: Genuine or Rhetoric?," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1866, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    20. Imran, Muhammad & Haglind, Fredrik & Asim, Muhammad & Zeb Alvi, Jahan, 2018. "Recent research trends in organic Rankine cycle technology: A bibliometric approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 552-562.

    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:rensus:v:90:y:2018:i:c:p:90-96. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.