Support For Nuclear Energy Research Articles

Comments: Nuclear Energy Gains (Some) Favor

Support for nuclear energy in the US is at its highest level in a decade, with 55% of Americans supporting it as a source of electricity. A Gallup poll conducted in March found 25% strongly favor, 30% somewhat favor, while 22% each strongly or somewhat oppose its usage. The report noted that oil prices have generally affected Americans’ responses since the survey was begun in 1994: high oil prices trended with more openness to nuclear energy, low oil prices trended with less favor. As of May, there were 436 nuclear power reactors in operation (connected to the grid) worldwide, providing about 10% of the world’s electricity. The countries with the most reactors are the US (93), France (56), and China (55). The largest reactors under construction were in the UK (gross electricity generation capacity of 1,720 MW). The largest-capacity nuclear reactors under construction worldwide were in China, with a total capacity of almost 22 GW (Statistica, May 2023). Projections for the potential growth of nuclear power in the next decades increased for the second consecutive year in the International Atomic Energy Agency’s 2022 outlook to 2050. Its high case scenario forecast for world nuclear generating capacity more than doubled to 873 GW net electrical (GWe) by 2050, compared with current levels of around 390 GWe, an increase of 81 GWe forecast in 2021. In the low case scenario, generating capacity remains flat. “We are at a defining moment in the world’s transition to a more secure, stable, and affordable energy future,” IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said. “Driven by the impacts of climate change and the energy crisis, governments are reconsidering their portfolios in favor of nuclear power. But for the high case scenario to be achieved, a number of challenges need to be addressed, including regulatory and industrial harmonization and progress in high-level waste disposal.” The IAEA said the use of nuclear power has avoided about 70 gigatonnes of CO2 emissions over the past 50 years. Almost half of the CO2 emission reductions needed to reach net zero in 2050 will need to come from technologies that are currently under development but are not yet on the market. IAEA said accelerating the pace of innovation and demonstration of advanced nuclear reactors including small modular reactors (SMRs) is required if nuclear is to play a role in decarbonization beyond electricity by providing low-carbon heat or hydrogen to the industrial and transport sectors. Although the Biden administration has included nuclear energy as a key component in its clean energy plan, support for nuclear energy has historically been tenuous. In the evaluation of the risks vs. benefits of nuclear energy, the risks weigh heavily in the balance, partly because when nuclear power reactors failed, they failed dramatically. Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island. While estimates of the number of directly related deaths or subsequent deaths resulting from radiation exposure via the accident or fallout are debated and vary widely, the association of fatalities with nuclear power reactor accidents/disasters is an immediately identified risk. Concerns about the risk of weapons proliferation, core meltdowns, and disposal of spent radioactive fuel are real and will need to be addressed transparently and convincingly by governments and regulators to gain wider public approval worldwide. Increasing nuclear generating capacity is not a quick fix. The complexity of the massive project, scale of investment, and long lead times are additional drawbacks. For comparison, a “typical” nuclear power plant requires 5 years (or more) to construct; natural gas-fired plants are frequently built in about 2 years. The United Nations (UN) estimates that the world’s population will grow from 7.8 billion in 2020 to around 8.5 billion in 2030 and 9.7 billion by 2050. Urbanization, which currently adds a city the size of Shanghai to the world’s urban population about every 4 months, is expected to result in approximately two-thirds of the world’s people living in urban areas by 2050 (up from about 55% now). The number of people without access to electricity has fallen substantially and is now below 1 billion, according to the UN. However, 733 million people, just over 9% of the world’s population, live without access. The challenge of meeting the rapidly growing energy demand, while reducing emissions, is considerable and highlights the needs for an energy mix which includes hydrocarbon, renewable, nuclear, and emerging and developing energy sources such as hydrogen.

A Zero-Carbon Nuclear Energy Future? Lessons Learned from Perceptions of Climate Change and Nuclear Waste

Nuclear energy is proposed as part of the solution to a net-zero carbon future. However, environmental issues with nuclear energy remain. In this study, a total of 1616 participants from across the U.S. stated their position on the following statements: “Nuclear energy is a clean energy source”, “Nuclear energy may be part of the solution to climate change”, “I am willing to accept the building of new nuclear power stations if it is environmentally friendly and had a zero-carbon footprint”, and “Nuclear power may lead to more pollution and environmental contamination”. Participants were also asked “Do you think nuclear energy is a zero-carbon energy?” Logistic regression was used to determine how concern around climate change and nuclear waste predicted participant responses. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to determine segments of respondents based on their perceptions of nuclear energy and the environment. Nuclear energy was perceived as being zero-carbon (74% agree), but not necessarily clean (50% agree). Nuclear energy was perceived as part of the solution to climate change (51% agree), but concern around more pollution and environmental contamination remained (42% agree). Concern around climate change was associated with greater odds of acceptance of nuclear energy, while concern around nuclear waste was associated with the opposite. The LCA suggested a “favorable”, “neutral”, and “negative” class, for which approximately 40%, 52%, and 8% of participants, respectively, belonged. This study suggests conditional (or reluctant) support for nuclear energy is occurring.

Political ideology and nuclear energy: Perception, proximity, and trust

AbstractPolitical ideology is an increasingly powerful force in support of public policy. Historically, nuclear energy has found more support among political conservatives. This study updates the literature on political ideology and support for nuclear energy by examining how political ideology is associated with perceptions of nuclear energy and trust of nuclear information sources. After excluding participants with incomplete data, and participants within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor, the analytical sample size for the analysis examining political ideology and perceptions of nuclear energy was 4153. The analytical sample includes a total of 1035 participants within a 50‐mile radius of INL, 710 participants from within Idaho who lived further than 50 miles from INL, 1899 participants from other states (more than 50 miles from a nuclear reactor), and 509 Non‐Idaho participants living within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor. Logistic regression was used to determine how political ideology was associated with perceptions of nuclear energy and trust in different sources regarding radioactive waste, after controlling for demographics and location. While liberal participants near INL were less favorable towards nuclear energy, and more trusting in impact scientists to tell the truth about radioactive waste than their conservative counterparts, this was not consistent across the US. Our findings reveal the complexity of political ideology and the perceptions of nuclear issues and how proximity influences perceptions. The perceptions of political moderates were particularly important in providing a more complex understanding of political ideology and nuclear energy issues.

Nuclear energy in the context of climate change

Human society faces the great challenge of drastically reducing greenhouse gas emissions while providing increased amounts of energy. Although the share of renewable energy sources has increased in recent years, fossil fuels are still widely used and burning them makes large amounts of carbon dioxide enter the atmosphere. However, renewable energy sources may not be able to supply in time enough energy to replace fossil fuels. Under the circumstances, the question arises as to whether nuclear energy could play a significant role in mitigating climate change. Although there is still confidence and support for nuclear energy, it is unlikely that this energy source will make a greater contribution to combating climate change in the coming decades. This study analyzes the current state of nuclear energy, as well as the development prospects in the context of climate change and risks to the environment and human health.

Bad external actors and good nuclear energy: Media discourse on energy supplies in the Czech Republic and Slovakia

For Central and Eastern European countries, energy security has been one of the top political topics ever since the 2009 gas crisis. Although these countries have a shared interest in this issue, their preferences – especially those regarding the role of Russia as their main energy supplier – are not identical. This paper examines and juxtaposes the discourses on natural gas supply in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Utilizing a broadly constructivist perspective, the article explores the media discourses connected to energy supplies in these countries. Methodologically, the paper employs critical discourse analysis to examine this discourse. The paper argues that the media discourses in both countries underline the overall unreliability of the external environment and stress the necessity to rely on domestic energy sources. In the Czech case, such an environment also includes the EU, which translates into a critical stance towards renewable energy, viewed as being forced on country by the EU. In contrast, the Slovak discourse presents the EU as a suitable arena for energy cooperation. Both countries agree on the support for nuclear energy, which is considered to be a domestic – and therefore most reliable – energy source.

The party politics of nuclear energy: Party cues and public opinion regarding nuclear energy in Belgium

Political science research suggests that political party communications often have a strong effect on people’s positions on political issues. However, studies on support for nuclear energy have hitherto largely ignored party-political factors, especially in multiparty contexts, focusing instead on psychometric variables such as risk perception, benefit perception, and trust. This article analyzes if and how people use party cues when determining their support for nuclear energy. We conducted a public opinion survey in Belgium in 2015, which is representative for the population on age, gender, education and level of urbanization. Our results indicate that parties have a net-effect on support for nuclear energy although the effect is modest compared to the effects of the psychometric variables. Furthermore, we show that partisan cue taking occurs more amongst voters of parties that have a clear and opposing position on nuclear energy (i.e. the issue owning parties and the policy defending parties). Cue taking voters of these parties became somewhat more extreme in their support for nuclear energy in the direction advocated by their preferred party. Hence, parties seem to have a polarizing impact on public opinion on nuclear energy. Furthermore, partisan cue taking on nuclear energy occurred more amongst respondents more knowledgeable/strongly involved on the issue of nuclear than amongst those less knowledgeable/less involved.

Exploring News Frames, Sources and Editorial Lines on Newspaper Coverage of Nuclear Energy in Spain

ABSTRACTFive nuclear power plant operate in Spain, one of the EU countries with less support for nuclear energy. The aims of this investigation are to find out if news on nuclear power are provided from an environmental point of view, who are the sources in the nuclear debate and which are the editorial lines in Spanish newspapers from 2008 to 2012. The results show that the environmental perspective on nuclear power is unusual. Using an eco-efficient frame, it is defined as a clean source of energy. Politicians play the greatest role and party political use is made of the nuclear power issue. Spanish nuclear coverage emphasizes the views of interest groups rather than those of scientists and other experts, ecologists or citizens. Thus, the press doesn't play the substantive role in public deliberation and don't connect with the different interests and sensitivities existing in the public sphere about nuclear energy.

Public opinion change after the Fukushima nuclear accident: The role of national context revisited

This study explores how national context moderated change in support for nuclear energy after the Fukushima accident. The following national contextual variables are tested: geographical distance, nuclear energy production status, freedom of the press, and the building of new nuclear reactors. The results illustrate that previous research has misunderstood the moderating role of national context on opinion change after the Fukushima accident. A survey conducted shortly after the accident with more than 23,000 respondents from 41 countries has shown that geographical distance from the accident mattered: Contradicting a previous study, the decrease in support for nuclear energy was stronger in countries closer to Fukushima. In addition, support for nuclear energy decreased more in countries where new nuclear reactors were under construction. The country's nuclear energy production status and press freedom did not determine opinion change after the Fukushima accident. The non-effect of freedom of the press on opinion change contradicts the role of media after a focusing event as described in the literature. Overall results demonstrate a limited effect of national context on opinion change following a focusing event. Hence, national context provides only limited information to policy makers on how to respond to a nuclear accident.

Nuclear accident reminders and support for nuclear energy: Paradoxical effect

Three experiments investigated the impact of nuclear accident reminders on support for nuclear power, as a function of initial attitudes towards environmental protection. Data were collected in France, where nuclear plants produce approximately 80% of the country's electricity, and where this is a highly politicized issue. Nuclear accident reminders were expected to lead individuals relatively low in environmental protection concern to paradoxically increase their support for nuclear energy (compared to a control condition), while those high in environmental protection concern were expected to decrease their support for nuclear energy. Taken together, results confirm the hypothesis for those weakly concerned with environmental protection. Also, this effect persisted for at least two weeks, effects of nuclear accident reminders were parallel to effects of mortality salience, and subliminal primes were as efficient as supraliminal primes, suggesting that the effect is unconscious. The processes that produce these effects and their policy implications are discussed.

Does proximity matter? Plant location, public awareness, and support for nuclear energy

Does geographic proximity to nuclear power plants influence public attitudes toward nuclear energy? Utilizing a statewide survey of North Carolina residents, this research considers whether proximity to a nuclear facility – measured by residence in a 10 or 50 mile Emergency Planning Zone – influences citizen awareness, support, and perceptions of safety concerning nuclear energy. The results suggest that while geographic proximity to generating sites does lead to increased levels of awareness, it does not appear to impact overall attitudes toward the use and perceived safety of nuclear energy.

Risk Perception of Nuclear Energy During the Fukushima Crisis: The Role of Trust and Communication in Taiwan

This study explores how people in Taiwan perceived risk toward nuclear power during the Fukushima disaster in March 2011. We conducted an island-wide telephone survey of 1, 093 residents in Taiwan within one week after the disaster happened. Results show that political trust mostly determined people’s perception of the risk. People with lower political trust tend to have more concern about the risk, and those who trust government tend to have more support for nuclear energy. In terms of communication, TV news attention is positively correlated with risk perception, but those paying more attention to TV news are likely to oppose nuclear energy more. People with more objective knowledge about nuclear energy are likely to be in favor of nuclear energy and also tend to accept the risk of nuclear power. Male respondents present more tolerance of the risk than their female counterpart. Consistent with the past literature, Pan-Blue party supporters are more in favor of nuclear energy than Pan-Green party supporters.

Fukushima Nuclear Accident Implications for the Nuclear Power Development in China

The Fukushima nuclear accident is prompting countries around the world to reassess the safety of nuclear power plant and their nuclear development aspirations. The course of Fukushima nuclear accident, the accident status to date are summarized, the global support for nuclear energy after Fukushima are stated, and the nuclear power development in China, China responses to Fukushima accident are analyzed. Nuclear energy plays an important role as means to adjust the energy structure, to avoid environmental pollution, and to address climate change in China, while the development speed of nuclear power should be reasonable and appropriate. Drawing lessons from Fukushima crisis, China insists on the safety-first principle in nuclear power development, hence China should be cautions in NPP sites selection, reviews its nuclear power development speed, lifts the safety standards, and improve the nuclear emergency response capabilities.

Public perceptions and governance of controversial technologies to tackle climate change: nuclear power, carbon capture and storage, wind, and geoengineering

AbstractThe role carbon emissions play in contributing to climate change makes clear the necessity for a global reconsideration of current modes of energy production. In recent years, as concerns over the threats of climate change (CC) have become more acute, four technologies have notably risen to the forefront of academic and public discourse: nuclear power, carbon capture and storage (CCS), wind power, and geoengineering. The particular interest of these four approaches lies in the fact that they reflect both energy production and climate control technologies, are often socially controversial, and present complex challenges of governance. Nuclear and wind power both deserve an important place among the variety of low‐carbon energy options. In countries where public acceptance is evaluated, although, support for nuclear energy appears to be conditional upon simultaneous development of other renewable energies alongside a feasible plan to address the disposal of nuclear waste. The Fukushima accident sharply increased public concern about the safety and vulnerability of nuclear reactors. While wind power receives general public support, issues of accommodation can arise when it comes to siting wind farms. Persistent dependency upon carbon‐producing energy has made favorable the option of CCS. However, in addition to technical and geological factors, social resistance to the placement of carbon storage units remains a key obstacle. Geoengineering offers the technological capacity to directly act on the climate should levels of atmospheric CO2 become dangerously high. Public perception regarding the risk of climate change can be labile, and the alternatives reviewed here share the characteristic that their technical and political dimensions are intertwined. The variety of options for combining and implementing these technologies, coupled with the inherently time‐sensitive nature of CC, underscore the complexity of the endeavor. In order to bridge these various levels of analysis and decision making, and to better understand and integrate people's involvement, exercises in risk governance could be developed at both the national and international levels. WIREs Clim Change 2011 2 712–727 DOI: 10.1002/wcc.134This article is categorized under: Perceptions, Behavior, and Communication of Climate Change > Social Amplification/Attenuation of Climate Risks The Carbon Economy and Climate Mitigation > Policies, Instruments, Lifestyles, Behavior

Les animaux et la ville Nathalie Blanc Odile Jacob, 2000, 232 p., 155 F.

For Central and Eastern European countries, energy security has been one of the top political topics ever since the 2009 gas crisis. Although these countries have a shared interest in this issue, their preferences – especially those regarding the role of Russia as their main energy supplier – are not identical. This paper examines and juxtaposes the discourses on natural gas supply in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Utilizing a broadly constructivist perspective, the article explores the media discourses connected to energy supplies in these countries. Methodologically, the paper employs critical discourse analysis to examine this discourse. The paper argues that the media discourses in both countries underline the overall unreliability of the external environment and stress the necessity to rely on domestic energy sources. In the Czech case, such an environment also includes the EU, which translates into a critical stance towards renewable energy, viewed as being forced on country by the EU. In contrast, the Slovak discourse presents the EU as a suitable arena for energy cooperation. Both countries agree on the support for nuclear energy, which is considered to be a domestic – and therefore most reliable – energy source.

Survey reveals unexpected support for nuclear energy

Survey reveals unexpected support for nuclear energy