Literature DB >> 20561266

Intergenerational considerations affecting the future of nuclear power: equity as a framework for assessing fuel cycles.

Behnam Taebi1, Andrew C Kadak.   

Abstract

Alternative fuel cycles are being considered in an effort to prolong uranium fuel supplies for thousands of years to come and to manage nuclear waste. These strategies bring with them different benefits and burdens for the present generation and for future generations. In this article, we present a method that provides insight into future fuel cycle alternatives and into the conflicts arising between generations within the framework of intergenerational equity. A set of intersubjective values is drawn from the notion of sustainable development. By operationalizing these values and mapping out their impacts, value criteria are introduced for the assessment of fuel cycles, which are based on the distribution of burdens and benefits between generations. The once-through fuel cycle currently deployed in the United States and three future fuel cycles are subsequently assessed according to these criteria. The four alternatives are then compared in an integrated analysis in which we shed light on the implicit tradeoffs made by decisionmakers when they choose a certain fuel cycle. When choosing a fuel cycle, what are the societal costs and burdens accepted for each generation and how can these factors be justified? This article presents an integrated decision-making method, which considers intergenerational aspects of such decisions; this method could also be applied to other technologies.
© 2010 Society for Risk Analysis.

Entities:  

Year:  2010        PMID: 20561266     DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01434.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  6 in total

1.  Specifying the Concept of Future Generations for Addressing Issues Related to High-Level Radioactive Waste.

Authors:  Celine Kermisch
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  The Strength of Ethical Matrixes as a Tool for Normative Analysis Related to Technological Choices: The Case of Geological Disposal for Radioactive Waste.

Authors:  Céline Kermisch; Christophe Depaus
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 3.525

3.  Contested Technologies and Design for Values: The Case of Shale Gas.

Authors:  Marloes Dignum; Aad Correljé; Eefje Cuppen; Udo Pesch; Behnam Taebi
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2015-07-25       Impact factor: 3.525

4.  Rawls's Wide Reflective Equilibrium as a Method for Engaged Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Potentials and Limitations for the Context of Technological Risks.

Authors:  Neelke Doorn; Behnam Taebi
Journal:  Sci Technol Human Values       Date:  2017-08-23

5.  How to Weigh Values in Value Sensitive Design: A Best Worst Method Approach for the Case of Smart Metering.

Authors:  Geerten van de Kaa; Jafar Rezaei; Behnam Taebi; Ibo van de Poel; Abhilash Kizhakenath
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 3.525

6.  Reversible Experiments: Putting Geological Disposal to the Test.

Authors:  Jan Peter Bergen
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2015-09-12       Impact factor: 3.525

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.