Gilmore N , P.A. Burr , E. Obbard , C. Stockings , J.J. Kruzic , I. Seitenzahl , S. Ata , E. Maartensson , R.K. Niven
{"title":"Discussing possible futures to neutralise nuclear energy discourse","authors":"Gilmore N , P.A. Burr , E. Obbard , C. Stockings , J.J. Kruzic , I. Seitenzahl , S. Ata , E. Maartensson , R.K. Niven","doi":"10.1016/j.rser.2024.115105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Nuclear energy discourse is deeply entrenched, with historical incidents and excessive objectivity deepening for-or-against lines that impede collaborative discussions. This research advocates for a futures thinking approach where stakeholders discuss possibilities before debating probabilities and preferences. This method is demonstrated by deriving four scenarios through an expert led review of historical events and recent research. 1) Spillover Benefits envisages the staggered deployment of small modular reactors stemming from remote power projects in a few leading nations that need continued government support and significant technological advancement. 2) Disruption Rebound envisages the ramifications of an energy security crises that that may shift public opinion, justify political actors, and fragment international partnerships. 3) Catastrophe Contraction envisages the severe setback of a major nuclear accident, stressing the challenge of enduring social apprehensions on the way to ultra reliable operation. 4) Strategic Fulcrum examines the geopolitical implication of using nuclear technology to establish long-term alliances, which could either increase or decrease technology costs and conflict risks depending on uncertain geopolitical developments. In this research, futures thinking allowed experts to openly consider scenarios they may otherwise have dismissed as unlikely or undesirable. Other stakeholders can apply this method to facilitate inclusive discussions, transforming contentious debates into constructive discourse.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":418,"journal":{"name":"Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews","volume":"210 ","pages":"Article 115105"},"PeriodicalIF":16.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032124008311","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Nuclear energy discourse is deeply entrenched, with historical incidents and excessive objectivity deepening for-or-against lines that impede collaborative discussions. This research advocates for a futures thinking approach where stakeholders discuss possibilities before debating probabilities and preferences. This method is demonstrated by deriving four scenarios through an expert led review of historical events and recent research. 1) Spillover Benefits envisages the staggered deployment of small modular reactors stemming from remote power projects in a few leading nations that need continued government support and significant technological advancement. 2) Disruption Rebound envisages the ramifications of an energy security crises that that may shift public opinion, justify political actors, and fragment international partnerships. 3) Catastrophe Contraction envisages the severe setback of a major nuclear accident, stressing the challenge of enduring social apprehensions on the way to ultra reliable operation. 4) Strategic Fulcrum examines the geopolitical implication of using nuclear technology to establish long-term alliances, which could either increase or decrease technology costs and conflict risks depending on uncertain geopolitical developments. In this research, futures thinking allowed experts to openly consider scenarios they may otherwise have dismissed as unlikely or undesirable. Other stakeholders can apply this method to facilitate inclusive discussions, transforming contentious debates into constructive discourse.
期刊介绍:
The mission of Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews is to disseminate the most compelling and pertinent critical insights in renewable and sustainable energy, fostering collaboration among the research community, private sector, and policy and decision makers. The journal aims to exchange challenges, solutions, innovative concepts, and technologies, contributing to sustainable development, the transition to a low-carbon future, and the attainment of emissions targets outlined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews publishes a diverse range of content, including review papers, original research, case studies, and analyses of new technologies, all featuring a substantial review component such as critique, comparison, or analysis. Introducing a distinctive paper type, Expert Insights, the journal presents commissioned mini-reviews authored by field leaders, addressing topics of significant interest. Case studies undergo consideration only if they showcase the work's applicability to other regions or contribute valuable insights to the broader field of renewable and sustainable energy. Notably, a bibliographic or literature review lacking critical analysis is deemed unsuitable for publication.