Pub Date : 2020-03-01DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2020.431.435
R. Petrescu, F. Petrescu
The paper briefly studies the interaction between an electron and a down quark, considered integrated within a proton. It is therefore assumed that there is a down quark within a proton in which there are also two quarks up and an accelerated electron capable of penetrating the down quark inside the proton, in extremely difficult conditions in which the proton is already accelerated to a certain level necessary to start the nuclear fusion reaction between two hydrogen protons, in which case a proton already has high kinetic energy, moving at a very high linear velocity and having an extremely small size. Under these conditions, the possibility is studied for an electron to penetrate the proton, or more precisely to be able to interact (to be able to join) the down quark. It determines the kinetic energy required for the electron to achieve a goal like this.
{"title":"Interaction between an Electron and a Quark Down","authors":"R. Petrescu, F. Petrescu","doi":"10.3844/ajeassp.2020.431.435","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3844/ajeassp.2020.431.435","url":null,"abstract":"The paper briefly studies the interaction between an electron and a down quark, considered integrated within a proton. It is therefore assumed that there is a down quark within a proton in which there are also two quarks up and an accelerated electron capable of penetrating the down quark inside the proton, in extremely difficult conditions in which the proton is already accelerated to a certain level necessary to start the nuclear fusion reaction between two hydrogen protons, in which case a proton already has high kinetic energy, moving at a very high linear velocity and having an extremely small size. Under these conditions, the possibility is studied for an electron to penetrate the proton, or more precisely to be able to interact (to be able to join) the down quark. It determines the kinetic energy required for the electron to achieve a goal like this.","PeriodicalId":277238,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Energy (Sustainability) eJournal","volume":"109 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128713867","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-11-23DOI: 10.3844/AJEASSP.2018.1293.1297
F. Petrescu
To better understand the structure of matter, it is not enough to study atoms and molecules. For living matter it is necessary to study the cell, including the mitochondrial and for matter in general, it is necessary to determine the elemental elements of the atom and further those of the nucleus, how the nucleons bind to each other, forming virtually new atomic structures if they have electrons, or new ionic structures if they suffer a lack of electrons. The present study aims to explain how the three nucleons bind to a tritium nucleus (nucleus called triton), thus forming the core of the third hydrogen isotope, a positive ion, containing two neutrons and a proton, a single particle positively charged and two neutral charged nuclear particles. For this tritium independent nucleus, called triton, the main dimensions will be determined by calculating its radius R, which is not a constant dimension but a dynamic one, changing its magnitude in function to the velocity of the moving triton particle.
{"title":"About the Triton Structure","authors":"F. Petrescu","doi":"10.3844/AJEASSP.2018.1293.1297","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3844/AJEASSP.2018.1293.1297","url":null,"abstract":"To better understand the structure of matter, it is not enough to study atoms and molecules. For living matter it is necessary to study the cell, including the mitochondrial and for matter in general, it is necessary to determine the elemental elements of the atom and further those of the nucleus, how the nucleons bind to each other, forming virtually new atomic structures if they have electrons, or new ionic structures if they suffer a lack of electrons. The present study aims to explain how the three nucleons bind to a tritium nucleus (nucleus called triton), thus forming the core of the third hydrogen isotope, a positive ion, containing two neutrons and a proton, a single particle positively charged and two neutral charged nuclear particles. For this tritium independent nucleus, called triton, the main dimensions will be determined by calculating its radius R, which is not a constant dimension but a dynamic one, changing its magnitude in function to the velocity of the moving triton particle.","PeriodicalId":277238,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Energy (Sustainability) eJournal","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129588796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper focuses on critically reviewing the prevailing techno-economic analysis methods used for traditional and new nuclear power plants (NPPs). The organizations whose methods are compared here are – International Atomic Energy Agency; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; University of Chicago, U.S. Department of Energy / Oak Ridge National Laboratory; Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and International Energy Agency – Nuclear Energy Agency. We identify technology and market factors that changed in the past few years that have a direct impact on the economic feasibility of nuclear power. Based on the review, we identify areas in which the traditional methods could be improved to better fit the changed global scenario, so as to give a more realistic picture of the feasibility of NPPs. We found that there are many similarities across organizations in terms of methodology. The differences were mainly regarding the terminology and the levels of aggregation. We identified a costing method which combines the salient features of other methods to better fit the changed global scenario, so as to give a more realistic picture of the feasibility of NPPs.
{"title":"Techno-Economic Analysis Methods for Nuclear Power Plants","authors":"Hari C. Mantripragada, E. Rubin","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3198421","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3198421","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on critically reviewing the prevailing techno-economic analysis methods used for traditional and new nuclear power plants (NPPs). The organizations whose methods are compared here are – International Atomic Energy Agency; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; University of Chicago, U.S. Department of Energy / Oak Ridge National Laboratory; Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and International Energy Agency – Nuclear Energy Agency. We identify technology and market factors that changed in the past few years that have a direct impact on the economic feasibility of nuclear power. Based on the review, we identify areas in which the traditional methods could be improved to better fit the changed global scenario, so as to give a more realistic picture of the feasibility of NPPs. We found that there are many similarities across organizations in terms of methodology. The differences were mainly regarding the terminology and the levels of aggregation. We identified a costing method which combines the salient features of other methods to better fit the changed global scenario, so as to give a more realistic picture of the feasibility of NPPs.","PeriodicalId":277238,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Energy (Sustainability) eJournal","volume":"196 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123231722","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As exemplified by the recent proposed mergers of Exelon Corporation (“Exelon”) with Pepco Holdings, Inc. (“PHI”) and NextEra Energy with Hawaiian Electric Industries, nuclear-heavy utility companies are increasingly seeking to offset the losses they are experiencing by acquiring profitable, regulated utilities that do not generate nuclear power. But these mergers have been met with skepticism by the public and in some cases utility regulators. This Note focuses on the utility commissions’ consideration of the Exelon-PHI merger to establish that, despite press coverage that indicated that the District of Columbia (“DC”) Public Service Commission’s (“DC PSC”) initial rejection of the merger might have been influenced by concerns that Exelon’s nuclear losses would be passed on to DC ratepayers, that was not the case. DC PSC’s ultimate acceptance of the proposed merger was also not influenced by Exelon’s nuclear generation activities. This Note also attempts to develop lessons from the Exelon-PHI regulatory process that nuclear-heavy utilities might seek to apply in acquiring non-nuclear, regulated utilities to offset their losses in the unprofitable, deregulated nuclear generation industry and meet the carbon reduction ambitions of the EPA's Clean Power Plan ("CPP"). Lastly, this Note offers policy recommendations that the federal government could pursue to put the nuclear industry on firmer financial ground in order to ensure that the CPP’s carbon emission goals are met.
{"title":"Nuclear Chaos: The Exelon-PHI Merger and What it Means for Nuclear Power in the United States and the EPA's Carbon Emission Rules","authors":"Hampden Macbeth","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3108232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3108232","url":null,"abstract":"As exemplified by the recent proposed mergers of Exelon Corporation (“Exelon”) with Pepco Holdings, Inc. (“PHI”) and NextEra Energy with Hawaiian Electric Industries, nuclear-heavy utility companies are increasingly seeking to offset the losses they are experiencing by acquiring profitable, regulated utilities that do not generate nuclear power. But these mergers have been met with skepticism by the public and in some cases utility regulators. This Note focuses on the utility commissions’ consideration of the Exelon-PHI merger to establish that, despite press coverage that indicated that the District of Columbia (“DC”) Public Service Commission’s (“DC PSC”) initial rejection of the merger might have been influenced by concerns that Exelon’s nuclear losses would be passed on to DC ratepayers, that was not the case. DC PSC’s ultimate acceptance of the proposed merger was also not influenced by Exelon’s nuclear generation activities. This Note also attempts to develop lessons from the Exelon-PHI regulatory process that nuclear-heavy utilities might seek to apply in acquiring non-nuclear, regulated utilities to offset their losses in the unprofitable, deregulated nuclear generation industry and meet the carbon reduction ambitions of the EPA's Clean Power Plan (\"CPP\"). Lastly, this Note offers policy recommendations that the federal government could pursue to put the nuclear industry on firmer financial ground in order to ensure that the CPP’s carbon emission goals are met.","PeriodicalId":277238,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Energy (Sustainability) eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131165616","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ronald U. Mendoza, Yla Gloria Marie P Paras, D. Bertulfo
In public policy literature, white elephant projects are described as large-scale investment ventures which do not only crowd-out funds from smaller-scale investment opportunities, but also lead to negative social returns. This case study briefly sketches recent literature and information on white elephant projects and then proceeds to examine the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) in the Philippines, considered an example of a white elephant project. This particular megaproject had implications on the Philippines' fiscal standing and energy security, offering lessons for future projects of this size and significance.
{"title":"The Bataan Nuclear Power Plant in the Philippines: Lessons from a White Elephant Project","authors":"Ronald U. Mendoza, Yla Gloria Marie P Paras, D. Bertulfo","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2833766","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2833766","url":null,"abstract":"In public policy literature, white elephant projects are described as large-scale investment ventures which do not only crowd-out funds from smaller-scale investment opportunities, but also lead to negative social returns. This case study briefly sketches recent literature and information on white elephant projects and then proceeds to examine the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) in the Philippines, considered an example of a white elephant project. This particular megaproject had implications on the Philippines' fiscal standing and energy security, offering lessons for future projects of this size and significance.","PeriodicalId":277238,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Energy (Sustainability) eJournal","volume":"93 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114443720","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-06-12DOI: 10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.3428117.V1
Sitakanta Mishra
Undoubtedly, the Indian nuclear energy programme is at the cusp of an expansion but there are many policies or institutional disjoints that needs urgent attention.
毫无疑问，印度的核能计划正处于扩张的风口浪尖，但有许多政策或制度上的脱节需要紧急关注。
{"title":"India: From 'Nuclear Apartheid' to Nuclear Multi-Alignment","authors":"Sitakanta Mishra","doi":"10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.3428117.V1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.3428117.V1","url":null,"abstract":"Undoubtedly, the Indian nuclear energy programme is at the cusp of an expansion but there are many policies or institutional disjoints that needs urgent attention.","PeriodicalId":277238,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Energy (Sustainability) eJournal","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122975858","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The preferences expressed in voting on nuclear reactor licenses and the risk perceptions of citizens provide insights into social costs of nuclear power and decision making in energy policy. We show analytically that these costs consist of disutility caused by unnecessary anxiety - due to misperceived risks relating to existing reactors - and where licenses for new nuclear reactors are not granted, delayed or totally lost energy production. Empirical evidence is derived from Finnish surveys eliciting explicitly the importance of risk perceptions on preferences regarding nuclear power and its environmental and economic impacts. We show that the estimated marginal impact of a high perceived risk of nuclear accident is statistically significant and that such a perception considerably decreases the probability of a person supporting nuclear power. This result holds across a number of robustness checks including an instrumental variable estimation and a model validation by observed voting behavior of the members of Parliament. The public's risk perceptions translate into a significant social cost, and are likely to affect the revenues, costs and financing conditions in the nuclear power sector in the future.
{"title":"Quantifying the Social Costs of Nuclear Energy: Perceived Risk of Accident at Nuclear Power Plant","authors":"A. Huhtala, Piia Remes","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2724787","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2724787","url":null,"abstract":"The preferences expressed in voting on nuclear reactor licenses and the risk perceptions of citizens provide insights into social costs of nuclear power and decision making in energy policy. We show analytically that these costs consist of disutility caused by unnecessary anxiety - due to misperceived risks relating to existing reactors - and where licenses for new nuclear reactors are not granted, delayed or totally lost energy production. Empirical evidence is derived from Finnish surveys eliciting explicitly the importance of risk perceptions on preferences regarding nuclear power and its environmental and economic impacts. We show that the estimated marginal impact of a high perceived risk of nuclear accident is statistically significant and that such a perception considerably decreases the probability of a person supporting nuclear power. This result holds across a number of robustness checks including an instrumental variable estimation and a model validation by observed voting behavior of the members of Parliament. The public's risk perceptions translate into a significant social cost, and are likely to affect the revenues, costs and financing conditions in the nuclear power sector in the future.","PeriodicalId":277238,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Energy (Sustainability) eJournal","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122416597","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper focuses on arguably the single most striking contrast in contemporary major energy politics in Europe (and even the developed world as a whole): the starkly differing civil nuclear policies of Germany and the UK. Germany is seeking entirely to phase out nuclear power by 2022. Yet the UK advocates a ‘nuclear renaissance’, promoting the most ambitious new nuclear construction programme in Western Europe. Here, this paper poses a simple yet quite fundamental question: what are the particular divergent conditions most strongly implicated in the contrasting developments in these two countries. With nuclear playing such an iconic role in historical discussions over technological continuity and transformation, answering this may assist in wider understandings of sociotechnical incumbency and discontinuity in the burgeoning field of ‘sustainability transitions’. To this end, an ‘abductive’ approach is taken: deploying nine potentially relevant criteria for understanding the different directions pursued in Germany and the UK. Together constituted by 30 parameters spanning literatures related to socio-technical regimes in general as well as nuclear technology in particular, the criteria are divided into those that are ‘internal’ and ‘external’ to the ‘focal regime configuration’ of nuclear power and associated ‘challenger technologies’ like renewables. It is ‘internal’ criteria that are emphasised in conventional sociotechnical regime theory, with ‘external’ criteria relatively less well explored. Asking under each criterion whether attempted discontinuation of nuclear power would be more likely in Germany or the UK, a clear picture emerges. ‘Internal’ criteria suggest attempted nuclear discontinuation should be more likely in the UK than in Germany – the reverse of what is occurring. ‘External’ criteria are more aligned with observed dynamics – especially those relating to military nuclear commitments and broader ‘qualities of democracy’. Despite many differences of framing concerning exactly what constitutes ‘democracy’, a rich political science literature on this point is unanimous in characterising Germany more positively than the UK. Although based only on a single case, a potentially important question is nonetheless raised as to whether sociotechnical regime theory might usefully give greater attention to the general importance of various aspects of democracy in constituting conditions for significant technological discontinuities and transformations. If so, the policy implications are significant. A number of important areas are identified for future research, including the roles of diverse understandings and specific aspects of democracy and the particular relevance of military nuclear commitments – whose under-discussion in civil nuclear policy literatures raises its own questions of democratic accountability.
{"title":"Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories in Germany and the UK: From 'Regimes' to 'Democracies' in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities","authors":"P. Johnstone, A. Stirling","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2744549","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2744549","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on arguably the single most striking contrast in contemporary major energy politics in Europe (and even the developed world as a whole): the starkly differing civil nuclear policies of Germany and the UK. Germany is seeking entirely to phase out nuclear power by 2022. Yet the UK advocates a ‘nuclear renaissance’, promoting the most ambitious new nuclear construction programme in Western Europe. Here, this paper poses a simple yet quite fundamental question: what are the particular divergent conditions most strongly implicated in the contrasting developments in these two countries. With nuclear playing such an iconic role in historical discussions over technological continuity and transformation, answering this may assist in wider understandings of sociotechnical incumbency and discontinuity in the burgeoning field of ‘sustainability transitions’. To this end, an ‘abductive’ approach is taken: deploying nine potentially relevant criteria for understanding the different directions pursued in Germany and the UK. Together constituted by 30 parameters spanning literatures related to socio-technical regimes in general as well as nuclear technology in particular, the criteria are divided into those that are ‘internal’ and ‘external’ to the ‘focal regime configuration’ of nuclear power and associated ‘challenger technologies’ like renewables. It is ‘internal’ criteria that are emphasised in conventional sociotechnical regime theory, with ‘external’ criteria relatively less well explored. Asking under each criterion whether attempted discontinuation of nuclear power would be more likely in Germany or the UK, a clear picture emerges. ‘Internal’ criteria suggest attempted nuclear discontinuation should be more likely in the UK than in Germany – the reverse of what is occurring. ‘External’ criteria are more aligned with observed dynamics – especially those relating to military nuclear commitments and broader ‘qualities of democracy’. Despite many differences of framing concerning exactly what constitutes ‘democracy’, a rich political science literature on this point is unanimous in characterising Germany more positively than the UK. Although based only on a single case, a potentially important question is nonetheless raised as to whether sociotechnical regime theory might usefully give greater attention to the general importance of various aspects of democracy in constituting conditions for significant technological discontinuities and transformations. If so, the policy implications are significant. A number of important areas are identified for future research, including the roles of diverse understandings and specific aspects of democracy and the particular relevance of military nuclear commitments – whose under-discussion in civil nuclear policy literatures raises its own questions of democratic accountability.","PeriodicalId":277238,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Energy (Sustainability) eJournal","volume":"44 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132284141","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nuclear reactors entail massive non-transferrable site-specific investments. The resulting appropriable quasi-rents offer the mob the ideal target. In exchange for large fees, it can either promise to "protect" the utility (and silence the reactor's local opponents) or "extort" from it (and desist from inciting local opponents). Using municipality-level (1742 cities, towns, villages) and prefecture-level (47) Japanese panel data covering the years from 1980 to 2010, I find exactly this phenomenon: when a utility announces plans to build a reactor, the level of extortion climbs. Reactors have broad-ranging effects on social capital as well. In general, the perceived health costs to nuclear power are highest for young families. As a result, if a utility announces plans for a new reactor, these families disappear. Yet these are the men and women who invest most heavily in the social capital that keeps communities intact. When they disappear, reliance on government subsidies increases, and divorce rates rise. Firms stay away, and unemployment climbs.
{"title":"Nuclear Power and the Mob: Extortion and Social Capital in Japan","authors":"J. Ramseyer","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2587276","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2587276","url":null,"abstract":"Nuclear reactors entail massive non-transferrable site-specific investments. The resulting appropriable quasi-rents offer the mob the ideal target. In exchange for large fees, it can either promise to \"protect\" the utility (and silence the reactor's local opponents) or \"extort\" from it (and desist from inciting local opponents). Using municipality-level (1742 cities, towns, villages) and prefecture-level (47) Japanese panel data covering the years from 1980 to 2010, I find exactly this phenomenon: when a utility announces plans to build a reactor, the level of extortion climbs. Reactors have broad-ranging effects on social capital as well. In general, the perceived health costs to nuclear power are highest for young families. As a result, if a utility announces plans for a new reactor, these families disappear. Yet these are the men and women who invest most heavily in the social capital that keeps communities intact. When they disappear, reliance on government subsidies increases, and divorce rates rise. Firms stay away, and unemployment climbs.","PeriodicalId":277238,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Energy (Sustainability) eJournal","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129314917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Many countries are facing a dilemma over whether to extend the lives of their old reactors or make costly capital investments on Renewable Energy (RE). This paper explores the determinants of Willingness-To-Pay (WTP) for RE in France by means of a contingent valuation question that was included in a large web survey organized by the OECD. The main contribution of our paper is to test whether people living close to a reactor are sensitive to the age of the reactor. We find that the age of the reactor has a positive effect on WTP for RE.
{"title":"Determinants of Willingness-to-Pay for Renewable Energy: Does the Age of Nuclear Power Plant Reactors Matter?","authors":"Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu, H. Donfouet, B. Kriström","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2573663","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2573663","url":null,"abstract":"Many countries are facing a dilemma over whether to extend the lives of their old reactors or make costly capital investments on Renewable Energy (RE). This paper explores the determinants of Willingness-To-Pay (WTP) for RE in France by means of a contingent valuation question that was included in a large web survey organized by the OECD. The main contribution of our paper is to test whether people living close to a reactor are sensitive to the age of the reactor. We find that the age of the reactor has a positive effect on WTP for RE.","PeriodicalId":277238,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Energy (Sustainability) eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116666200","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：