Comments on "The Grand Objectives" by Thomas E. Graedel: The Role of Values in Environmental Decision Making

Journal of Industrial Ecology

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 23-29

  Craig, Paul P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Environmental objectives; Environmental policy; Environmental values; Life cycle assessment; Nuclear policy; Prioritization

Indexed keywords

EID: 0006386073     PISSN: 10881980     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/jiec.1998.2.1.23     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Albright, D., F. Berkhout, and W. William. 1993. World inventory of plutonium and highly enriched uranium 1992. Oxford: Oxford University Press for SIPRI.
2. Bateson, G. 1972. Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing.
3. Bell, W. 1994. Why should we care about future generations? In Why generations now.' Kyoto: Institute for the Integrated Study of Future Generations.
4. Berkhout, F. 1994. Nuclear power: An industrial ecology that failed. In Industrial ecology and global change, edited by R. Socolow et al., pp. 319-330. New York: Cambridge University Press.
5. Carter, L. 1987. Nuclear imperatives and the public trust. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
6. Clark, M. 1989. Ariadne's thread: The search for new modes of thinking. New York: St. Martin's.
7. Clift, R., K. Burningham, and R. Lofstedt. 1995. Environmental perspectives and environmental assessment. In Values and the environment: A social science perspective, edited by Y. Guerrier et al. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
8. Craig, P. P., H. Glasser, and W. Kempton. 1993. Ethics and values in environmental policy: The said and the UNCED. Environmental Values 2: 137-158.
9. Dracker, R. and P. De Laquil III. 1996. Progress commercializing solar-electric power systems. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 21: 371-402.
10. Flynn, J. and P. Slovic. 1995. Yucca Mountain: A crisis for policy: Prospects for America's high-level nuclear waste program. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 20: 88-118.
11. Giegrich, J. and S. Schmitz. 1995. Valuation as a step in impact assessment: Methods and case study. In Environmental life-cycle assessment, edited by M. Curran. New York: McCraw-Hill.
12. Glasser, H. 1995. Towards a descriptive, participatory theory of environmental policy analysis and project evaluation. Ph.D. dissertation in civil and environmental engineering, University of California, Davis.
13. Graedel, T. E. 1997. The grand objectives: A framework for prioritized grouping of environmental concerns in life-cycle assessment. Journal of Industrial Ecology 1(2): 51-64.
14. Hohenemser, C. 1983. Methods for analyzing and comparing technological hazards: Definitions and factor structures. Clark University Hazard Assessment Group, Center for Technology, Environment and Development. Report no. 3.
15. Holdren, J. 1992. Radioactive waste management in the United States: Evolving policy prospects and dilemmas. Annual Review of Energy 17: 235-259.
16. Holdren, J. 1996. Handout for the energy and resources group (ERG) seminar on his departure for Harvard. Berkeley. May.
17. INFCE (International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation). 1980. Report of the INFCE Wording Group. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
18. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 1996. Climate change 1995: The science of climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Jevons, W. S. 1865. The coal crisis: An inquiry concerning the progress of the nation, and the probable exhaustion of our coal-mines. Reprinted 1965. New York; Augustus M. Kelley.
20. Kempton, W. and P. Craig. 1993. European thinking on global climate change. Environment 35(3): 16.
21. Kempton, W., J. S. Boster, and J. A. Hartley. 1995a. Environmental values in American culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Kempton, W., P. Craig, and C. Kuennen. 1995b. European policy makers' views of how science enters the political process. Energy and Environment 6(2): 87-105.
23. Krishnan, R., J. M. Harris, and N. R. Goodman, eds. 1995. A survey of ecological economics. Covelo, CA: Island Press.
24. Lewis, H. W. 1990. Technological risk. New York: W. W. Norton.
25. Marietta, D. E. Jr. 1995. For the people and the planet: Holism and humanism in environmental ethics, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
26. NAS (National Academy of Sciences). 1992. Policy implications of greenhouse warming: Mitigation, adaptation, and the science base. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
27. NAS. 1995a. Technical basis for Yucca Mountain standards. Board on Radioactive Waste Management. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences Press.
28. NAS. 1995b. Management and disposition of excess weapons plutonium: Reactor-related options. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences Press.
29. NAS. 1996. Nuclear wastes: Technologies for separations and transmutation. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences Press.
30. NWTRB (Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board). 1994, 1995, 1996. Reports to the U.S. Congress and the secretary of energy. Washington, DC: Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, http://www.nwtrh.gov.
31. NWTRB. 1997. Testimony on H.R. 1270 of Jared L. Cohon, chairman of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, before the Subcommittee on Energy and Power, Committee on Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives. Washington, DC. 29 April 1997.
32. Partridge, E. 1981. Responsibilities to future generations. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
33. Robinson, John. 1982. Apples and horned toads: On the framework-determined nature of the energy debate. Policy Sciences 15: 23-45.
34. Shrader-Frechette, K. S. 1991. Risk and rationality: Philosophical foundations for populist reforms. Berkeley: University of California Press.
35. Slovic, P. 1986. Informing and educating the public about risk. Risk Analysis 6(4): 403-415.
36. Slovic, P. 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236: 280-285.
37. Slovic, P. 1993. Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis 13(6): 675-681.
38. Teller, E. 1979. Energy from heaven and earth. New York: W. H. Freeman.
39. U.S. DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1978. Energy demands: 1972 to 2000. Report HCP/R4024-01. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Research.
40. U.S. DOE. 1995. Total systems performance assessment - 1995: An evaluation of the potential Yucca Mountain repository. Report B00000000-01717-2200-00136, rev 1. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.
41. Waltar, A. E. and A. B. Reynolds. 1981. Fast breeder reactors. New York: Pergamon Press.
42. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). 1987. Our common future (The Bruntland Report). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43. Weingart, J. M. 1978. The helios strategy: An heretical view of the potential role of solar energy in the future of a small planet. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 12: 273-315.