Nuclear new build in the United States 1990-2010: A three state analysis

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 80, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 876-892

  Heffron, Raphael J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Lessons learned; Nuclear energy policy; Nuclear new build; Public administration; State law; Technology

Indexed keywords

ELECTRICITY MARKET; IN-DEPTH STUDY; LESSONS LEARNED; NUCLEAR NEW BUILD; NUCLEAR SECTORS; RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES; STATE ANALYSIS; STATE LAWS;

ENERGY POLICY; MANAGEMENT; NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION; RESEARCH; TECHNOLOGY;

NUCLEAR ENERGY;

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY; ENERGY POLICY; NUCLEAR POWER; PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION; STATE ROLE;

FUKUSHIMA; HONSHU; JAPAN; PENNSYLVANIA; THREE MILE ISLAND; TOHOKU; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84877141066     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2012.10.023     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Applied Decision Analysis Inc. An Analysis of Power Plant Construction Leadtimes. EPRI-2880 1983, vol. 1. Electric Power Research Institute, Palto Alto, CA.
2. Arias A.D., van Beers C. Environmentally damaging government policies in the energy sector. Energy and Innovation: Structural Change and Policy Implications 2010, Purdue University Press, Indiana, US. M. van Geenhuizen, W.J. Nuttall, D.V. Gibson, E.M. Oftedal (Eds.).
3. Baker K., Stoker G. Metagovernance and the UK nuclear industry-a limiting case. Interactive Policy Making, Metagovernance and Democracy 2011, ECPR-Studies in European Political Science, Colchester, UK. J. Torfing, P. Triantafillou (Eds.).
4. Blumsack S. Measuring the benefits and costs of regional electric grid integration. Energy Law J. 2007, 28:147-184.
5. Bredimas A., Nuttall W.J. An international comparison of regulatory organizations and licensing procedures for new nuclear power plants. Energy Policy 2008, 36(4):1344-1354.
6. Cameron P.D. The revival of nuclear power: an analysis of the legal implications. J. Environ. Law 2007, 19(1):71-87.
7. Campbell J.L. Collapse of an Industry: Nuclear Power and the Contradictions of US Policy 1988, Cornell University Press, NY, US.
8. Cantor R., Hewlett J. The economics of nuclear power. Further evidence on learning, economies of scale, and regulatory effects. Resour. Energy 1988, 10:315-335.
9. Carley S. The era of state energy policy innovation: a review of policy instruments. Rev. Policy Res. 2011, 28(3):265-294.
10. Chu S. Secretary of the US Department of Energy. Statement on the February 4th 2010 FY 2011 Budget Hearing before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 2010, Available from: [Last accessed online August 2011 http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/ciprod/documents/2-4-10_Final_Testimony_(Chu).pdf].
11. Davies D. The Sizewell B nuclear inquiry: an analysis of public participation in decision-making about nuclear power. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 1984, 9(3):21-32.
12. Delmas M., Heiman B. Government credible commitment to the French and American nuclear power industries. J. Policy Anal. Manage. 2001, 20(3):433-456.
13. Dubin J.A., Rothwell G.S. Subsidy to Nuclear Power Through Price-Anderson Liability Limit. Contemporary Policy Issues 1990, VIII. July 1990.
14. EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2010 with Projections to 2035. US Nuclear Power Plants: Continued Life or Replacement After 60 2010, Available online: [Last Accessed December 2010: http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/aeo_2010analysispapers/nuclear_power.html].
15. Global Subsidies Initiative Relative subsidies to energy sources Online: Accessed May 1st-July 20th 2011: from. http://www.globalsubsidies.org/files/assets/relative_energy_subsidies.pdf.
16. Goodman M.R., Andes F.P. The politics of regulatory reform and the future direction of nuclear energy policy. Rev. Policy Res. 1985, 5(1):111-121.
17. Hecht G. The Radiance of France: Nuclear Power and National Identity After World War II 1998, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, United States.
18. Hecht G. The Radiance of France: Nuclear Power and National Identity After World War II 2009, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, United States. 2nd ed.
19. Heffron R.J. Romanian nuclear new build: progress amidst turbulence. Prog. Nucl. Energy 2012, 56:43-60.
20. Holt M. Nuclear Energy Policy. Congressional Research Service 2011, Available from: [Last Accessed online http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/ciprod/documents/2-4-10_Final_Testimony_(Chu).pdf].
21. IAEA-International Atomic Energy Agency Milestones in the Development of a National Infrastructure for Nuclear Power. No. NG-G-3.1 2007, IAEA Publishing, Vienna, Austria, [Online: last accessed September 2011: from http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1305_web.pdf].
22. IAEA Competitiveness of nuclear energy: IAEA's perspective and study results for Europe. Report by Sokolov, Y.A. Deputy Director General, IAEA, November 2008 2008, IAEA Publishing, Vienna, Austria.
23. IAEA Online: last accessed September 2011: from. http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC54/GC54InfDocuments/English/gc54inf-3-att6_en.pdf.
24. IEA, OPEC, OECD, World Bank Joint Report Analysis of the scope of energy subsidies and suggestions for the G-20 initiative Online: last accessed May 1st-July 20th 2011: from. http://www.iea.org/weo/docs/G20_Subsidy_Joint_Report.pdf.
25. Jasper J.M. Nuclear Politics: Energy and the State in the United States, Sweden, and France 1990, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, USA.
26. Joskow P.L., Baughman M.L. The future of the U.S. nuclear energy industry. Bell J. Econ. 1976, 7(1):3-32.
27. Joskow P.L. Markets for power in the United States: an interim assessment. Working Paper 05-20 September 2005 2005, Joint Center AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, [Accessed online: last accessed August 2010: http://ssrn.com/abstract=845785 or www.aei-brookings.org].
28. Kasperson R.E., Berk G., Pijawka D., Sharaf A.B., Wood J. Public opposition to nuclear energy: retrospect and prospect. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 1980, 5(31):11-23.
29. Komanoff C. Power Plant Cost Escalation 1981, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
30. Lester R. Rethinking nuclear power. Sci. Am. 1986, 254:31-39. (March).
31. Lund P. Market penetration rates of new energy technologies. Energy Policy 2006, 34(17):3317-3326.
32. Massachusetts Institute of Technology The future of nuclear power: an interdisciplinary study Last Accessed December 2010: Available at. http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/.
33. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Update of the MIT 2003 future of nuclear power: an interdisciplinary study Last Accessed December 2010: Available at. http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/.
34. Matisoff D.C. The adoption of state climate change policies and renewable portfolio standards: regional diffusion or internal determinants. Rev. Policy Res. 2008, 25(6):527-546.
35. Miles M.B., Huberman A.M. Qualitative Data Analysis 1994, Sage Publications, London, UK. 2nd ed.
36. Mooz W.E. Cost Analysis of Light Water Reactor Power Plants. R-2304-DOE 1978, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.
37. Mooz W.E. A Second Cost Analysis of Light Water Reactor Power Plants. R-1899-DOE 1979, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.
38. Morone J.G., Woodhouse E.J. The Demise of Nuclear Energy? Lessons for Democratic Control of Technology 1989, Yale University Press, CT, US.
39. Moss T., Sills D. The Three Mile Island Nuclear Accident 1981, New York Academy of Sciences, New York, US.
40. Mullin M., Daley D.M. Working with the state: exploring interagency collaboration within a Federalist system. J. Public Adm. Res. 2009, 20:757-778.
41. Navarro P. Comparative energy policy: the economics of nuclear power in Japan and the U.S. Energy J. 1988, 9(4):1-16.
42. NEA Chernobyl Accident 1995, OECD NEA Publishing, Paris, France, [Also online: Accessed Jan 10th-Jan 25th 2010: from http://www.nea.fr/rp/chernobyl/chernobyl-1995.pdf].
43. New York Times Chernobyl Officials are sentenced to labor camp. July 30th, 1987 Online: Accessed February 1st-February 15th 2009: from. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/30/world/chernobyl-officials-are-sentenced-to-labor-camp.html?pagewanted=1.
44. Nohrstedt D. External shocks and policy change: Three Mile Island and Swedish nuclear energy policy. J. Eur. Public Policy 2005, 12(6):1041-1059.
45. Nohrstedt D. The politics of crisis policy-making: Chernobyl and Swedish nuclear energy policy. Policy Stud. J. 2008, 36(2):257-278.
46. Nohrstedt D. Do advocacy coalitions matter? Crisis and change in Swedish nuclear energy policy. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 2009, 20:309-333.
47. NRC (U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission) Reactor license renewal overview Available online: Last accessed August 2011. http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/overview.html.
48. NRC Nuclear reactor license renewal Available from website for this information and where updates to these statistics will be: Last Accessed August 2011:. http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal.html.
49. Nuttall W.J. Nuclear energy in the enlarged European Union. Security of Energy Supply in Europe: Natural Gas, Nuclear and Hydrogen 2010, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK. F. Leveque, J. Glachant, J. Barquin, C. Von Hirschhauen, F. Holz, W. Nuttall (Eds.).
50. Paik S., Schriver W. The effect of increased regulation on capital costs and manual labor requirements of nuclear power. Eng. Econ. 1979, 26(3):223-244.
51. Parenteau P.A. Regulation of nuclear power plants: a constitutional dilemma for the states. Environ. Law 1976, 6(675):1975-1976.
52. Perin C. Shouldering risks. The Culture of Control in the Nuclear Power Industry 2005, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, US.
53. Pope D. Nuclear Implosions: The Rise and Fall of the Washington Public Power Supply System 2008, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
54. Proops J. The (non-) economics of the nuclear fuel cycle: an historical and discourse analysis. Ecol. Econ. 2001, 39:13-19.
55. Rabe B.G. Environmental policy and the bush era: the collision between the administrative presidency and state experimentation. Publicus: J. Federal. 2007, 37(3):413-431.
56. Rabe B.G. States on steroids: the intergovernmental odyssey of American climate policy. Rev. Policy Res. 2008, 25(2):105-128.
57. Rabe B.G. Statehouse and Greenhouse: The Emerging Politics of American Climate Change Policy 2004, Brookings Institute, Washington DC.
58. Rabe B.G. Race to the Top: The Expanding Role of US State Renewable Portfolio Standards 2006, Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, VA.
59. Robbins J. Lessons from Chernobyl: the event, the aftermath fallout: radioactive, political, social. Thyroid 1997, 7(2):189-192.
60. Rossin A.D., Rieck T.A. Economics of nuclear power. Science 1978, 201(4356):582-589.
61. Slocum T. The failure of electricity deregulation: history, status, and needed reforms. Public Citizen's Energy Program 2008, Available online: [last accessed August 2010 from www.citizen.org].
62. Sovacool B.K. The costs of failure: a preliminary assessment of major accidents, 1907-2007. Energy Policy 2008, 36(5).
63. Stoler P. Decline and Fall: The Ailing Nuclear Power Industry 1985, Dodd, Mead and Company, NY, US.
64. Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts Energy Report 2008 Available online: Last accessed August 2011. http://www.window.state.tx.us/specialrpt/energy/.
65. Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts 2010 Annual Statement Available online: Last accessed August 2011. http://www.window.state.tx.us/.
66. Tweena M. Nuclear energy: rise, fall and resurrection. Cicero Working Paper 2006:01 2006, Norway. [Online: Accessed August 05th-August 25th 2009: http://www.cicero.uio.no/media/4101.pdf].
67. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) US EPA Expert Elicitation Task Force White Paper, 2011 2011, Available from: [http://www.epa.gov/stpc/pdfs/ee-white-paper-final.pdf. Previous 2009 draft version available from http://www.epa.gov/osa/pdfs/elicitation/Expert_Elicitation_White_Paper-January_06_2009.pdf].
68. World Nuclear Association World nuclear power reactors Online: Accessed September 2011: from. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/reactors.html.
69. Wynne B. Rationality and Ritual: The Windscale Inquiry and Nuclear Decisions in Britain. Chalfont St. Giles 1982, British Society for the History of Science, UK.
70. Zimmerman M.B. Learning effects and the commercialization of new energy technologies: the case of nuclear power. Bell J. Econ. 1982, 13(2):297-310.