Facebook LinkedIn Instagram Twitter
Shop
Search
Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

Search Results for All:
(Showing results 1 to 10 of 12)

Next 10 >>


Nuclear Power for Developing Countries: Attainable Within This Century?

Eli B. Roth

Year: 1982
Volume: Volume 3
Number: Number 2
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol3-No2-4
View Abstract

Abstract:
To use or not to use nuclear power for generating electricity has, in many parts of the world, become as much an emotional issue as an economic or technical one. Probably this is even more so in developed than in developing countries. The menacing worldwide energy misallocations and shortages have been the subject of a number of conferences, workshops, articles, studies, and - in the United States at least - of pronouncements by advocates ranging in style and substance from Jane Fonda to Barry Commoner to Edward Teller. It is not necessary to take sides here on the narrower question of whether any country in particular should try to use nuclear power for electricity or should try to avoid it. But except perhaps for antinuclear diehards, surely anyone concerned with the plight of developing countries, whose other energy resources are often wholly inadequate, must be interested in finding a satisfactory way to open up for those countries, or to keep open, the nuclear option.



Nuclear Power: Epilogue or Prologue?

Harold R. Denton

Year: 1983
Volume: Volume 4
Number: Number 1
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol4-No1-7
View Abstract

Abstract:
Judging by the continuing stream of nuclear power plant cancellations and downward revisions of nuclear energy forecasts, there is nothing riskier than predicting the future of commercial nuclear power. U.S. Nuclear Regulation Commissioner John Ahearne (1981) likens the recent events affecting the nuclear power industry in the United States to a Greek tragedy. Others, particularly other nations, take a different view about the future.



The Impact of Nuclear Power Plant Construction Activity on the Electric Utility Industry's Cost of Capital

Keith Berry and Samuel Loudenslager

Year: 1987
Volume: Volume 8
Number: Number 2
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol8-No2-5
View Abstract

Abstract:
All across the United States, electric utilities are now faced with the prospect of prematurely abandoning partially completed nuclear units. While there are many reasons for this dilemma,[ the ratemaking implications are profound. They force regulators to make the unsavory decision as to the appropriate allocation of the fixed costs sunk in the abandoned projects between ratepayers and stockholders.' If a significant number of these plants are abandoned, the dollars at stake (estimated to be as large as $66 billion') in any ratemaking division of accountability are staggering.



Comparative Energy Policy: The Economics of Nuclear Power in Japan and the United States

Peter Navarro

Year: 1988
Volume: Volume 9
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol9-No4-1
View Abstract

Abstract:
Over the next several decades, Japan and the United States will pursue dramatically different nuclear power strategies. In the United States, no new reactors have been ordered since 1978, and no U.S. utility is seriously planning any new construction. In contrast, Japanese utilities aggressively continue to plan, order, and build new nuclear plants, and the Japanese government and utility industry are committed to increasing Japan's nuclear reliance from 26 percent of total generation to 49 percent by the year 2010.



The Impact of Nuclear Power on the Systematic Risk and Market Value of Electric Utility Common Stock

Russell l. Fuller, George W. Hinman and Thomas C. Lowinger

Year: 1990
Volume: Volume 11
Number: Number 2
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol11-No2-7
View Abstract

Abstract:
The objective of this study is to determine whether investors perceive utilities with nuclear plants to be more risky than utilities with no nuclear facilities. Two basic analytical frameworks are used. One approach is to analyze investors' differential perception of the market-related systematic risk of nuclear utility stocks versus non-nuclear utility stocks. This is done by comparing the betas of nuclear versus non-nuclear utility stocks. The second approach is an econometric treatment of price to book value ratios, using cross-sectional data in the time period 1973 to 1987. For both approaches, the differences in the financial markets' perception of risk, related to the special events of TMI, Chernobyl and the WPPSS bond default; are analyzed. Based on the cross-sectional analysis of P/BV ratios in recent years, we estimate the financial markets valued nuclear power utilities at approximately 20% less than comparable non-nuclear utilities. We estimate that a 3% increase in the allowed rate of return for nuclear utilities (from 13.7% to 16.7% in 1988) would have been necessary to fully offset the discount associated with nuclear power.



Performance-Based Pricing for Nucleaer Power Plants

Yeon-Koo Che and Geoffrey Rothwell

Year: 1995
Volume: Volume16
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol16-No4-3
View Abstract

Abstract:
State public utility commissions in the United States have implemented incentive regulations to promote the operating efficiency of nuclear power plants. This paper surveys these incentive programs, focusing on the perfomance-based pricing approach. Our findings suggest that the performance-based price should be set between the electric utility's avoided cost and the marginal cost of generating electricity at the nuclear power plant.



Economic and Regulatory Factors Affecting the Maintenance of Nucleaer Power Plants

James G. Hewlett

Year: 1996
Volume: Volume17
Number: Number 4
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol17-No4-1
View Abstract

Abstract:
This paper examines the factors causing the escalation in the 1980s and' subsequent leveling off of nuclear power plant non-fuel Operating and Maintenance (O&M) costs. Over the period 1974-93, real (inflation-adjusted) non-fuel O&M costs escalated from about $23 to about $97 per kilowatt of installed capacity (kW). However, much of the escalation in costs occurred in the 1980s. Over the period 1975-87, real O&M costs escalated at an annual rate of about 11 percent. Since then, the annual growth rate in real O&M costs fell to about I percent. The research found that the escalation in O&M costs was primarily due to increased regulatory activity by the Nuclear Regulatory, Commission. More important, there is little evidence that the moderation in the growth in O&M costs was regulatory induced, but instead was due to changes in the economic incentives to improve plant performance.



Global Demand Growth of Power Generation, Input Choices and Supply Security

Kenichi Matsui

Year: 1998
Volume: Volume19
Number: Number 2
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol19-No2-5
View Abstract

Abstract:
The anticipated global demand growth for energy, and electricity in particular, is mapped for the coming 20 years. Five critical issues implied by this forecast are then spelled out: uncertainty, security of energy supply, energy financing, and the role of nuclear and renewable energy. Finally, based on a review of the energy revolutions which the human race has experienced during history, the paper sketches a long term energy future. It suggests the possibility of a new energy era in the 21st century with electricity and hydrogen as the main final energy and nuclear and renewables as the main primary energy, providing, coincidentally, a solution to the CO2 issues that loom so importantly at the end of the 20th century.



Coal or Nuclear in New Power Stations: The Political Economy of an Undesirable but Necessary Choice

Marian Radetzki

Year: 2000
Volume: Volume21
Number: Number 1
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol21-No1-7
View Abstract

Abstract:
Where gas and hydro are not available and power capacity needs to be expanded, the choice will be between coal and nuclear, for there are few viable alternative options. This paper analyzes the factors that will determine the choice. The internal costs of power generation using coal and nuclear show no clear edge for one or the other. A tilt in favor of nuclear emerges when the external costs, as assessed by experts in the field, are added to the internal ones. Laymen's evaluations of the external costs appear to be at least an order of magnitude higher than the expert assessments, however. Given their high level and strong influence on energy policy making, these evaluations will ultimately determine the choice. But since the laymen's views in this regard are formed in an unsystematic manner and are unstable over time, it is not possible to use economic analysis to determine what that choice will be.



Implementing Kyoto in Canada: The Role of Nuclear Power

Duane Bratt

Year: 2005
Volume: Volume 26
Number: Number 1
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol26-No1-5
View Abstract

Abstract:
On December 17, 2002, Canada ratified the Kyoto Protocol, committing itself to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 6 percent of 1990 levels. This paper argues that nuclear power must be an indispensable component of Canada�s Kyoto implementation strategy. This is because nuclear power, unlike other conventional energy sources of coal, natural gas, and oil, does not contribute to the emission of greenhouse gases. Nuclear power is frequently criticized for its environmental record (radiation, production of waste, reactor safety), but a comparison with the other major energy sources reveals the green advantages of nuclear power. One potential opportunity is using nuclear power in the Alberta oil sands which would contribute to Canada meeting its emission reduction targets while limiting the economic/political dislocation caused by implementing the Kyoto Protocol. The paper concludes by explaining why, despite the above advantages, the federal government has failed to properly utilize nuclear power in its strategy to meet its Kyoto commitments.




Next 10 >>

Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

 





function toggleAbstract(id) { alert(id); }