The Economic Assessment of the Cost of Nuclear Accidents

Abstract

This paper discusses the obstacles that hamper robust estimations of the cost of nuclear accidents. From an economic standpoint, risks of accidents are often quantified by the assessment of an expected cost; that is the product of a monetary loss by its probability of occurrence. In the case of nuclear power, this definition is inadapted. Estimating the probability of a nuclear disaster is subject to high uncertainties, and so is the assessment of its monetary equivalent. This paper first discusses the two specific challenges in estimating the probabilities of nuclear accidents: these accidents are too sparse to identify frequencies of occurrence with probabilities; they are also dreadful, which makes risk-aversion a complex phenomenon. This paper then focuses on the assessment of nuclear damage. The large discrepancies exhibited in the existing literature arise from three sources: the scope of the assessments, the conflict between the use of past data or PSA studies in the assessment of radiation damage, and the methods that are used to quantify non-monetary welfare losses.

Why sufficiency? An interdisciplinary perspective

“…PtX) substantial amounts of renewable energy needed for production, see issues above; potential externalisation of environmental issues (e.g. water use, infrastructure build-up) (Bracker, 2017;Skowron and Fünfgelt, 2021) restriction of import potential (all countries need to decarbonise in parallel) (Straatsma, 2021); high uncertainty of costs and capacity/market ramp up (Kleijn and Voet, 2010); maturity and timely availability of infrastructure and transport capacities (Block, 2021); economic dependence and negative effects on population with production for export / influence of international industrial companies (Skowron and Fünfgelt, 2021) nuclear power generation a risk of environmental contamination and unresolved residues issue (Ojovan et al, 2019;Wheatley et al, 2016;Kyne and Bolin, 2016;Harms et al, 2019) no permanent repository available so far; waste deposit acceptance; multiple risks: health, proliferation, costs for future generations, state insurance (no private insurance possible) (des comptes, 2012;Wealer et al, 2019;Balleisen et al, 2017;Bizet and Lévêque, 2017;D'Haeseleer, 2013;Whitton et al, 2015) (references include all aforementioned subarguments)…”