An Expert Elicitation of the Proliferation Resistance of Using Small Modular Reactors (SMR) for the Expansion of Civilian Nuclear Systems

Siegel, Jonas; Gilmore, Elisabeth A.; Gallagher, Nancy; Fetter, Steve

doi:10.1111/risa.12861

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This sometimes leads to endorsements for new reactor designs that offer to produce spent fuel so toxic that it would be impossible to process in any organized fashion; however, this "proliferation resistant" idea rests upon the assumption that exclusively state actors would be involved, and promptly runs into issues when non-state actors who expect sacrifice as part of their membership are considered. For an assessment of the proliferation resistance of small modular reactors (SMRs) see Siegel et al (2018). 20.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A new “nuclear normalcy”?

Schmid

2018

Journal of International Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article focuses on a part of the “nuclear condition” that is often overlooked in philosophical discussions: that of materiality. Connecting the spheres of nuclear weapons (and associated security threats), and of nuclear power generation (and associated safety concerns), are the materials that bombs and electricity can be made of, and the machines that produce either enriched uranium or plutonium. We now have evidence of just how fragile the machines and devices were (and are) that sustained the nuclear age, but also how tenuous and artificial the boundary is that we assume between “peaceful” and “military” purposes. And yet, each new “nuclear deal” affirms this boundary, and the possibility of its existence. While the community of scholars and policymakers who prioritize nuclear security strive to label as many steps of the process as “special,” and therefore subject to inspection, accounting, and international control, multinational power companies and national nuclear industries promote “technical fixes” for lingering safety concerns, and advance the opposite strategy: to “normalize” many processes to the point of including severe accident response into the industry’s business-as-usual. The article argues that different kinds of “nuclearities” have increasingly become accepted as “normal”: on one hand, international diplomacy that foregrounds legal and regulatory strategies to nip potential nuclear weapons programs in the bud, and on the other, national nuclear power programs growing their fleets and attempting to expand their market reach. By accepting the divide between the “security community” and the “safety community” as the new “nuclear normalcy,” the shared nuclear materiality threatens to slip out of view, or at the very least, out of focus.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A new “nuclear normalcy”?

Schmid

2018

Journal of International Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There have been more than 40 concepts of SMRs being developed at various stages from conceptual design to prototype construction around the world. A report published by IAEA summarized that the SMRs based on light water reactor were recognized as the most mature technology with lowest risk for the moment (Hong and Brook, 2018;Siegel et al, 2018).…”

Section: Development Of Smrsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspective on Site Selection of Small Modular Reactors

Zhang¹,

Guo²,

Liu³

et al. 2020

J ENVIRON INFORM LET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As an emerging means of energy supply, small modular reactors (SMRs) are considered as a promising option for relieving environmental pressure caused by increasing fossil fuel consumption. Since SMRs are at an early stage of development, in-depth analysis on the necessity and feasibility of their deployment is essential. The site selection of SMRs, which is a multifaceted process and should be guided by a clearly established set of criteria, is a crucial step. To propose comprehensive recommendations for SMR site selection, a review is provided in this study. The review involves development process, technical characteristics and potential applications of SMRs, research status of SMR site selection, and criteria for site selection of nuclear power plants (NPPs). Different considerations of siting criteria between SMRs and NPPs are analyzed. Based on the review and analyses, perspectives and targeted suggestions on SMR site selection are provided.

show abstract

“…As such, CCS at a large scale is a good candidate for a structured expert elicitation, an approach that has been shown to be of value where there is limited information and experience, large uncertainties and risks are theoretically very low (Aspinall, 2010). Previously, structured expert elicitation has been applied to wide ranging issues of collective importance (Colson and Cooke, 2017;Cooke and Goossens, 2008), including water pollution, the aerospace sector, volcanoes; nuclear applications (Siegel et al, 2018); health risk related to chronic wasting disease (Oraby et al, 2016); prion disease (Tyshenko et al, 2012;Tyshenko et al, 2011) and global foodborne disease burden (Hald et al, 2016). Gerstenberger and Christophersen (2016) combined a structured expert elicitation with Bayesian Belief Networks analysis in a research project to demonstrate the use of these methods in assessing the probability that the CO 2 CRC Otway Stage 2C experiment (Australia) would meet its goals of detecting and stabilising a CO 2 plume using a 4D seismic monitoring survey.…”

Section: Structured Expert Elicitationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uncertainty in risk issues for carbon capture and geological storage: findings from a structured expert elicitation

Larkin

Gracie

Shafiei

et al. 2019

IJRAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon capture and geological storage (CCS) is identified within the portfolio of mitigation options for climate change. Each value chain activity of large scale integrated projects (capture, transport, injection and storage) includes uncertainties and hence potential risks with respect to both environmental and human health protection. With a focus on injection and storage, a structured elicitation of international experts provides quantified judgements and uncertainties and understanding of relative risk of CCS activities. In the 0-50 year, 51-499 year and >500 year time periods, the expert panel suggested an almost equal likelihood of storage leakage occurring, with a marked decrease from minor to major to catastrophic leakage (approximately >1 in 30; 1 in 103; 1 in 104, respectively); for the same time periods, the judgement of likelihood for major leakage that would result in measurable negative effects on human health or the environment was the same (approximately 1 in 103). Insights could stimulate further scientific deliberations about the reliable and effective deployment of this complex and interdisciplinary technological process. A companion paper discusses complementary findings for issues in CCS risk management.

show abstract

An Expert Elicitation of the Proliferation Resistance of Using Small Modular Reactors (SMR) for the Expansion of Civilian Nuclear Systems

Cited by 10 publications

References 18 publications

A new “nuclear normalcy”?

A new “nuclear normalcy”?

Perspective on Site Selection of Small Modular Reactors

Uncertainty in risk issues for carbon capture and geological storage: findings from a structured expert elicitation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About