Nuclear Power Reactors: A Study in Technological Lock-in

Abstract

ROBIN COWANRecent theory has predicted that if competing technologies operate under dynamic increasing returns, one, possibly inferior, technology will dominate the market. The history of nuclear power technology is used to illustrate these results. Light water is considered inferior to other technologies, yet it dominates the market for power reactors. This is largely due to the early adoption and heavy development by the U.S. Navy of light water for submarine propulsion. When a market for civilian power emerged, light water had a large head start, and by the time other technologies were ready to enter the market, light water was entrenched.

Is one path enough? Multiple paths and path interaction as an extension of path dependency theory

“…Although the development of a path is often described as a process of convergence, in which one technology is selected among a larger number of alternatives (cf. David, 1985;Arthur, 1988;Cowan, 1990;Cowan and Gunby, 1996), the emergence of a path is clearly related to the point in time when a selection has been made. Paths are, thus, seen as an outcome of technological competition, in which one of the initially available alternatives wins and becomes increasingly irreversible over time (David, 1985).…”

Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change

“…While the empirical literature is quite thin, some studies have explored the issue of increasing returns and technology lock-in for competing technologies within the energy and environment arenas, including analysis of renewable energy and fossil fuels (Cowan and Kline, 1996), the internal combustion engine and alternatively fueled vehicles (Cowan and Hulten, 1996), pesticides and integrated pest management (Cowan and Gunby, 1996), technologies for electricity generation (Islas, 1997), nuclear power reactor designs (Cowan, 1990), and the transition from hydrocarbon-based fuels (Kemp, 1997).…”

Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories in Germany and the UK: From 'Regimes' to 'Democracies' in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities

“…So, with respect more specifically to the present case, it is often far more ambiguous than is typically conceded which instances of real-world phenomena relate to which particular analytical categories (like 'levels' or 'phases') and what the implications might be. For instance, what exactly is a 'regime' in this context (Shove, 2012): a particular nuclear design complex (Cowan, 1990); nuclear power as a whole (Berkhout, 1997); the national electricity generating system in which these are embedded (Strunz, 2014); wider international infrastructures and supply chains associated with electricity supply in general (Malerba, 2002) or the entire technological and institutional environment of energy provision within which it is seamlessly entangled (Hughes, 1989). Likewise, the most formative processes and relations behind incumbency or discontinuity may in principle be more due to 'horizontal' relations linking continguous or overlapping regimes -within a 'level' rather than between them.…”

“…These include 'autonomy' (Winner, 1999) , 'lock in' (Cowan, 1990), 'path dependency' (Arthur, 1994), 'entrapment' (Walker, 2000), and 'obduracy' in 'socio-technical imaginaries' (Jasanoff & Kim, 2009). More recently, notions of 'incumbent strategies' have been developed, adopting political-economic perspectives to analyse the 'resistance' of incumbents to the diffusion of alternative technologies (Geels, 2014;Smink et al, 2013).…”

“…Such studies are generally not concerned with close inspection of the regime dynamics around the nuclear industries of the UK and Germany in their own right (Bailey, 2007;Kleiner, 2008;Klessmann, Nabe, & Burges, 2008;Lipp, 2007;Lockwood, 2014a;Lovinfosse, 2008;Mitchell, Bauknecht, & Connor, 2006). Yet in previous literatures, nuclear technology has been highlighted as a paradigmatic example of processes driving regime stability -providing canonical examples of constitutive processes of 'autonomy' (Winner 1979), 'lock in' (Cowan, 1990) and 'entrapment' (Walker, 2000). Taking account of this, other literatures have recognised the role played by nuclear power as a dominant force in shaping wider energy regimes (Elliott, 2006).…”