Nuclear Power and Justice between Generations

201 Pages·2010·1.57 MB·English

When we produce nuclear power we are depleting a non-renewable resource N
u
(uranium) that will eventually not be available to future generations. Furthermore c
le
the ensuing nuclear waste needs to be isolated from the biosphere for long periods a
r

of time to come. This gives rise to the problem of justice to posterity or inter- P
o
generational justice. Different production methods or nuclear fuel cycles address w
e
these issues differently which is why we first need to carefully scrutinize all the r
a
possibilities. This book presents just such an analysis by investigating how the nd

various fuel cycles employed will affect the interests of future generations. Ju
s
It combines philosophical discussions on justice to future generations with the tic
technological realities of nuclear power production: what is our moral obligation e
b
to posterity and to what extent can existing technologies help us to meet such e
t
w
obligations? Which scientifically feasible future technologies have the potential to e
e
help us to comply with these obligations better? The answers to these questions n

can help decision-makers to reflect on the desirability of future fuel cycles, which G
e
n
again will support Research and Development paths for the final industrialization e
r
of a certain desirable technology. a
t
io
n
s
B
e Nuclear Power and Justice
h
n
a
m
‘Wonder en is
T
a between Generations
e
b
i
gheen wonder’
A Moral Analysis of Fuel Cycles
Behnam Taebi
S
im
o
n
S
te
v
in
S
e
rie
s
in
th
e
E
th
ic
s
o
f Te
c
h
n Simon Stevin Series in the Ethics of Technology
o
lo
g
y
Nuclear Power and Justice
between Generations

Nuclear Power and Justice
between Generations
A Moral Analysis of Fuel Cycles
Proefschrift
ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor
aan de Technische Universiteit Delft,
op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. ir. K.C.A.M. Luyben
voorzitter van het College voor Promoties,
in het openbaar te verdedigen op dinsdag 29 juni 2010 om 12:00 uur
door Behnam TAEBI
materiaalkundig ingenieur
geboren te Teheran, Iran
Dit proefschrift is goedgekeurd door de promotor:
Prof. dr. M. J. van den Hoven
Copromotor:
Dr. ir. I. R. van de Poel
Samenstelling promotiecommissie
Rector Magnificus, voorzitter Technische Universiteit Delft
Prof. dr. M. J. van den Hoven, Technische Universiteit Delft, promotor
Dr. ir. I. R. van de Poel, Technische Universiteit Delft, copromotor
Prof. dr. ir. T.H.J.J. van der Hagen, Technische Universiteit Delft
Prof. A.C. Kadak, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Prof. dr. ir. A.W.M. Meijers, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
Prof. dr. F.G.H. Berkhout, Vrije Universiteit
Dr. S. M. Gardiner, University of Washington
Dr. ir. J.L. Kloosterman heeft als begeleider in belangrijke mate aan de
totstandkoming van het proefschrift bijgedragen.
Research for this thesis was made possible by the 3 TU Centre for Ethics and
Technology
© Behnam Taebi, 2010
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without prior permission in writing
of the publisher.
editors: Philip Brey, Peter Kroes and Anthonie Meijers
ISBN: 978-90-386-2274-3
ISSN: 1574-941X
Copies of this publication may be ordered from the 3TU.Centre for Ethics and
Technology, [email protected].
for more information, see http://www.ethcisandtechnology.eu.
Contents
List of papers vii
Acknowledgments ix
Glossary xi
1 Introduction 1
1.1. Objectives and research questions 6
1.2. What is intergenerational justice? Temporal duties 8
1.3. Challenges to temporal justice 18
1.4. Overview of the dissertation 26
2 A Challenge to Geological Disposal 33
2.1. Introduction 34
2.2. Nuclear Waste Management: fuel cycles, storage and disposal 35
2.3. Intergenerational equity and nuclear waste management 39
2.4. Nuclear Waste Management; “a desire for equity” 43
2.5. Moral legitimacy of distinguishing between future generations 47
2.6. Intergenerational arguments revisited: a challenge to geological disposal 53
2.7. Conclusions 58
3 To Recycle or Not to Recycle? 61
3.1. Introduction 61
3.2. Future rights, present obligations: intergenerational justice 64
3.3. Nuclear fuel cycles: open and close 66
3.4. Risks and associated values 71
3.5. Value conflicts in fuel cycles and future generations 77
3.6. Underlying assumptions and possible counter-arguments 80
3.7. Conclusions 86
4 Intergenerational Considerations Affecting the Future of Nuclear Power 89
4.1. Introduction 90
4.2. Sustainability and intergenerational Equity 91
4.3. Moral standing of sustainability: values at stake 96
4.4. Intergenerational assessment of fuel cycles 101
4.5. Comparing fuel cycles 108
4.6. Conclusion 114
v
Appendix 1: Burden-benefit charts 117
Appendix 2: Scorecard and explanation of impacts and rankings 121
5 The Morally Desirable Option for Nuclear Power Production 125
5.1. Nuclear power production and temporal duties 127
5.2. Moral pluralism and temporal prima facie duties 128
5.3. The moral stringency of temporal duties: internal conflict 131
5.4. Nuclear energy: a review of the technology and its future 133
5.5. Intergenerational conflicts and three challenges 136
5.6. Conclusions 143
6 Conclusions 145
6.1. The moral dilemmas and technological choices underlying fuel cycles 145
6.2. The morally desirable fuel cycle 148
6.3. Assumption and possible objections 149
6.4. Moral norms and policy implications 151
6.5. The general desirability and future research 153
Bibliography 155
Summary 177
Samenvatting 181
About the author 185
vi
List of papers
Chapter 2
Taebi, B. 'A Challenge to Geological Disposal: How Partitioning and
Transmutation Changes the Outlook on Intergenerational Equity in Nuclear
Waste Management policy', submitted manuscript.
Chapter 3
Taebi, B., and Kloosterman, J. L. (2008) 'To Recycle or Not to Recycle? An
Intergenerational Approach to Nuclear Fuel Cycles', in: Science and Engineering
Ethics 14 (2): 177-200.
Chapter 4
Taebi, B., and Kadak, A.C. (Forthcoming) 'Intergenerational Considerations
Affecting the Future of Nuclear Power; Equity as a Framework for Assessing
Fuel Cycles', in: Risk Analysis.
Chapter 5
Taebi, B. 'The Morally Desirable Option for Nuclear Power Production',
submitted manuscript.
The co-authored papers are written in conjunction with nuclear scientists at the
Reactor Institute Delft (Delft University of Technology) and the Department of
Nuclear Science and Engineering (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). The
philosophical analysis in these papers may be ascribed to the candidate. Co-
authors have given their permission for use of the papers in this dissertation.
vii

Acknowledgments
First of all I would like to thank the 3 TU Centre for Ethics and Technology for
funding this research project. During the carrying out of this research I have felt
deeply indebted to my supervising professor Jeroen van den Hoven and to my
personal tutor Ibo van de Poel for the support and enthusiasm they have given,
but above all else, for their unfailing faith in me and my research project. To Ibo,
who was also my day-to-day supervisor, I am very grateful for his many useful
and constructive comments on my dissertation chapters; this work could not
have been properly completed without his devoted and sympathetic attitude. I
furthermore wish to express my gratitude to Jan Leen Kloosterman from the
Reactor Institute Delft. He helped me to get to grips with the technical issues
surrounding nuclear power and fuel cycles and I am honored that he co-
authored one of the papers included in this dissertation.
During my PhD research I have had the pleasure of spending several months
at other universities. I wish to thank the Department of Nuclear Science and
Engineering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and in particular Andrew
Kadak for having me in Boston and for letting me participate in the MIT study
on the future of nuclear power that was continuing whilst I was there. I also
wish to thank him for co-authoring a paper with me and for inviting me to give a
lecture series on ‘Engineering Ethics’ for Nuclear Science and Engineering
students at MIT one year later. I am also grateful for the time I was able to spend
in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Washington. In particular I
am indebted to Stephen Gardiner for hosting me in Seattle and for the time he
spent reading and commenting on my writings. My time in Seattle very much
inspired me intellectually.
There are a number of other people, though, who have contributed to my
research and have invested time and interest in it. First, I wish to thank the
members of my supervising committee. In addition to Jeroen, Ibo and Jan Leen,
I wish to thank Tsjalling Swierstra, Andreas Spahn and Sjoerd Zwart. I would
also like to mention Ewoud Verhoef (of COVRA, The Dutch Central
Organization for Radioactive Waste), Dominic Roser (University of Zurich), Axel
Gosseries (Louvain University), Lars Löfquist (Uppsala University), Lara
Pierpoint (MIT), Denis Arnold (UNC Charlotte) and Charles Forsberg (MIT). I
am furthermore grateful to the audiences of the conferences where I presented
ix