Air Quality Implications of a Nuclear Moratorium: An Alternative Analysis

B-Tier
Journal: The Energy Journal
Year: 1981
Volume: 2
Issue: 3
Pages: 33-48

Authors (4)

Anthony Bopp (not in RePEc) Verne Loose (not in RePEc) Charles Kolstad (Stanford University) Robert Pendley (not in RePEc)

Score contribution per author:

0.503 = (α=2.01 / 4 authors) × 1.0x B-tier

α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count

Abstract

The role of nuclear power in the nation's energy future is and probably will continue to be one of the principal energy policy issues in the United States. Relatively inexpensive coal reserves and escalating costs of light water reactors have eroded a once-large cost advantage enjoyed by nuclear technologies. While the relative cost advantage of nuclear over coal electric power has become a subject of debate, other less concrete issues have surfaced and often overshadow economic arguments. Antinuclear "forces" generally view the technology as the essence of what they consider wrong with modern technological society. Pronuclear "forces" counter that much fear associated with nuclear power derives from the newness of the technology and that the air quality and possible economic gains associated with nuclear power make it the preferable choice for future electricity generation.

Technical Details

RePEc Handle
repec:sae:enejou:v:2:y:1981:i:3:p:33-48
Journal Field
Energy
Author Count
4
Added to Database
2026-01-25