Abstract
Reactor safety has featured prominently in the nuclear debate in the US and UK throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s. Public acceptability of nuclear power will largely be related to the resolution of safety issues. In view of the proposal by the UK Central Electricity Generating Board to build PW Rs, this paper discusses the safety philosophies which have evolved in both countries. Whereas UK safety authorities have consistently advocated siting as a means to minimise the residual risks of nuclear generation, their UK counterparts consider siting to be only of marginal relevance as a safety measure. This is borne out from a cluster analysis of 109 sites using 12 demographic variables. A sixfold classification illustrates the predominance of remote sites in the US and high population density sites in the UK. A search for more remote, safer sites in the UK is advocated.
Chapter PDF
References
Aldrich, D. C. et al. 1982. Technical guidance for siting criteria development. NUREG/GR 2339, SAND 81 – 1549, Albuquerque, New Mexico: Sandia National Laboratories.
Armstrong, J. 1984. Town and Country Planning. April: 129.
Ashley, R. L. (ed). 1965. Nuclear power reactor siting. Proceedings of a National Topical Meeting. Los Angeles: American Nuclear Society, Division of Technical Information.
Bunch, D. F. 1978. Metropolitan siting: a historical perspective. NUREG 0478, Washington DC: USNRC.
Burwell, C. C, Ohanian, M. J, and Weinberg, A. M. 1979. A siting policy for an acceptable nuclear future. Science 207: 1043–51.
Burwell, C. C, and Lane, J. A. 1980. Nuclear site planning to 202 5. ORAU/IEA-80-5A(M), Oak Ridge, Tn: Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Institute for Energy Analysis.
CEGB. 1982. CEGB statement of case: volumes 1–2, Sizewell Power Station Public Inquiry. London: CEGB.
Charlesworth, F. R, and Gronow, W. S. 1967. A summary of experience in the practical application of siting policy in the United Kingdom. In Containment and siting of nuclear power plant. Vienna: IAEA, 143–70.
Cope, D. F, and Bauman, H. F. 1977. Expansion potential for existing nuclear power station sites. ORNL/IM-5927, Oak Ridge, Tn: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Dale, G. C. 1982. The safety of the AGR. London: CEGB.
Durfee, R. C, Coleman, P. R. 1983. Population distribution analyses for nuclear power plant siting. NUREG/CR 3056, ORNL CSD TM-197, Oak Ridge Tn: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Farmer, F. R. 1962. The evaluation of power reactor sites. FPR/INF/266, Harwell: UKAEA.
Fells, I. 1984. The world nuclear power scene and UK energy policy in 1984. Energy Policy 12: 3: 306–09.
Franklin, L. 1984. What Sizewell means for the UK power plant industry. Energy Policy 12: 3: 271–75.
Gammon, K. M, Pedgrif t, G. F. 1983. Changes in the investigation and selection of sites for nuclear power stations. Nuclear engineering 22: 41–45.
George, B. V, Hilsley, D. C. 1982. Britain’s approach to the PW R stresses safety and reliability. Nuclear Engineering International 21: 34–46.
Greenberg, M, Krueckeberg, D. A, Kaltman, M. 1984. Population trends around nuclear power plants. In M J Pasqualetti and K D Pijawka (eds), Nuclear power. Boulder, Westview: 189–212.
Health and Safety Executive. 1979. Safety assessment principles for Nuclear power reactors. London: HMSO.
Health and Safety Executive. 1982. Emergency plans for civil nuclear installations. London: HMSO.
Hunt, F. R. 1970. Power station site selection in England and Wales. In Environmental aspects of nuclear power stations. Vienna: IAEA: 647–59.
Kelly, M. J. et al. 1984. Analysis of availability of previously identified sites under alternative demographic criteria. NUREG/CR 3057, ORNL 5936, Oak Ridge Tn: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Lilienthal, D. 1980. Atomic energy: a new start. New York: Harper and Row.
Marley, W. G, and Fry, T. M. 1955. Radiological hazards from an escape of fission products and implications in power reactor locations. In Proceedings of the international conference on peaceful uses of atomic energy. New York: United Nations: 102–05.
MacKerron, G. 1984. Sizewell: good value for consumers money. Energy Policy 12: 3: 296–301.
Metz, W. C, Daum, M. L, Pearlman, K. T and Waite, N .D. 1984. Land-use controls and nuclear power plants. In M J Pasqualetti and K D Pijawaka (eds), Nuclear power. Boulder: Westview: 137–64.
Minarick, T.W and Kickialka, C. A. 1982. Precursors to potential severe core damage accidents. 1969–1979, a status report. NUREG/CR-249 7, Oak Ridge Tn: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1974. The site population factor. WASH 1235, Washington DC: USNRC.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1979. Report of the siting policy task Force. NUREG 0625, Washington DC: USNRC.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1981. Scoping summary report — environmental impact statement on the siting of nuclear power plants. Washington DC: USNRC.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1982. 1981 annual report. Washington DC: USNRC.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1983. 1982 annual report. Washington DC: USNRC.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1984. 1983 annual report. Washington DC: USNRC.
Openshaw, S. 1982a. The siting of nuclear power stations and public safety in the UK. Regional Studies 16: 183–98.
Openshaw, S. 1982b. The geography of reactor siting policies in the UK’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series 7: 150–62.
Openshaw, S. 1985. The siting of nuclear power stations and public safety. London: Routledge Kegan and Paul.
Starr, C, and Braun, C. 1983. US nuclear power performance. Energy policy 12: 3: 253–58.
Union of Concerned Scientists. 1984. Nuclear power plants in the United States: current status and statistical history. Boston: UCS.
US Atomic Energy Commission. 1962. Reactor siting criteria 10CFR Part 100. Washington DC: USAEC.
US Department of Energy. 1984. Nuclear power program information and data. Washington DC: USDOE.
US Office of Technology Assessment. 1984. Nuclear power in an age of uncertainty. OTA-E-216, Washington DC.
Weinberg, A M. 1984. Emerging trends in nuclear energy. Energy Policy 12: 3: 247–52.
Zeigler, D. J, and Johnson, J. H. 1984. Evacuation behaviour in response to nuclear power plant accidents. The Professional Geographer 36: 207–15.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1985 D. Reidel Publishing Company
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fernie, J., Openshaw, S. (1985). Nuclear Power in the US and UK: The Role of Siting in Safety Philosophy. In: Calzonetti, F.J., Solomon, B.D. (eds) Geographical Dimensions of Energy. The GeoJournal Library, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-5416-8_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-5416-8_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8890-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-5416-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive