Environmental debates over nuclear energy : media, communication, and the public
Environmental debates over nuclear energy often center around two polarized sets of arguments – the potential benefits of nuclear energy as a clean way of producing energy, helping to mitigate climate change and the concerns over the possibility of ionizing radiation release and nuclear waste contam...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10356/140532 |
| _version_ | 1811679618729508864 |
|---|---|
| author | Ho, Shirley S. Kristainsen, Silje |
| author2 | Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information |
| author_facet | Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information Ho, Shirley S. Kristainsen, Silje |
| author_sort | Ho, Shirley S. |
| collection | NTU |
| description | Environmental debates over nuclear energy often center around two polarized sets of arguments – the potential benefits of nuclear energy as a clean way of producing energy, helping to mitigate climate change and the concerns over the possibility of ionizing radiation release and nuclear waste contamination of the environment. As a form of clean energy, the environmental benefits of nuclear energy can be attributed to its low carbon emission (International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA], 2014; Lovelock, 2004; Monbiot, 2009). On the other hand, previous nuclear accidents have triggered concerns about the possibility of ionizing radiation leaks and nuclear waste contamination to the environment (IAEA, 2014). The debates over nuclear energy are further compounded by arguments over other potential benefits of nuclear energy such as reliable energy production, economic competitiveness and stable electricity prices, and the potential adverse effects of nuclear energy such as the possible proliferation of nuclear weapons and the high upfront costs of nuclear power plants (IAEA, 2014). In the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear incident in Japan, many nations such as Germany, Belgium, and Switzerland decided to phase out nuclear power, but nations such as China, India, Finland, the UK, and the US are planning or already building new nuclear energy plants (Goodfellow, Dewick, Wortley, & Azapagic, 2014; World Nuclear Association, 2019). |
| first_indexed | 2024-10-01T03:12:01Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | ntu-10356/140532 |
| institution | Nanyang Technological University |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-10-01T03:12:01Z |
| publishDate | 2020 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | ntu-10356/1405322020-05-30T08:00:09Z Environmental debates over nuclear energy : media, communication, and the public Ho, Shirley S. Kristainsen, Silje Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information Social sciences::Communication Nuclear Energy Risk Environmental debates over nuclear energy often center around two polarized sets of arguments – the potential benefits of nuclear energy as a clean way of producing energy, helping to mitigate climate change and the concerns over the possibility of ionizing radiation release and nuclear waste contamination of the environment. As a form of clean energy, the environmental benefits of nuclear energy can be attributed to its low carbon emission (International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA], 2014; Lovelock, 2004; Monbiot, 2009). On the other hand, previous nuclear accidents have triggered concerns about the possibility of ionizing radiation leaks and nuclear waste contamination to the environment (IAEA, 2014). The debates over nuclear energy are further compounded by arguments over other potential benefits of nuclear energy such as reliable energy production, economic competitiveness and stable electricity prices, and the potential adverse effects of nuclear energy such as the possible proliferation of nuclear weapons and the high upfront costs of nuclear power plants (IAEA, 2014). In the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear incident in Japan, many nations such as Germany, Belgium, and Switzerland decided to phase out nuclear power, but nations such as China, India, Finland, the UK, and the US are planning or already building new nuclear energy plants (Goodfellow, Dewick, Wortley, & Azapagic, 2014; World Nuclear Association, 2019). Accepted version 2020-05-30T08:00:08Z 2020-05-30T08:00:08Z 2019 Journal Article Ho, S. S., & Kristiansen, S. (2019). Environmental debates over nuclear energy : media, communication, and the public. Environmental Communication, 13(4), 431-439. doi:10.1080/17524032.2019.1603018 1752-4032 https://hdl.handle.net/10356/140532 10.1080/17524032.2019.1603018 2-s2.0-85064231907 4 13 431 439 en Environmental Communication This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Environmental Communication on 09 Apr 2019, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/17524032.2019.1603018 application/pdf |
| spellingShingle | Social sciences::Communication Nuclear Energy Risk Ho, Shirley S. Kristainsen, Silje Environmental debates over nuclear energy : media, communication, and the public |
| title | Environmental debates over nuclear energy : media, communication, and the public |
| title_full | Environmental debates over nuclear energy : media, communication, and the public |
| title_fullStr | Environmental debates over nuclear energy : media, communication, and the public |
| title_full_unstemmed | Environmental debates over nuclear energy : media, communication, and the public |
| title_short | Environmental debates over nuclear energy : media, communication, and the public |
| title_sort | environmental debates over nuclear energy media communication and the public |
| topic | Social sciences::Communication Nuclear Energy Risk |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10356/140532 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT hoshirleys environmentaldebatesovernuclearenergymediacommunicationandthepublic AT kristainsensilje environmentaldebatesovernuclearenergymediacommunicationandthepublic |