Consent-Based Siting of Spent Fuel Facilities: Evidence from Nationwide U.S. Surveys

References

• “Nuclear Waste Disposal,” U.S. Government Accountability Office (2022); https://www.gao.gov/nuclear-waste-disposal (current as of Apr. 29, 2022).
   Google Scholar
• “Dry Cask Storage,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2023); https://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/dry-cask-storage.html.
   Google Scholar
• “Integrated Waste Management System,” U.S. Department of Energy (2022); https://www.energy.gov/ne/integrated-waste-management.
   Google Scholar
• “Summary of Consolidated Interim Storage Advantages and Disadvantages from an Integrated Systems Perspective from Prior Reports and Studies,” Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Feb. 2023); https://curie.pnnl.gov/system/files/ISF_Adv_Disadv_Final_0.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• “Assessment of Disposal Options for DOE-Managed High-Level Radioactive Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel,” U.S. Department of Energy (2014); http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/10/f18/DOE_Options_Assessment.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• D. EASTERLING and H. KUNREUTHER, The Dilemma of Siting a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository, Springer, New York (1995).
   Google Scholar
• J. RICHTER, M. J. BERNSTEIN, and M. FAROOQUE, “The Process to Find a Process for Governance: Nuclear Waste Management and Consent-Based Siting in the United States,” Energy Res. Social Sci., 87, 102473 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102473.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• “Report to the Secretary of Energy,” Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, U.S. Department of Energy (2012).
   Google Scholar
• H. C. JENKINS-SMITH et al., “Designing a Process for Consent-Based Siting of Used Nuclear Fuel Facilities: Analysis of Public Support,” The Bridge, Natl. Acad. Eng., 42, 3, 28 (2012).
   Google Scholar
• H. C. JENKINS-SMITH et al., “Public Preferences Related to Radioactive Waste Management, Nuclear Energy, and Environment: Methodology and Response Reference Report for the 2015 Energy and Environment Survey,” SAND2015-4967, Sandia National Laboratories (2015).
   Google Scholar
• R. BARKE and H. C. JENKINS-SMITH, “Politics and Scientific Expertise: Scientists, Risk Perception, and Nuclear Waste Policy,” Risk Anal., 13, 4, 425 (1993); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb00743.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. A. MAZMANIAN and D. MORRELL, “The NIMBY Syndrome: Facility Siting and the Failure of Democratic Discourse,” Environmental Policy in the 1990s: Toward a New Agenda, 2nd ed., N. J. VIG and M. E. KRAFT, Eds., p. 233, CQ Press (1994).
   Google Scholar
• J. FLYNN et al., “Risk, Media, and Stigma at Rocky Flats,” Risk Anal., 18, 715 (1998); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01115.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. SLOVIC, J. FLYNN, and H. KUNREUTHER, Risk, Media, and Stigma: Understanding Public Challenges to Modern Science and Technology, Routledge (2001).
   Google Scholar
• K. GUPTA et al., “Exploring Aggregate Vs. Relative Public Trust in Administrative Agencies that Manage Spent Nuclear Fuel in the United States,” Rev. Policy Res., 37, 4, 491 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12385.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. KELLER, V. VISSCHERS, and M. SIEGRIST, “Affective Imagery and Acceptance of Replacing Nuclear Power Plants,” Risk Anal., 32, 3, 464 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01691.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. A. PARKHILL et al., “From the Familiar to the Extraordinary: Local Residents’ Perceptions of Risk When Living with Nuclear Power in the UK,” Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr., 35, 1, 39 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2009.00364.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• V. VISSCHERS and L. WALLQUIST, “Nuclear Power Before and After Fukushima: The Relations Between Acceptance, Ambivalence, and Knowledge,” J. Environ. Psychol., 36, 77 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.07.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. S. HO et al., “Exploring Public Perceptions of Benefits and Risks, Trust and Acceptance of Nuclear Energy in Thailand and Vietnam: A Qualitative Approach,” Energy Policy., 127, 259 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.12.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. P. TULER and T. WEBLER, “Controversy and Consensus in the Design of a Consent-Based Siting Process for Radioactive Waste,” Energy Res. Social Sci., 95, 102906 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102906.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar