Integrated framework for the external cost assessment of nuclear power plant accident considering risk aversion: The Korean case

Recently, the estimation of accident costs within the social costs of nuclear power plants (NPPs) has garnered substantial interest. In particular, the risk aversion behavior of the public toward an NPP accident is considered an important factor when integrating risk aversion into NPP accident cost. In this study, an integrated framework for the external cost assessment of NPP accident that measures the value of statistical life (VSL) and the relative risk aversion (RRA) coefficient for NPP accident based on an individual-level survey is proposed. To derive the willingness to pay and the RRA coefficient for NPP accident risks, a survey was conducted on a sample of 1550 individuals in Korea. The estimation obtained a mean VSL of USD 2.78 million and an RRA coefficient of 1.315. Based on the estimation results in which various cost factors were considered, a multiplication factor of 5.16 and an external cost of NPP accidents of 4.39E−03 USD-cents/kWh were estimated. This study is expected to provide insight to energy policy decision-makers on analyzing the economic validity of NPP compared to other energy sources by reflecting the estimated external cost of NPP accident into the unit electricity generation cost of NPP.

[1]  Chetan Dave,et al.  Eliciting risk preferences: When is simple better? , 2008 .

[2]  Charles A. Holt,et al.  Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects , 2002 .

[3]  D. Weil.  Valuing the Economic Consequences of Work Injury and Illness: A Comparison of Methods and Findings , 2001 .

[4]  Roberto Dones,et al.  Severe accidents in the energy sector: comparative perspective. , 2004, Journal of hazardous materials.

[5]  Jason F. Shogren,et al.  Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous Choice Valuation with Follow-Up Questioning , 1996 .

[6]  Joseph E. Aldy,et al.  The Value of a Statistical Life: A Critical Review of Market Estimates Throughout the World , 2003 .

[7]  B. K. Grimes,et al.  Planning Basis for the Development of State and Local Government Radiological Emergency Response Plans in Support of Light Water Nuclear Power Plants , 1978 .

[8]  R. Myerson.  Probability Models for Economic Decisions , 2004 .

[9]  G. Harrison,et al.  Risk Aversion in the Laboratory , 2008 .

[10]  Piet Rietveld,et al.  The value of statistical life in road safety: a meta-analysis. , 2003, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[11]  S. F. Edwards,et al.  Overlooked Biases in Contingent Valuation Surveys: Some Considerations , 1987 .

[12]  S. Yoo,et al.  Measuring the Willingness to Pay for Tap Water Quality Improvements: Results of a Contingent Valuation Survey in Pusan , 2013 .

[13]  B. Kriström.  Spike Models in Contingent Valuation , 1997 .

[14]  Hyun Gook Kang,et al.  INTEGRATED SOCIETAL RISK ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK FOR NUCLEAR POWER AND RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES , 2015 .

[15]  Seung-Hoon Yoo,et al.  WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR GREEN ELECTRICITY IN KOREA: A CONTINGENT VALUATION STUDY , 2009 .

[16]  Rainer Friedrich,et al.  ACRONYM : ExternE-Pol TITLE : Externalities of Energy: Extension of accounting framework and Policy Applications , 2005 .

[17]  Anna Alberini,et al.  Urban Environmental Health and Sensitive Populations: How Much are the Italians Willing to Pay to Reduce Their Risks? , 2005 .

[18]  Jeroen P. van der Sluijs,et al.  On the contribution of external cost calculations to energy system governance: the case of a potential large-scale nuclear accident , 2011 .

[19]  David Pearce,et al.  VALUING RISKS TO LIFE AND HEALTH Towards Consistent Transfer Estimates in the European Union and Accession States , 2000 .

[20]  Olav Hohmeyer,et al.  Social Costs of Energy Consumption: External Effects of Electricity Generation in the Federal Republic of Germany , 1988 .

[21]  Daniel M. Violette,et al.  The value of reducing risks of death: A note on new evidence , 1989 .

[22]  S. Yoo,et al.  Modelling willingness to pay responses from dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys with zero observations , 2001 .

[23]  Morten I. Lau,et al.  Behavioral Econometrics for Psychologists , 2007 .

[24]  W. Michael Hanemann,et al.  Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses , 1984 .

[25]  Ronald Stewart.  Social costs of energy consumption: External effects of electricity generation in the Federal Republic of Germany: by Olav Hohmeyer Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988, $29.70 , 1990 .

[26]  A. Markandya,et al.  The External Costs of Nuclear Power: Ex Ante Damages and Lay Risks , 1993 .

[27]  Ari Rabl,et al.  External costs of nuclear: Greater or less than the alternatives? , 2013 .

[28]  W. D. Rowe,et al.  Risk Assessment Review Group Report to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission , 1979, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[29]  Hee-Jung Kang,et al.  An External Costs Assessment of the Impacts on Human Health from Nuclear Power Plants in Korea , 2008 .

[30]  Ron Goeree,et al.  Age, Health and the Willingness to Pay for Mortality Risk Reductions: A Contingent Valuation Survey of Ontario Residents , 2002 .

[31]  Louis Eeckhoudt,et al.  Risk aversion and the external cost of a nuclear accident , 2000 .

[32]  S. Hirschberg,et al.  Comparative risk assessment of severe accidents in the energy sector , 2014 .

[33]  Taylor Martin,et al.  The Role of Nuclear Energy in a Low-Carbon Energy Future , 2012 .

[34]  M. Thorne.  Actions to Protect the Public in an Emergency due to Severe Conditions at a Light Water Reactor: Emergency Preparedness and Response Report , 2013, Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection.

[35]  Asbjørn Torvanger,et al.  The political economy of technology support: Making decisions about carbon capture and storage and low carbon energy technologies , 2011 .

[36]  W. Adamowicz,et al.  The Effect of Risk Characteristics on the Willingness to Pay for Mortality Risk Reductions from Electric Power Generation , 2006 .

[37]  J. Bennett,et al.  Minimising Payment Vehicle Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies , 2000 .

[38]  H. P. Binswanger.  Attitudes toward risk: Experimental measurement in rural india , 1980 .

[39]  Wesley D. Seitz,et al.  Measuring Water Quality Benefits , 1986 .

[40]  David R. Hodas,et al.  Environmental Costs of Electricity , 1990 .

[41]  Stefan Hirschberg,et al.  A Comparative Analysis of Accident Risks in Fossil, Hydro, and Nuclear Energy Chains , 2008 .

[42]  Paul Mosley,et al.  Risk Attitudes and the ‘Vicious Circle of Poverty’ , 2005 .

[43]  Morten I. Lau,et al.  Eliciting Risk and Time Preferences , 2008 .

[44]  J. Cameron,et al.  Interpreting the Precautionary Principle , 2013 .

[45]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Risk and time preferences: linking experimental and household survey data from Vietnam , 2010 .

[46]  M. G. Morgan,et al.  What Do We Know About Making Risk Comparisons , 1990 .

[47]  John C. Whitehead,et al.  Environmental Interest Group Behavior and Self‐Selection Bias in Contingent Valuation Mail Surveys , 1991 .

[48]  L. Hansen,et al.  Stochastic Consumption, Risk Aversion, and the Temporal Behavior of Asset Returns , 1983, Journal of Political Economy.

[49]  J. Heckman.  Sample selection bias as a specification error , 1979 .

[50]  Joseph G. Eisenhauer,et al.  DEMOGRAPHY OF RISK AVERSION , 2001 .

[51]  Maureen L. Cropper,et al.  Valuing future risks to life , 1990 .

[52]  F. Vettraino,et al.  The Projected Costs of Generating Electricity - IEA-NEA Report - 2010 Edition , 2010 .