The trouble with justification – Getting straight on the science and politics of nuclear energy

• Published in: Energy strategy reviews Vol. 1; no. 4; pp. 233 - 242
• Main Author: Meskens, Gaston
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 01-05-2013
• Subjects: Deliberative democracy; Risk governance; Transdisciplinarity; Risk governance; Deliberative democracy; Transdisciplinarity
• ISSN: 2211-467X; 2211-467X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.esr.2013.01.004

The way nuclear energy technology ‘escapes’ a deliberate justification approach as an energy technology on a transnational level is today in sharp contrast with the way fossil fuel energy technologies are subject of global negotiations driven by the doom of climate change. The claim put forward is that this ‘denial’ is a symptom of a contemporary settled ‘comfort of polarisation’ around the use of nuclear energy technology that is deeply rooted in the organisational structures of politics, science and informed civil society. The article argues for the need to develop a new rationale that aims to seek societal trust ‘by method instead of proof’, taking into account that the outcome of such a justification process might as well be an acceptance or a rejection of the technology. It sketches what this ‘deliberate-political’ approach would be in theory and practice, briefly hits at two contemporary myths that would relativize the need for this approach and concludes with a ‘pragmatic’ list of elements of an advanced framework for deliberation on nuclear energy technology and on energy in general.
► Nuclear has never been negotiated at UN energy and climate change conferences. ► This ‘denial’ is a symptom of a ‘comfort of polarisation’ around nuclear. ► A responsible safety culture and public info are insufficient conditions for societal trust. ► Society needs to develop a rationale that seeks trust ‘by method instead of proof’.