بازارهای انرژی رقابتی و انرژی هسته ای: آیا ما می توانیم هر دو را داشته باشیم، آیا ما هر دو را می خواهیم؟
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|16377||2010||6 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 5657 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
- تولید محتوا با مقالات ISI برای سایت یا وبلاگ شما
- تولید محتوا با مقالات ISI برای کتاب شما
- تولید محتوا با مقالات ISI برای نشریه یا رسانه شما
پیشنهاد می کنیم کیفیت محتوای سایت خود را با استفاده از منابع علمی، افزایش دهید.
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Energy Policy, Volume 38, Issue 9, September 2010, Pages 4903–4908
In 1987, the UK Conservative Party was re-elected promising to transform the electricity industry into a privatised competitive industry and to promote an expansion of nuclear power. Fulfilling both objectives was not possible. The nuclear plants were withdrawn from the sale and plans to build new plants were abandoned, but privatisation proceeded. In 2007, the Labour government began a new attempt to build nuclear plants to operate in the competitive electricity market, promising that no subsidies would be offered to them. By 2010, the utilities that were planning to build nuclear plants were beginning to suggest that ‘support’ in some form would be needed if they were to build new plants. More surprisingly, the energy regulator, Ofgem, cast doubt on whether a competitive wholesale electricity market would provide security of supply. In 1990, the UK government opted for a competitive electricity market over expanding nuclear power. Now, the option of opting for a competitive electricity market may not exist. However, this might not leave the way open for new nuclear plants. The expected cost of power from new nuclear plants is now so high that no more than one or two heavily subsidised plants will be built.
In 1987, the UK Conservative Party was re-elected to government. Their manifesto included promises to transform the electricity industry into a privatised competitive industry and to promote an expansion of nuclear power (Conservative Party, 1987). Many commentators believed that these two objectives were incompatible. In 1989, in order to fulfil the promise to privatise the electricity industry, the government was forced to withdraw the nuclear capacity from the sale and abandon all nuclear expansion plans. This was interpreted by these commentators as confirming the incompatibility of new nuclear build with a competitive electricity industry. Despite this experience, in 2007, the British (then Labour) government launched a new policy to build nuclear power stations that would be built by the private sector and compete without subsidies in the electricity market. However, by the start of 2010, the utilities, which had earlier endorsed the government’s nuclear plans, were becoming nervous and broaching the need for various forms of support if they were to build nuclear plants. Much more surprisingly, in February 2010, the government and the economic regulator, the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem), seemed to signal the likely abandonment of the wholesale electricity market. From 2000 onwards, worldwide concern about climate change has grown and finding measures that will deal with this issue has come to dominate the energy policy agenda. Many governments have based their energy policies on a combination of revitalising the nuclear power option and introducing competition to energy markets as instruments to meet their energy policy goals. If the UK, the pioneers of competitive energy markets and one of the leading nations trying to revitalise nuclear power1 , were to have to acknowledge that this combination of policies will not work, the basis for many current national energy policies would crumble. This article examines the two attempts, in 1987 and 2007, by the UK to combine expansion of nuclear power and competitive energy markets, explains the failure of the first attempt and comments on the prospects for the second attempt.