The Morally Desirable Option for Nuclear Power Production

Philosophy and Technology 24 (2):169-192 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper reflects on the various possible nuclear power production methods from an ethical perspective. The production and consumption of nuclear power give rise to the problem of intergenerational justice; in other words, we are depleting a nonrenewable resource in the form of uranium while the radiotoxic waste that is generated carries very long-term potential burdens. I argue that the morally desirable option should therefore be to seek to safeguard the interests of future generations. The present generation has at least two duties with regard to posterity: not to jeopardize the safety and security of future generations or impose any harm upon them and to sustain future well-being insofar as that is possible with the available energy resources. These duties are presented as pluralist prima facie duties thus implying that they could well be overruled by morally more compelling duties. If we are unable to fulfill both these prima facie duties simultaneously, it should be particularly the duty not to impose harm on posterity that should be the leading incentive behind nuclear power production. This supports the arguments in favor of the introduction of a new fuel cycle that can substantially reduce the waste lifetime and therefore also potential future burdens. However, the further development and application of this scientifically proven but not yet industrialized fuel cycle give rise to additional burdens for contemporaries. This paper examines the extent of the moral stringency of the no harm duty sought for situations in which future interest should guide us in our choosing of a certain technology.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Disarming nuclear apologists.Robert E. Goodin - 1985 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 28 (1-4):153 – 176.
Need and safety: The nuclear power debate.Paul B. Thompson - 1984 - Environmental Ethics 6 (1):57-69.
An Examination of a Moral Argument against Nuclear Deterrence.Robert McKim - 1985 - Journal of Religious Ethics 13 (2):279 - 297.
Can God Change His Mind?Theodore Gulesarian - 1996 - Faith and Philosophy 13 (3):329-351.
Nuclear energy and obligations to the future.R. Routley & V. Routley - 1978 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 21 (1-4):133 – 179.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-05-05

Downloads
98 (#170,449)

6 months
35 (#96,047)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
A Theory of Justice: Revised Edition.John Rawls - 1999 - Harvard University Press.
Principles of biomedical ethics.Tom L. Beauchamp - 1979 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by James F. Childress.
The Right and the Good. Some Problems in Ethics.W. D. Ross - 1930 - Oxford: Clarendon Press. Edited by Philip Stratton-Lake.

View all 37 references / Add more references