Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Graduate Program in International Studies Dissertations Summer 2014 Explaining Nuclear Energy Pursuance: A Comparison of the United States, Germany, and Japan Lauren Emily McKee Old Dominion University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds Part of the Energy Policy Commons, and the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation McKee, Lauren E.. "Explaining Nuclear Energy Pursuance: A Comparison of the United States, Germany, and Japan" (2014). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), dissertation, International Studies, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/8257-af84 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds/69 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Program in International Studies at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXPLAINING NUCLEAR ENERGY PURSUANCE: A COMPARISON OF THE UNITED STATES, GERMANY, AND JAPAN by Lauren Emily McKee B.A. May 2004, University of Southern Mississippi M.A. August 2007, University of Southern Mississippi A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL STUDIES OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY August 2014 Approved by: Steve Yetiv (Director) Francis Adams (Member) Heidi Schlipphacke (Member) ABSTRACT EXPLAINING NUCLEAR ENERGY PURSUANCE: A COMPARISON OF THE UNITED STATES, GERMANY, AND JAPAN Lauren Emily McKee Old Dominion University, 2014 Director: Dr. Steve Yetiv Energy is critical to the functioning of the global economy and seriously impacts global security as well. What factors influence the extent to which countries will pursue nuclear energy in their overall mix of energy approaches? This dissertation explores this critical question by analyzing the nuclear energy policies of the United States, Germany and Japan. Rather than citizen opposition or proximity to nuclear disasters, it seems that a country’s access to other resources through natural endowments or trading relationships offers the best explanation for nuclear energy pursuance. For my mother, who always knew I could. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My greatest debt of gratitude is owed to my director and mentor, Dr. Steve Yetiv, whose support and guidance on matters of career, school and “real-life” have proven immeasurably valuable and entertaining. I also have to thank my dissertation committee members, Drs. Heidi Schlipphacke and Francis Adams. Dr. Schlipphacke has been an endless source of encouragement, offering her time and energy as both a teacher and role model. Her combination of professionalism and warmth I constantly try to emulate. Similarly, I owe many thanks to Dr. Adams, who, in addition to offering his time as a dissertation committee member, has also presented me with numerous teaching opportunities in the Political Science and Geography Department for which I will always be grateful. I must also thank Dr. Regina Karp, who has been my go-to “voice of reason” and who gives of herself so freely to help GPIS students. She has been a valuable source of advice for me as a female scholar just starting out, especially in a field and profession where there are still regrettably few women. My international education would have been incomplete without the friendship of my fellow GPIS students, especially Wiebke Lamer, Renata Giannini, Alessandro Shimabukuro, Carlos Teixiera, Degi Betcher, Katerina Oskarsson, Jeff Mistich, and Sagar Rijal. They all deserve my respect for constantly challenging my perceptions of the world and my deepest appreciation for the community we created in a place where we were all from somewhere else. Special thanks to Wiebke for her insights on Germany, her translations of challenging German words over 35 characters, and her willingness to always “conference” with me. Finally, I must thank my friends and family who have long supported my dream of getting a Ph.D. and my sometimes “wild and weird” ideas about seeing and studying the world. Thanks are owed to my father, Michael McKee, who inspired my curiosity for what lay beyond Mississippi when I was very young. My oldest friends each deserve my gratitude: Amanda Mills Blackledge, who always knew I was “going places;” Matt Wilson, who can always offer an American perspective; and Bethany Mills Rigney, who always keeps me humble. I also owe a debt to Reggie Shoemake, who did not get to see me finish but was confident that I would. Lastly and most deeply, I must thank my mother, Sheila Shoemake, who instilled my love of and respect for reading and learning and who has always believed in my capabilities, even and especially when I didn’t believe in myself. I am absolutely sincere when I say this dissertation and Ph.D. would not have been possible without her constant love and support. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES.........................................................................................................................ix LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................................x Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................1 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................... 8 Background Literature .............................................................................................................8 Comparative Literature..........................................................................................................14 3: NUCLEAR ENERGY IN THE UNITED STATES.........................................................24 Objective..................................................................................................................................24 Development of Early Energy Policy in the U S ................................................................25 Atomic Energy Acts of 1946 and 1954 ...............................................................................25 Energy Upheaval in the 1970s............................................................................................. 29 Division in the 1980s .............................................................................................................32 1992 Energy Policy A ct........................................................................................................ 33 Nuclear Public Opinion in the United States ..................................................................... 36 Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima .................................................................43 Nuclear Protest in the US ...................................................................................................... 49 Access to Other Resources .................................................................................................... 60 Chapter Conclusions ..............................................................................................................69 4: NUCLEAR ENERGY IN GERMANY..............................................................................73 Objective..................................................................................................................................73 Development of Early Energy Policy in Germany........................................................... 74 The 1959 Atomic Energy A ct...............................................................................................75 Subsequent Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act: 2002 ........................................... 76 Subsequent Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act: 2010 ............................................76 Fukushima in 2011................................................................................................................. 77 Nuclear Public Opinion in Germany....................................................................................80 Polling Results of German Nuclear Opinion ..................................................................... 83 The 1970s and Three Mile Island ........................................................................................ 87 The Early 1980s and Chernobyl..........................................................................................94 The 1990s and the Rise of the Der Griinen P artei ............................................................ 98 Angela Merkel, the CDU, and Fukushima ......................................................................102 Access to Other Resources ................................................................................................ 108 Chapter Conclusions ............................................................................................................113 viii Chapter Page 5: NUCLEAR ENERGY IN JAPAN ..................................................................................... 117 Objective................................................................................................................................117 Development of Early Energy Policy in Japan................................................................119 Atomic Energy Basic