Nathan E Hultman and Jonathan G Koomey 2007 Environ. Res. Lett. 2 034002 doi:10.1088/1748-9326/2/3/034002
Nathan E Hultman1,2,5 and Jonathan G Koomey3,4
Show affiliationsAs countries begin to reassess and expand their energy research and development programs, it is appropriate to understand the likely costs of alternate approaches. Unfortunately, communities of experts have a well-known optimistic bias in their judgments. We review findings from several disciplines that underscore this tendency toward overconfidence as well as some proposed alternatives to incorporate it in public decision-making. We further argue, based on a disaggregated analysis of US nuclear power costs, that incorporating a second-order uncertainty in the shape of the distribution of cost components is essential for capturing important elements of uncertainty in moving forward with expanded energy R&D programs.
28.41.Te Protection systems, safety, radiation monitoring, accidents, and dismantling
28.41.Ak Theory, design, and computerized simulation
89.65.Gh Economics; econophysics, financial markets, business and management
Issue 3 (July-September 2007)
Received 20 March 2007, accepted for publication 20 June 2007
Published 17 July 2007
Nathan E Hultman and Jonathan G Koomey 2007 Environ. Res. Lett. 2 034002
A Menciassi et al 2005 J. Micromech. Microeng. 15 2045
Y Hatsugai 1997 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 9 2507
S Bietti et al 2009 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 6 012009
J H Hannay 1998 J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 31 L53
R Beals et al 1999 Inverse Problems 15 L1
R Haydock et al 1972 J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 5 2845
R Haydock et al 1975 J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 8 2591
E Saeedi et al 2008 J. Micromech. Microeng. 18 075019
Benjamin C. Allanach et al JHEP03(2003)016