Call for Papers: Special Issue "Energy Futures and Nuclear Infrastructures: Legacies, Fragilities, Imaginaries"
Guest Editors
Martin Denoun (Spiral, University of Liège) <martin.denoun@uliege.be>
Maël Goumri (LAMSADE, Cermes3, Université Paris Dauphine) <mael.goumri@u-paris.fr>
Claire Le Renard (LATTS, École des Ponts ParisTech) <claire.le-renard@enpc.fr>
Ange Pottin (University of Vienna) <ange.pottin@univie.ac.at>
Call for proposals
This issue addresses the current nuclear “relaunch” announcements and socio-political rehabilitation through a low-carbon framing as an entry point for STS research. We argue that the persistence of the nuclear past imprints both the present of this industrial sector and the shapes of its imagined and envisaged energy futures. And beyond an industry that is singular in many aspects, we seek to shed light on processes that appear in many other fields of technological development.
Context and questions
Nuclear energy was a minor topic in previous international negotiations on climate change. However, it took an unprecedented place at COP 28 in Dubai in late 2023. The period opened by the Fukushima disaster in 2011 seems to be drawing to a close - at least partially - as several countries have affirmed a commitment to (re)developing nuclear energy. This so-called “relaunch”, “revival” or even “renaissance” consists in strengthening or accelerating development plans after years of crisis. In the context of climate change and geopolitical tensions over energy supply, many actors are reviving and reconfiguring justifications and promises that have accompanied nuclear technology since the post-war years. One of the main justifications is energy abundance. Germany, for example, while often described as one of the most anti-nuclear countries, has considered the possibility of relaunching nuclear energy to tackle energy scarcity in the aftermath of the Ukrainian war and the reduction of Russian gas deliveries. In France, nuclear energy developments are often justified by the need to achieve independence from fossil fuels through the electrification of mobility and the production of hydrogen. The nuclear industry is presented by the French government as a way to ensure affordable electricity for both citizens and companies, and therefore to support economic growth. United States start-ups working on concepts presented as innovative (such as Small Modular Reactors, fast breeder reactors, or fusion reactors) are contributing to a wider movement presenting technological advances as a means of solving global crises. Taken together, these justifications make nuclear energy development appear as an essential auxiliary of a political contract around the sharing of economic value.
However, nuclear power, which only accounts for a small portion of the global energy mix, must also contend with the uncertainties and costs associated with an aging infrastructure, waste management, and decommissioning. While holding a futuristic promise that revives past discourses, nuclear power carries an ancient legacy that weighs on its future. In their first decades as a civilian industry, nuclear technologies relied primarily on an ideal of economic or scientific progress. But what happens when the nuclear industry is simultaneously faced with the issues of both decline and renewal? How does this configuration shed light on the challenges of managing infrastructures that are presented as crucial in the context of climate change? This poses new questions for STS that go beyond the nuclear case: they have become crucial in the nuclear sector due to its infrastructural fragilities while becoming central in a number of “net-zero” policies.
Aims and scope of this call
The goal here is less to investigate these so-called nuclear “relaunches”, “revival” or “renaissance” as such, but rather more to provide tools for understanding them. We acknowledge the novelty of a context that entails reconfigurations. Nevertheless, the structuring hypothesis of this issue is that such relaunches both presuppose and engage persisting legacies. By that, we mean, among other things: the persistence of large technical systems (Hughes, 1987) and of ‘‘old’’ technologies (Edgerton, 2008) that have shaped international dependencies, regulatory frameworks, electricity production, energy policies, monitoring systems, etc. ; the persistence of long term radioactive residues (Hecht, 2023), from high-level waste to installations in decommissioning, and of a decaying infrastructure that requires care (Denis & Pontille, 2022); the persistence of narratives, imaginaries, promises, and overall of ways of engaging with the future (Koselleck, 2004) that often originate in the decades following WWII and are revived today in discourses presenting nuclear technologies as a solution to climate change, energy supply crises and geopolitical turmoil. This scope goes together with a methodological commitment: approaches that consider the long-term dynamics are particularly relevant to understanding the recent “relaunch” announcements.
Moreover, nuclear categories and engineering practices have also irrigated other industrial sectors. Previous research has suggested that nuclear policies can be regarded as a “political laboratory” for other sectors, especially regarding the management of environmental hazards (Bensaude-Vincent et al., 2022). We extend this statement beyond the realm of environmental policy and contend that nuclear power as an object of study plays the role of a magnifying mirror of processes that also occur in other industries. Following Becker (2014), we argue that, connected and discussed together, in-depth case studies can inspire analyses beyond the nuclear case. In this regard, the nuclear sector is an example of a large technological system that has reached its maturity phase and thus has to increasingly deal with uncomfortable knowledge (Rayner, 2012) and uncertainties for the future. This focus could shed light on formerly blackboxed aspects, such as the constraints of materiality jeopardizing the discourses of promises, crucial infrastructures that were made invisible, the generation and circulation of residues or the management of accidents. This issue on nuclear energy pays particular attention to issues often overlooked in the current context.
Possible topics
The special issue aims to discuss and contribute to the following questions:
Lively presence of pasts future
- How are past visions of the future embodied in present infrastructures? How do they weight on “decarbonization” or “transition” strategies?
- How do past visions of nuclear futures inform current projections?
Managing the past in the future
- How are nuclear technologies developed and maintained despite their initial or unforeseen fragilities?
- How do current aging and decommissioning issues affect new nuclear projects? How are future residues taken into account in current scenarios?
Nuclear technology as a laboratory for STS research
- How can the study of past nuclear promises deconstruct and denaturalize today's performative narratives on “energy transition”?
- What does it mean to “relaunch” or “revive” a given technology?
- What role does nuclear energy play in the creation of broader energy fictions?
Timeline
16th December 2024: Submission of an abstract of max 1,000 words (not including references) that details (a) an outline of the argument; (b) the empirical object of analysis; (c) the analytical framework and (d) the methodology. Indicate the names of all authors, their institutional affiliations, and the email address of the corresponding author on the top of the abstract and send it as a PDF document to the guest editors via email.
15th of January 2025: Decision by guest editors about invitation for manuscript submission to the journal’s standard double blind peer review process.
15th May 2025: Submission of the manuscript to guest editors via email and via Journal Website. Before submitting, be sure that your manuscript corresponds to the requirements of the journal’s authors’ guidelines: https://sciencetechnologystudies.journal.fi/about/submissions.
Please remember to select the Section "Special Issue: Energy Futures and Nuclear Infrastructures" when submitting the paper.
Bibliography
Becker, Howard Saul. What about Mozart? What about Murder? Reasoning from Cases. University of Chicago Press, 2014.
Bensaude-Vincent, Bernadette, et al., eds. Living in a nuclear world: from Fukushima to Hiroshima. Routledge, 2022. https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/98553.
Brown, Kate. Manual for Survival: A Chernobyl Guide to the Future. First edition. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2019.
Denis, Jérôme, & David Pontille. Le soin des choses. Politiques de la maintenance. La Découverte, 2022.
Edgerton, David L. The Shock of the Old: Technology and Global History since 1900. Profile Books, 2008.
Felt, Ulrike. « Keeping Technologies Out: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Formation of Austria’s Technopolitical Identity ». In Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power, edited by Sheila Jasanoff & Sang-Hyun Kim, 103‑25. Chicago; London: The University of Chicago Press, 2015.
Hecht, Gabrielle. Being Nuclear: Africans and the Global Uranium Trade. Cambridge, MA: MIT press, 2014.
Hecht, Gabrielle. The radiance of France: nuclear power and national identity after World War II. Inside technology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2009.
Hecht, Gabrielle. Residual governance: how South Africa foretells planetary futures. Duke University Press, 2023.
Hughes, Thomas Parke. « The Evolution of Large Technological Systems ». The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, edited by Wiebe E. Bijker et al., MIT Press, 1987, p. 51‑82.
Ito, Kenji, & Maria Rentetzi. « The Co-Production of Nuclear Science and Diplomacy: Towards a Transnational Understanding of Nuclear Things ». History and Technology 37, no 1 (01.2021): 4‑20. https://doi.org/10.1080/07341512.2021.1905462.
Jasanoff, Sheila, & Sang-Hyun Kim. « Containing the Atom: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea ». Minerva 47, no 2 (06.2009): 119‑46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-009-9124-4.
Johnstone, Phil, & Andy Stirling. « Comparing Nuclear Trajectories in Germany and the United Kingdom: From Regimes to Democracies in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities ». Energy Research & Social Science 59 (01.2020): 101245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.101245.
Kasperski, Tatiana, & Anna Storm. « Eternal Care: Nuclear Waste as Toxic Legacy and Future Fantasy ». Geschichte Und Gesellschaft 46, no 4 (12.2020): 682‑705. https://doi.org/10.13109/gege.2020.46.4.682.
Koselleck, Reinhart. Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time. Columbia University Press, 2004.
Krige, John. « Techno-Utopian Dreams, Techno- Political Realities: The Education of Desire for the Peaceful Atom ». In Utopia/Dystopia, edited by Michael D. Gordin, Helen Tilley, & Gyan Prakash, 151‑75. Princeton University Press, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400834952.151.
Lehtonen, Markku. « Brand New or More of the Same Nuclear? (De)Constructing the Economic Promise of the European Pressurised Reactor in France and the UK ». Science as Culture 32, no 1 (01.2023): 29‑57. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2022.2087505.
Parotte, Céline, Hadrien Macq, & Pierre Delvenne. « The Efficacy Paradox Revisited: “Closing Up” Commitments in Nuclear Waste Governance ». Science, Technology, & Human Values 49, no 2 (03.2024): 344‑70. https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439221112459.
Rayner, Steve. « Uncomfortable Knowledge: The Social Construction of Ignorance in Science and Environmental Policy Discourses ». Economy and Society, vol. 41, no 1 (01.2012), p. 107‑25. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2011.637335 .
Saraç-Lesavre, Başak. « Deep Time Financing? ‘Generational’ Responsibilities and the Problem of Rendez-Vous in the U.S. Nuclear Waste Programme ». Journal of Cultural Economy 14, no 4 (07.2021): 435‑48. https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2020.1818601.
