Nuclear (public)Reaction
Analyzing National Public Sentiment towards Nuclear Energy in Response to Energy-Related
Crises
Arthur Ryan Agbayani
February 28, 2012
Senior Research Project
Submitted in partial satisfaction of a B.A. in
Urban Studies and Planning
University of California, San Diego
Abstract:
Nuclear energy production has emerged as one of the leading methods of
electricity generation in the United States. Although a highly efficient process, its
radioactive nature makes it a controversial topic of debate. With the recent event
of the Fukushima Meltdown, nuclear power has become highly debated in today’s
context. Current research on public opinion towards nuclear energy shows
patterns of declining support following major crises. This research addresses three
questions. (1.) What are some historical examples of energy –related crises in the
past 60+ years? (2.) How have these events affected public opinion toward
nuclear energy? (3.) How does the data following the Fukushima meltdown relate
to the uncovered public opinion patterns? The research combines the context of
energy-related phenomenon with data from national public opinion polls toward
nuclear energy to illustrate a decline in nuclear support following these events.
Poll research statistics from the Roper Center Public Opinion Archive serve as the
primary source of data gathering.
Keywords: nuclear energy, public opinion, polling, energy policy, nuclear crisis
Introduction
Nuclear power plants emerged in the mid-twentieth century as innovative massgenerators of electricity. Today, the U.S. is the world’s largest producer of nuclear power,
generating over 30 percent of the worldwide electricity supply. From a local standpoint, the U.S.
produces 19.8 percent of its electrical energy in nuclear power plants1. Nuclear power production
1
Statistics drawn from www.our-energy.com/nuclear_energy
Agbayani 2
generates a vast amount of electricity which meets the highly demanding energy needs of U.S.
citizens. According to 2010 CEC2 statistics, the United States has a population of 308,746,000
and uses an average of 12,146 kWh per capita3. In recent times however, these plants have been
a controversial topic of debate. Supporters of nuclear power plants promote their efficiency in
electricity production, while antagonists protest against the harmful dangers surrounding their
radioactive nature. While the two opposing parties hold steadfast to their beliefs, public
sentiment toward nuclear energy is constantly shifting.
Two recent 2011 nuclear-related events are the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Plant
Meltdown in Japan and the September 8, 2011 Blackout in the Southwest region of the U.S. It
seems as if now (more than ever) current energy production policies must be placed under
scrutiny, given the vulnerability of the nation’s energy grid. Two factors that influence public
opinion toward nuclear energy are the context of the time period and the occurrence of energyrelated crises. Opinion polls are highly beneficial because they serve as a fundamental data
source to study national public sentiment towards nuclear energy. According to M.V. Ramana4,
public opinion polls show that support for nuclear power has declined since the event at
Fukushima, Japan. Many factors contribute to this overall decline, but the underlying conclusion
is that nuclear plants are perceived as risky technologies. This resistance, Ramana further
outlines, is likely to deter the further construction of new nuclear reactors. Public opinion
therefore, is important to study because it carries weight among policy-makers and legislators.
Although there are currently 104 functioning nuclear reactors spread across the nation, no
nuclear facility has been constructed since the mid-1970s. The San Onofre Nuclear Generating
2
California Energy Commission
Data from energyalmanac.ca.gov/
4
Researcher appointed by the Nuclear Futures Laboratory and the Program on Science and Global Security,
focusing on the future of nuclear energy in the context of climate change and nuclear disarmament.
3
Agbayani 3
Station (SONGS) is the power plant most applicable to the Southern California region. Located
directly south of San Clemente on the California coast, this structure consists of three units (two
of which are functional today) and generates about 17,000 GW of electricity annually5. A second
facility for nuclear power within the state of California is the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power
Plant. Located in the San Luis Obispo region, this structure consists of two units and generates
about 18,000 GW of electricity annually6. Making up 15.3 percent of in-state electricity
generation, nuclear energy production is an essential part of Southern California’s energy grid
because it satisfies a significant part of the state’s energy needs7.
Although nuclear energy production has become one of the most popular and efficient
methods of electricity generation in the country, the U.S. has halted further investment in these
facilities. High construction costs, concerns with public safety, and issues with proper waste
disposal methods are some of the many major concerns behind the discontinued investment in
nuclear technology. With Global Warming on the rise, it is no secret that sustainability is a topic
that world leaders, policy makers, and even average citizens must be conscious about when
making decisions. Furthermore, there have been a number of nuclear-related events which have
highlighted the inevitable dangers and risks surrounding nuclear power. These crises are
significant to note because they are highly influential in shaping public support for this
technology. Generally speaking, these crises have a detrimental effect on public support for
nuclear power production.
The central research question is: how has public sentiment towards nuclear energy shifted
in response to energy-related crises in the past 60 years? The study of public opinion polls before
and after significant crises denotes a shift from growing support to greater opposition for nuclear
5
Data from www.sce.com/
Data from www.pge.com/
7
Data from energyalmanac.ca.gov/
6
Agbayani 4
energy practices. A long-term observance of historical trends in public opinion illustrates a
general pattern of opposition to nuclear energy. The occurrence of nuclear energy-related
phenomenon, combined with other outside factors, has been detrimental to support for nuclear
technology. This research serves as useful information for world leaders and policy-makers to
recognize public dissatisfaction with current nuclear energy practices and ultimately influence
them to create policies that promote renewable energy as a healthy and necessary alternative to
nuclear power plants.
Conceptual Framework and Literature Review
The nuclear debate has gained a lot of interest due to increasing concerns about climate
change and planet sustainability. Studies related to nuclear energy that have emerged in the
twentieth century primarily revolve around public opinion and the many factors that shape it.
The research conducted by Judith de Groot and Linda Steg revolves around a 123-person sample
of the Dutch population. In accordance with Ramana’s article, these researchers also reiterate
nuclear energy’s highly controversial nature. In the Netherlands, Dodewaard (the country’s first
commercial nuclear plant) was shut down in 1997 after only 28 years of operation. Concerns
regarding nuclear safety, radioactive pollution, and faulty machinery were the primary driving
forces for its ultimate closure. Groot and Steg’s study focused on the individuals’ perspectives
surrounding the risks and benefits associated with nuclear energy production. The methodology
of their study was to distribute questionnaires via mail to a random sample of Dutch citizens.
After a brief introduction that stated general and unbiased facts about the facility, the
questionnaire proceeded to ask questions pertaining to the risks and benefits of the country’s
increased supply and greater use of nuclear energy. It then concluded by asking the respondents
whether they ultimately categorized themselves as either “supporters” or “opponents” of an
Agbayani 5
increased supply and greater use of nuclear energy in the country’s power infrastructure. The
findings were relatively even. 51 percent of the respondents were in favor of nuclear energy
while 47 percent were against it. The remaining two percent did not answer. This literature is
relevant to the research because it provides an example of modern research on public opinion
regarding nuclear energy. Their focus however, is more concerned with the causes for such
numbers rather than the figures themselves.
M.V. Ramana’s article “Nuclear Power and the Public” talks about the decline in public
support for nuclear energy. He specifically discusses Japanese public sentiment following the
devastating Fukushima power plant meltdown. In response many protests arose in the nearby
towns where major Japanese power plants were situated. According to 2010 Japanese national
polls, between 41 and 54 percent of Japanese citizens support the reduction of nuclear plants8.
These figures can be compared to a 2005 poll conducted by the International Atomic Energy
Agency which concluded that 82 percent of Japanese citizens favored building more plants or
maintaining already existing ones. Public support of nuclear power plants has decreased
significantly (82 percent to about 47 percent) from 2005 to 2011. According to Ramana, these
patterns are not just specific to Japan. In fact, nuclear energy has declined in popularity among
many nations in the world. In the United States for example, an April 2011 Washington PostABC poll found that 64 percent of American citizens opposed the construction of new reactors
following the Fukushima events (Craighill and Cohen, 2011). Another important poll conducted
by CBS News in March 2011 (soon after the Fukushima meltdown) showed that only 43 percent
of respondents approve of building new reactors, down from a 57 percent approval rating in 2008
(Cooper and Sussman, 2011). Nuclear power however, was not always so unpopular. In the
United States in 1977, when CBS News conducted one of the first polls on nuclear power, 69
8
Kyodo News 2011
Agbayani 6
percent of those surveyed were supportive of the U.S. building more nuclear power plants. Two
years later, after the 1979 Three Mile Island accident, public support for new plants decreased to
46 percent. It dropped even further to 34 percent after the Chernobyl accident in 1986. Ramana’s
studies of opinion polls show that a majority of the U.S. population has consistently been
opposed to the construction of new nuclear reactors following large-scale accidents (Bolsen and
Cook, 2008; Rosa and Dunlap, 1994). Since the 1979 Three Mile Island incident, construction of
new nuclear facilities has ceased in the U.S.
The article by Goodfellow et al. also discusses the importance of public acceptance of
nuclear safety in the construction of new power plants. The authors assert that public perception
of nuclear power has been an active research topic for decades, with many studies focusing on
the level of public support for (or opposition to) nuclear power. Investigators of this topic delve
into the psychological and sociological factors that influence people. Like Ramana, the authors
conclude that the recent events at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan have
resulted in a renewed focus on both the safety of nuclear power and the public understanding of
it. The negative public attitude has had far-reaching consequences for the nuclear industry. In
some parts of the world, there have been numerous delays and cancellations of nuclear projects.
In the United Kingdom for example, the ONR (Office for Nuclear Regulation9) is currently in the
process of decommissioning some nuclear plants while reassessing the safety of others. The
authors assert that understanding why the public objects to nuclear power plants helps address
the obligations and underlying reliance to this power source. They mention changes in
government nuclear policy stemming from the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl incidents in
1979 and 1986. According to the authors, the legacy of these events has continued throughout
the 1990s and early 2000s. Goodfellow et al. admit that their research shows that there are many
9
Governing body in the UK which regulates the nuclear industry in terms of safety and commission permits
Agbayani 7
complex factors at work that shape the perception of nuclear energy in many ways. They also
conclude that policy makers must recognize the importance of public perception of nuclear
power as a significant factor within the global nuclear world. These researchers draw upon
statistics from the Eurobarometer, which is a polling archive displaying survey data from
countries within the European Union10. This data source identifies a spectrum of beliefs about
the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear power. The model that these researchers illustrated
is what they referred to as the “risk/benefit logic model.” According to this highly intuitive
model, support for nuclear energy diminishes if the risks of nuclear power outweigh the benefits.
Likewise, support increases if the benefits outweigh the risks. If the risks outweigh the benefits,
then people favor the expansion of nuclear power. However, if the risks outweigh the benefits,
then people choose to protest against it. The central factors here are perceived risks/benefits and
calculated risks/benefits.
Research Strategy
The research strategy is to first conduct background information regarding nuclear energy
output and policy in the United States. Informational websites like www.nrc.gov/11 and
www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/12 provide helpful figures and statistics pertaining to the nuclear
industry in the U.S. Popular topics drawn from these sources include waste management, nuclear
safety, reactor technologies, and public perception. The next step is to gather background data on
historical nuclear-related crises that will provide contextual evidence regarding the happenings
for this phenomenon. The website of the World Nuclear Association13 provides helpful
overviews of these events. The dates of the incidents are then identified to serve as reference
10
Including (but not limited to) Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, and the UK
Official website of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
12
Official website of the Union of Concerned Scientists
13
http://www.world-nuclear.org/
11
Agbayani 8
points for narrowing down the polls to ones relevant to the research. One significant source
behind this research is archival data from the UCSD Geisel Library database. The EBSCOoperated engines draw out scholarly articles, periodicals, and journals pertaining to these events.
After researching historical nuclear-related crises, three events are selected: the atomic bombing
of Hiroshima/Nagasaki in 1945; the Three Mile Island accident in 1979; and the Chernobyl
Disaster in 1986.
Because the focus of my research is on public sentiment, I draw from public opinion polls
from the Roper Center’s online opinion archive. As one of the world’s leading archives of social
science data (specializing in data of public opinion surveys), the Roper Center’s website provides
visual graphs and statistical data from public opinion surveys. Founded in 1947 by Elmo Roper,
the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research is an archive database operated through the
University of Connecticut (UCONN). It collects and preserves public opinion data not only from
the United States, but also from foreign countries around the world. To date, it includes over
17,000 datasets and continues to grow. The majority of the surveys are national samples, but it
does however include some state and local surveys. This database will serve as the primary
source of information to study the change in public sentiment towards nuclear energy over time.
One major challenge to this research is to establish some sort of consistency between poll
data gathering. For example, ABC News might conduct a national survey asking a certain
question with a specific approach or wording. In order to study an accurate shift over time, it is
necessary to use a poll survey asking the same or similar question. It is also beneficial to focus
on polls conducted by the same organization. This removes any biases or outside factors that
could jeopardize the integrity of a representative sample of the population due to alternate
wording of the question. The last portion of the research looks at the most recent public opinion
Agbayani 9
polls following the Fukushima Dai-ichi incident to see if the figures complement the same
patterns drawn from the previous studied events. Another significant challenge is the availability
of poll data for events dating back to the early twentieth century. Because poll data first emerged
on official record in the mid-1930s, the availability of information dating far back is not always
readily available.
Findings and Analysis
Hiroshima and Nagasaki Atomic Bombings (Aug 1945)
The first nuclear-related event of this study is the 1945 bombing of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki, two prominently militarized Japanese cities. In an effort to elicit the surrender of
Japan, the United States (under the Manhattan Project14) developed nuclear weapons which were
deployed on the two cities. Only On August 6, “Little Boy15” was dropped on the city of
Hiroshima, Japan. A few days later on August 9, “Fat Man16” was dropped on Nagasaki. In the
ensuing months following the devastating bombings, over 240,000 Japanese deaths (cumulative)
were recorded. Notable causes of death included severe burns, falling debris, radiation sickness,
and other injuries. Six days after the strike on Nagasaki, the Japanese government announced its
surrender to the Allies, thus ending WWII. Still a morally debated topic, the bombings of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki have had reverberating effects not only in Japan, but throughout the
world.
A 1964 survey called “Hopes and Fears” was conducted by the Institute for International
Social Research. Accessed in the Roper Center’s archive, this data reveals the responses based
on 1,564 personal interviews issued by the Gallup Organization. The findings show that an
overwhelming majority of respondents perceived nuclear power as a benefit to mankind. The
14
A research and development program which produced the first atomic bomb
Codename for the atomic bomb striking Hiroshima, Japan
16
Codename for the atomic bomb striking Nagasaki, Japan
15
Agbayani 10
specific survey question stated was “In general, do you think the development of nuclear power
will turn out to be a benefit or a curse to mankind?” The question is essentially making
respondents look into the long-term future of such technology and assessing whether they see
greater benefit or greater risk in its practice (similar to Goodfellow et al’s “risk/benefit logic
model”). The results are organized into an informational bar graph below.
Hopes and Fears Survey 1964
50%
45%
45%
40%
35%
28%
30%
25%
20%
15%
14%
13%
Both or Neither
Don't Know
10%
5%
0%
Benefit
Curse
Question: “In General, do you think the development of nuclear power will turn out to be a benefit or a curse to
mankind?”
*Data from www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/
According to the bar graph, 45 percent of respondents said the development of nuclear
power would benefit mankind, while 28 percent perceived it as a curse. 14 percent of
respondents took a neutral stance and said “both or neither.” Lastly, 13 percent of people simply
did not know. Being that the study was conducted in 1964, it displays public sentiment well after
the 1945 atomic bombings; but because this technology heavily benefitted the United States in
wartime, its popularity carried on throughout the next 19 years. It is also significant to notice that
a significant percentage of the sample (27 percent) either did not have an opinion or did not
know how to respond. This is perhaps due to the many uncertainties surrounding such a new and
Agbayani 11
innovative technology. The nuclear industry gained favorable momentum following the
bombings which sparked the construction of new reactors across the nation.
Three Mile Island Accident (28 Mar 1979)
The Three Mile Island Accident is considered to be the worst nuclear power accident on
U.S. soil. Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station (TMI) is a nuclear plant situated on the
Susquehanna River located just south of Harrisburg, PA. It has two operating units, jointly
owned by General Public Utilities and Metropolitan Edison. On the morning of Wednesday
March 28, 1979, the relief valve in the second unit failed to operate correctly, causing large
amounts of reactor coolant to escape into the environment. People within the surrounding
communities were forced to evacuate. The reactor was immediately shut down while rescue
teams focused their efforts on mitigating the high pressure and immense heat, which could have
potentially resulted in a devastating explosion.
While the Three Mile Island event had the potential to be highly destructive, there were
no radiological health effects on record. The Pennsylvania Department of Health maintained
registry among the 30,000-plus people who lived within five miles of the power plant at the time
of the accident. By the late 1970s however, the registry was discontinued for lack of evidence to
support unusual health trends. Further health studies showed no abnormal or alarming numbers
of cancer-related diseases; however physicians did note significant psychological stress during
and shortly after the event17. The WNA18 article further asserts that the incident precipitated two
major effects. First, the accident drew heavy attention to nuclear safety thus causing stricter
nuclear regulatory laws to be drafted. Secondly, public confidence in nuclear energy (especially
17
18
Summary from www.world-nuclear.org/info
World Nuclear Association
Agbayani 12
in the U.S.) declined sharply. Statistics show that the decline in support for nuclear construction
continued even through the 1980s and 1990s.
A telephone survey conducted by NBC News/ Associated Press from September 19September 20 interviewed 1,600 randomized adults from across the nation. The survey question
they asked was, “Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: ‘No more nuclear
power plants should be built in this country until questions about safety are resolved, even
though some say this will mean energy shortages within 10 years.” The results are tabulated in
the following graph.
NBC News/ Associated Press Poll (Sept 1978)
60%
52%
50%
39%
40%
30%
20%
9%
10%
0%
Agree
Disagree
Not Sure
Question: “Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: ‘No more nuclear power plants should be built in
the country until questions about safety are resolved, even though some say this will mean energy shortages within 10
years.”
*Data from www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/
According to the graph, 52 percent of national adults agreed with the statement to halt
further construction of nuclear plants. 39 percent disagreed with the statement and proposed
continued construction, while 9 percent were not sure. Although this poll was conducted before
the accident, there still exists an imbalance with the opposition outnumbering support for an
Agbayani 13
expanded nuclear industry. Additionally, the percentage of respondents who did not have a
particular opinion steadily decreased in comparison to earlier studies. This is perhaps due to
nuclear energy emerging as a more established industry.
NBC News/ Associated Press later conducted the exact same survey immediately in April
1979, following the Three Mile Incident. Like the previous example, the data was collected from
1,600 national adults between the time dates of April 30- May 1, 1979. Again, the survey
question asked, “Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: ‘No more nuclear
power plants should be built in this country until questions about safety are resolved, even
though some say this will mean energy shortages within 10 years.” The results however, were
notably different.
NBC News/ Associated Press Poll (April 1979)
70%
65%
60%
50%
40%
29%
30%
20%
10%
6%
0%
Agree
Disagree
Not Sure
Question: “Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: ‘No more nuclear power plants should be built in the
country until questions about safety are resolved, even though some say this will mean energy shortages within 10 years.”
*Data from www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/
According to the graph, 65 percent agreed with the statement to cease construction. Only
29 percent disagreed, and 6 percent were not sure. Judging from these numbers, it is clear that
there was a notable increase in opposition to nuclear power expansion. Immediately following
Agbayani 14
the incident, the percentage of respondents in favor of halting the construction of new nuclear
reactors increased by 13 percent, while the percentage of those against new reactors decreased by
10 percent.
A subsequent NBC News/Associated Press survey conducted in 1980 shows resurgence
back to similar statistics before the accident occurred. Like the previous two surveys, this poll
was based on 1,599 telephone interviews of American national adults. According to these
numbers, the number of people opposed to the construction of new power plants reduced to 57
percent (down 8 percent from the previous year). The percentage of people in favor to new
power plants increased to 36 percent (up 7 percent from the previous year). 6 percent of the
sample was not sure.
NBC News/ Associated Press Poll 1980
60%
57%
50%
40%
36%
30%
20%
7%
10%
0%
Agree
Disagree
Not Sure
Question: “Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: ‘No more nuclear power plants should be built in
the country until questions about safety are resolved, even though some say this will mean energy shortages within 10
years.”
*Data from www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/
Generally speaking, public sentiment against nuclear expansion experienced a spike
(increase) in the short-term period following the crises. However, the figures returned to a more
Agbayani 15
stable state once the “chaos” of the event blew over. Although it is argued that people have
“short term memories” when it comes to reacting to catastrophic events, the percentage of those
opposed to nuclear expansion was still higher by 5 percent, showing a gradual increase in public
opposition.
A subsequent NBC News/ Associated Press general poll in November 1982 asked 1,583
adults if they “think the future of energy needs of the U.S. would be better served by expanding
nuclear power, or would they be better served by more conservation and expansion of other
energy sources?” The results are portrayed below.
NBC News/ Associated Press Poll (Nov 1982)
80%
67%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
19%
10%
6%
8%
Both
Not Sure
0%
More Nuclear Power
Conservation/Other
Sources
Question: “Do you think the future of energy needs of the U.S. would be better served by expanding nuclear power, or
would they be better served by more conservation and expansion of other energy sources?”
*Data from www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/
According to the graph, 19 percent of respondents favored more nuclear power, while an
overwhelming 67 percent favored conservation and other sources. Six percent favored an
increase in both, while 8 percent were not sure. From these figures, we can see that the
percentage of national adults in support of conservation/other sources is more than double the
percentage of those in favor for more nuclear power. By these numbers, it is clear that public
Agbayani 16
support for nuclear power is on the decline. During this time period, the public begins to look to
other sources of energy beyond the nuclear industry.
Chernobyl Disaster (26 April 1986)
Chernobyl was a nuclear power plant located in the Ukraine. During a routine systems
test on the morning of Saturday April 1986, reactor 4 at the plant malfunctioned causing a series
of explosions to occur, ultimately killing two plant workers. Large amounts of radioactive
contamination were released into the atmosphere for the next 10 days following the meltdown.
Unlike the Three Mile Island incident, this event directly affected residents in the nearby
vicinity. Most of the emitted hazardous material was in the form of contaminated dust and
debris. The lighter materials however, were carried by wind over the Ukraine and extended to the
countries of Belarus, and Russia. Some even continued into parts of Scandinavia and Europe.
Workers and their families were forced to move to a new town distant from the plant. The
Chernobyl Disaster is widely considered to be the worst nuclear power plant crises in history.
A Jan 1985 survey conducted by Cambridge Reports National Omnibus Survey gathered
data from 1,500 personal interviews of national adults. They were asked whether they “agreed
with the proposal of ‘Building more nuclear power plants.” The results are below.
Agbayani 17
Cambridge Reports National Omnibus Survey
(Jan 1985)
70%
59%
60%
50%
40%
31%
30%
20%
10%
10%
0%
Favor
Oppose
Don't Know
Question: “Do you agree with the proposal of ‘building more nuclear power plants’?”
*Data from www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/
According to the graph, 31percent of respondents were in favor of building more nuclear
power plants. 59 percent on the other hand, opposed the construction of new plants while 10
percent did not know.
Following the April 1986 events, Cambridge Reports National Omnibus Survey
conducted the same survey. A sample of national adults was asked whether they “agreed with the
proposal of ‘Building more nuclear power plants.”
Agbayani 18
Cambridge Reports National Omnibus Survey
(April 1986)
80%
69%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
24%
20%
7%
10%
0%
Favor
Oppose
Don't Know
Question: “Do you agree with the proposal of ‘building more nuclear power plants’?”
*Data from www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/
Under these numbers, 24 percent of respondents were in favor of building more nuclear
power plants, while 69 percent opposed such construction. Seven percent of respondents did not
know. Over the course of a 16 month period (Jan 1985 – Jul 1986) there was a notable 10 percent
increase of people opposed to the construction of new reactors. Support for more nuclear power
plants decreased by 7 percent.
A year later, the same organization conducted the same survey. This study was based on
1,500 personal interviews of national adults. The results are depicted on the following page.
Agbayani 19
Cambridge Reports National Omnibus Survey
(July 1987)
60%
56%
50%
40%
34%
30%
20%
10%
10%
0%
Favor
Oppose
Don't Know
Question: “Do you agree with the proposal of ‘building more nuclear power plants’?”
*Data from www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/
Similar to the study surrounding the Three Mile Island incident, opposition against the
nuclear industry experienced a spike immediately following the event. However, these figures
returned to comparable and consistent levels from before the crisis occurred. Interestingly
enough, support for more nuclear power was marginally higher roughly two years after the event,
while opposition gradually declined. Comparing the numbers from 1985 to the numbers from
1987, those opposed to the construction of new plants decreased by 3 percent from 1985-1987
and those in favor of new plants increased by 3 percent. The determining variable here is that the
Chernobyl incident occurred overseas as opposed to on U.S. home soil. Because there was a
spatial factor of the event happening overseas, public sentiment in the U.S. was not particularly
altered following the event, as highlighted by the relatively consistent statistics before and after.
Fukushima Accident (March 2011)
On March 11, 2011 the (9.0 magnitude) Great East Japan Earthquake precipitated a
tsunami hitting the eastern seaboard of Japan, where the Fukushima nuclear power plant is
Agbayani 20
located. As one of the largest nuclear power plants for the country of Japan, this plant consists of
6 separate boiling water reactors and has an output capacity of 4,696 MW19. The tsunami
disabled the power supply and cooling mechanisms, causing the three core reactors to melt.
Although there are no recorded deaths or diseases directly caused by the meltdown, large
quantities of radioactive waste were released into the surrounding environment. This incident
was highly significant in recognizing the vulnerability of world electrical grid systems to
earthquake damage.
The Civil Society Institute in collaborated with the Opinion Research Corporation, to
conduct 814 telephone interviews of national adults. The participants were asked,
“Again, thinking about the nuclear reactor crisis in Japan (2011)… would you say that
you are now more or less supportive than you were a month ago of expanding nuclear
power in the United States? (If More/ Less supportive, ask) Are you much more
supportive, somewhat more supportive, somewhat less supportive or much less
supportive?”
Civil Society Institute Poll (March 2011)
Don't Know/Not Sure
2%
No Change
14%
Much Less Supportive
28%
Somewhat Less Supportive
30%
Somewhat More Supportive
17%
Much More Supportive
8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
*Data from www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/
19
Information from www.tepco.co.jp/
*official website of the Tokyo Electric Power Company
30%
35%
Agbayani 21
According to the data, 8 percent of respondents were much more supportive of expanding
nuclear power in the U.S., while 17 percent of respondents said they were only somewhat more
supportive. An overwhelming 30 percent of respondents said they were somewhat less
supportive, and 28 percent were much less supportive of expanding the nation’s nuclear industry.
14 percent of the sample experienced no change, and the remaining 3 percent were not sure. The
general breakdown is that 58 percent of the sample was less supportive of expanding nuclear
power in the U.S., while only 25 percent were more supportive of nuclear expansion following
the event. As a highly lopsided statistic, the percentage opposed to an increased nuclear industry
(58 percent) is more than double of the percentage in support of it (25 percent). By comparison,
these figures complement the evident trend in decline towards nuclear energy following nuclearrelated crises.
In April 2011 ABC News/ Washington Post conducted a study based on 1,001 telephone
interviews of U.S. national adults. The interviewees were asked, “In general, would you favor or
oppose building more nuclear power plants at this time?” the results are displayed below.
ABC News/ Washingon Post Poll (April 2011)
No Opinion
3%
Oppose Strongly
47%
Oppose Somewhat
17%
Favor Somewhat
13%
Favor Strongly
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
In general, would you favor or oppose building more nuclear power plants at this time? (If Favor/Oppose, ask) Do
you favor/ oppose this strongly or somewhat? *Data from www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/
Agbayani 22
In the following month after the Fukushima meltdown, an overwhelming 64 percent of
the national sample either strongly or somewhat opposed the construction of more nuclear power
plants, while only 33 percent strongly or somewhat favored the construction of new plants.
Finally, 3 percent of the sample had no opinion. Because the crisis at Fukushima is a relatively
new phenomenon, there are limited available studies to compare in observing public sentiment
during the ensuing years following the event. Further studies would be interesting to compare to
the previous statistics to uncover changes in sentiment in coming years.
Conclusion
Over the course of the past 60+ years, numerous nuclear-related crises have occurred.
These events highlight the dangers surrounding nuclear power plants. Nuclear power is one of
the major sources of energy production not only in the United States, but also in many
industrialized countries around the world. It is no secret that the current energy grids of both the
U.S. and other industrial nations are highly vulnerable and very unstable. Today, nuclear energy
production continues to be one of the major forces behind mass electricity generation. The
dangers surrounding nuclear energy however, make it a controversial subject for policy makers
worldwide. Given the context of the most recent energy-related crises of the Southwest Blackout
and the Fukushima Dai-ichi meltdown, heavy scrutiny should be placed on nuclear power. Public
opinion towards nuclear energy practice is a very important topic to take into consideration when
dealing with regulatory policies and legislation. The Roper Center Public Opinion Archive is a
highly useful source of data to observe trends in public opinion over time. As emphasized by
Ramana and de Groot et al., the decreased public support for nuclear power has consequently led
to the decline of the nuclear industry worldwide.
Agbayani 23
This research focuses on three world-wide historical nuclear related crises that have
affected national public opinion towards this technology. The first is the atomic bombings of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki (1945) at the end of WWII. The poll data following the bombings
reveal that the nation believed that the future use of nuclear power would “benefit” mankind.
Drawing from the studies of de Groot and Steg, these researchers discus the risk/benefit model,
which they argue, completely shapes public opinion. In this particular case, the U.S. benefited
greatly from nuclear technology because it elicited the surrender of Japan. Therefore, public
support was high because the benefits far outweighed the risks. This trend however, does not
apply to the following events.
The next historically significant event is the 1979 Three Mile Island incident in
Pennsylvania. Public opposition changed dramatically in comparison to the previous time period.
The percentage of American adults opposed to expanding the nuclear industry increased by 13
percent (52 percent to 65 percent) following the incident20. In this case, the risks outweighed the
benefits due to the potential health scare, which ultimately caused a shift in sentiment. Similar to
the Three Mile Island incident is the Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine. A Cambridge Reports
National Survey illustrates further decline in nuclear support during the time period surrounding
the Chernobyl disaster. According to their figures, the percentage of American adults opposed to
the nuclear industry increased by 10 percent (59 percent to 69 percent)21 in the span of 16
months.
This research however, uncovers a unique pattern. The percentage of opposition against
nuclear power experiences a drastic increase in the short-term period following the event.
However, these percentages equalize back to more stable figures in the long-term time period.
20
21
Data from the same NBC News/Associated Press poll
Data from the same Cambridge Reports Omnibus National Survey
Agbayani 24
Regardless of the short term spike (increase), opposition toward nuclear power has steadily been
on the decline. Another factor which affects national opinion in the U.S. is proximity to the
crises. National public opinion against nuclear power increases greater when the crises happen
on U.S. soil than when they happen overseas.
Observation of opinion polls over the past 60 years shows a steady decline in support for
nuclear energy. With the growing popularity of sustainability and Global Warming mitigation,
people have recognized the need to transition away from the older established technologies for
energy production and instead toward renewable energy sources. Today, many organizations
make it their primary mission to regulate the nuclear industry to be safer and less harmful to the
environment. The Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility for example, is an advocacy organization
working to “educate and protect the citizens of California and future generations from the
dangers of radioactive contamination from nuclear power plants22.” Their primary methods are to
present both policy-makers and the public with concrete information on the harmful nature of
these plants.
Ultimately, public sentiment is important to study because it shows how the national
population feels about certain topics. Research on public sentiment towards nuclear energy is
integral to precipitate a shift to renewable energy. The data can and should be used by policy
makers to base their actions on when thinking of energy production practices. Public sentiment is
a mechanism to influence and pressure policy makers to rethink current energy production policy
and furthermore recognize the growing dissatisfaction with nuclear energy and ultimately act for
the betterment of the people.
22
From the official webpage found on a4nr.org/
Agbayani 25
Works Cited
Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility, accessed October 13, 2011, http://a4nr.org/.
Bolsen T and Cook FL (2008) Public opinion energy policy: 1974-2006. Public Opinion
Quarterly 72(2): 364-388.
Cooper M and Sussman D (2011) Nuclear power loses support in new poll. New York Times,
March 22. Available at: http://nytimes.com/2011/03/23/us/23poll.html.
Craighill PM and Cohen J (2011) Slim majority of Americans see nuclear plants as safe energy
sources, poll finds. Washington Post, April 20. Available at: http://www.washington
post.com/politics/slim-majority-of-americans-see-nuclear-plants-as-safe-energy-sourcespoll-finds/2011/04/19/AFRnZG9D_story.html.
De Groot, Judith I. M., and Linda Steg. 2010. "Morality and Nuclear Energy: Perceptions of
Risks and Benefits, Personal Norms, and Willingness to Take Action Related to Nuclear
Energy." Risk Analysis: An International Journal 30, no. 9: 1363-1373. Environment
Index, EBSCOhost (accessed February 6, 2011).
Goodfellow, Martin J., Hugo R. Williams, and AdisaAzapagic. 2011. "Nuclear renaissance,
public perception and design criteria: An exploratory review." Energy Policy 39, no. 10:
6199-6210. Environment Index, EBSCOhost (accessed Febrary 6, 2011).
2010. "Government Owes $142 Billion in Damages for Failing to Store Spent Nuclear Fuel."
Hazardous Waste Consultant 28, no. 5: 3.5-3.8. Environment Index, EBSCOhost
(accessed February 6, 2011).
Greenberg, Michael, and Heather Barnes Truelove. 2011. "Energy Choices and Risk Beliefs: Is It
Just Global Warming and Fear of a Nuclear Power Plant Accident?." Risk Analysis: An
International Journal 31, no. 5: 819-831. Environment Index, EBSCOhost (accessed
November 16, 2011).
2011. "Nuclear Energy." Monthly Energy Review 113-116. GreenFILE, EBSCOhost (accessed
February 7, 2011).
Piera, Mireia. 2010. "Sustainability issues in the development of Nuclear Fission energy."
Energy Conversion & Management 51, no. 5: 938-946. Environment Index, EBSCOhost
(accessed February 6, 2011).
Ramana, M. V. 2011. "Nuclear power and the public."Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists 67, no.
4: 43-51. Environment Index, EBSCOhost (accessed November 16, 2011).
Roper Center Public Opinion Archives, accessed November 28, 2011,
www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/.
Rosa EA and Dunlap RE (1994) Nuclear power: Three decades of public opinion. Public
Opinion Quarterly (58)2: 295-324.
Schmid, Sonja D. 2011. "When safe enough is not good enough: Organizing safety at
Chernobyl." Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists 67, no. 2: 19-29. Environment Index,
EBSCOhost (accessed February 6, 2011).
World Nuclear Association. www.world-nuclear.org/info. (accessed February 7, 2012).