External peer review of the U.S. Department of Energy's assessment of ''damages and benefits of the fuel cycles: Estimation methods, impacts, and values''. Final report.

摘要

The need for better assessments of the ''external'' benefits and costs of environmental effects of various fuel cycles was identified during the development of the National Energy Strategy. The growing importance of this issue was emphasized by US Department of Energy (DOE) management because over half of the states were already pursuing some form of social costing in electricity regulation and a well-established technical basis for such decisions was lacking. This issue was identified as a major area of controversy--both scientifically and politically--in developing energy policies at the state and national level. In 1989, the DOE's Office of Domestic and International Energy Policy commissioned a study of the external environmental damages and benefits of the major fuel cycles involved in electric power generation. Over the next 3-year period, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Resources for the Future conducted the study and produced a series of documents (fuel cycle documents) evaluating the costs of environmental damages of the coal, oil, natural gas, biomass, hydroelectric, and nuclear fuel cycles, as well as the Background Document on methodological issues. These documents described work that took almost 3 years and $2.5 million to complete and whose implications could be far reaching. In 1992, the Secretary of Energy sought advice on the overall concepts underlying the studies and the means employed to estimate environmental externalities. He asked the Secretary of Energy's Advisory Board to undertake a peer review of the fuel cycle studies and encouraged the Board to turn to outside expertise, as needed.