(Re-)constructing Nuclear Waste Management in Sweden: The Involvement of Concerned Groups, 1970–2010

Sweden constitutes a leading nation concerning developing technological solutions for final disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The KBS-3 solution that is now to be implemented in Östhammar, northeast of Stockholm, has become a reference concept for the program for sustainable nuclear power within the EU. A common understanding is that the Swedish solution is the outcome of a political culture characterized by consensus making and cooperation. In this paper, we argue that such an understanding is misleading. On the contrary, we show that the Swedish solution is a product of severe conflicts between concerned groups (the antinuclear movement, environmental organizations, local resistance groups, oppositional scientists, journalists, and intellectuals) and the nuclear energy industry. In this paper, we investigate the efforts performed by concerned groups in Sweden and their effects on the KBS-3. The concept of concerned groups describes a dynamic process by which different types of groups transform depending on their negotiability and their participation (or not) in the configuration of technoscientific phenomena. Thus, we also analyze how the critique, actions and research of concerned groups underwent a qualitative transition related to the degree to which they participated in the scientific, technological and political configuration of the final depository for spent nuclear fuel: from radical deconstruction of technoscientific initiatives coming from the nuclear energy industry, to co-construction of the technical solution KBS-3, to a reconstructivist agenda, that is, the production of knowledge and technical solutions potentially usable by nuclear engineers and politicians beyond the research efforts of the nuclear energy industry

Використання системи автоматизованого розрахунку для вибору оптимальної конструкції валу ротора молоткової дробарки

Paul Crutzen’s 2006 call for geoengineering research triggered public debate in the mass media of several countries. Since then, a common belief among numerous involved scientists has been that more geoengineering experimentation or research is needed and that geoengineering should be carefully considered in a precautionary way as an emergency option or ‘Plan B’. Despite the controversial potential of geoengineering in terms of mega-risks, ethical dilemmas and governance challenges, public geoengineering debate in the daily press from 2006 to 2013 was heavily dominated by accounts of scientists’ arguments for more geoengineering research or even deployment, only about 8% of mass media articles expressing criticism of geoengineering. However, based on a reading of 700 articles published worldwide in 2014 and 2015, we demonstrate a gradual shift in the coverage, and the daily press now primarily reports critical views of geoengineering technologies. The patterns outlined here point in the same direction: It seems as though the grand idea of geoengineering as Plan B is fading.LUC

Winter in the Forest, Dalecarlia

Illustration by Anshelm Schultzberg courtesy of the John Herron Art Museum

Local conflicts and national consensus:The strange case of circular economy in Sweden

Swedish press debate regarding the idea of a ‘circular economy’ is analysed to enable critical reflection on the development and use of the concept. We examine how actor positions formed around ideas of increased circularity. Using press material from 2012 to 2019 we identify positions on circular economy taken by Swedish companies, public authorities, political parties, and opinion makers. Our analysis reveals convergence amongst these actors at the national level despite ongoing situated local environmental conflicts. We show that this convergence is enabled by the convening power of ambiguity, which characterizes the use of circular economy ideas as a ‘floating signifier’ in the debate. In Sweden ideas of a circular economy may have been deployed by resilient capital to harness an otherwise economically disruptive process, as a new expression of ecological modernization. Further research into the political economy of circular economy ideas is encouraged

Социально-деятельные установки студентов как фактор их осознанной профессиональной подготовки

Climate engineering (geoengineering) has been widely discussed as a potential instrument for curbing global warming if politics fails to deliver green house gas emission reductions. This debate has lost momentum over the last couple of years, but is now being renewed in the wake of the December 2015 Paris climate change agreement. Resurgent interest primarily stems from two elements of the Paris agreement. First, by defining the long term goal as “achiev[ing] a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases” instead of decarbonization, the agreement can be interpreted as providing leeway for climate engineering proposals. Second, the agreement formulated a temperature goal of “well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C”. In response, several scientists argued that these goals may require climate engineering. As these discussions will affect the forthcoming review of pathways toward 1.5°C warming, this policy brief takes stock of climate engineering. It draws on the expertise of Linköping University’s Climate Engineering (LUCE) interdisciplinary research programme. The brief provides an overview of the status of academic debate on climate engineering regarding bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS);  stratospheric aerosol injection; and mass media reporting and public engagement

Transforming power: social science and the politics of energy choices

This paper addresses key implications in momentous current global energy choices – both for social science and for society. Energy can be over-used as a lens for viewing social processes. But it is nonetheless of profound importance. Understanding possible ‘sustainable energy’ transformations requires attention to many tricky issues in social theory: around agency and structure and the interplay of power, contingency and practice. These factors are as much shaping of the knowledges and normativities supposedly driving transformation, as they are shaped by them. So, ideas and hopes about possible pathways for change – as well as notions of ‘the transition’ itself – can be deeply constituted by incumbent interests. The paper addresses these dynamics by considering contending forms of transformation centring on renewable energy, nuclear power and climate geoengineering. Several challenges are identified for social science. These apply especially where there are aims to help enable more democratic exercise of social agency. They enjoin responsibilities to ‘open up’ (rather than ‘close down’), active political spaces for critical contention over alternative pathways. If due attention is to be given to marginalised interests, then a reflexive view must be taken of transformation. The paper ends with a series of concrete political lessons