Global and regional probabilities of major nuclear reactor accidents.

The continued and extended use of nuclear power is often considered and discussed as a viable energy policy option to meet energy demands while also meeting national CO2 emission reduction goals. A central issue in energy policy for sustainability is the question of nuclear reactor safety. However, studies on nuclear reactor safety often run up against the problem of estimating the probability of a major accident from patchy and limited empirical data. Here, we describe a simple probabilistic model of catastrophic nuclear reactor accidents based on a set of four assumptions. The model treats the accident probability in each of n reactors as a variable and returns the probability of a major accident in the reactor fleet. We find that, at 99.5% reactor safety, the probability of another Chernobyl- or Fukushima-sized event is 49% for the global fleet, and that safety would have to be 99.96% in order to bring that probability below 5%. We discuss our findings in light of the debate on energy policy for sustainability.

Tipping points ahead? How laypeople respond to linear versus nonlinear climate change predictions.

We investigate whether communication strategies that portray climate change as a nonlinear phenomenon provoke increases in laypeople's climate change risk perceptions. In a high-powered, preregistered online experiment, participants were exposed to linear or nonlinear predictions of future temperature increases that would be expected if global greenhouse gas emissions were not reduced. We hypothesized that the type of climate change portrayal would impact perceptions of qualitative risk characteristics (catastrophic potential, controllability of consequences) which would, in turn, affect laypeople's holistic risk perceptions. The results of the study indicate that the type of climate change portrayal did not affect perceptions of risk or other social-cognitive variables such as efficacy beliefs. While participants who were exposed to a nonlinear portrayal of climate change perceived abrupt changes in the climate system as more likely, they did not perceive the consequences of climate change as less controllable or more catastrophic. Notably, however, participants who had been exposed to a linear or nonlinear portrayal of climate change were willing to donate more money to environmental organizations than participants who had not been presented with a climate-related message. Limitations of the present study and directions for future research are discussed.

The coronavirus pandemic as an analogy for future sustainability challenges.

The current coronavirus outbreak may provide an illustrative analogy for sustainability challenges, exemplifying how challenges such as climate change may become wicked problems demanding novel and drastic solution attempts.

Navigating cognition biases in the search of sustainability.

We provide a conceptual review of the available knowledge on the role of human cognition biases for sustainability and sustainable behavior. Human cognition biases are defined as any deviation in decision making from the standard framework of rational choice. We distinguish between biases in individual decision making and biases in group decision making, and highlight the relevance of each for sustainable behavior. We find that while both categories may contribute to unsustainable behavior, human cognition biases in group settings might be central to understanding many of the current sustainability issues. Moreover, we argue that the effects of group-related biases may outweigh those on the individual level in driving unsustainable behavior, and that biases that have been discussed under various labels in the literature can be interpreted as manifestations of human cognition biases in group settings.