ABSTRACT

In recent years an assemblage of nuclear energy proponents has coalesced around the notion of ‘Climate First’ – arguing that nuclear power is a necessary component of the fight against climate change. One noteworthy addition to the Climate First fold is the semi-formalized communications campaign Nuclear for Climate (N4C). This article builds upon a previous ethical critique of Climate First by conducting a comparison of the extent of risk concept disclosure seen within N4C’s key messaging and more ‘traditional’ Climate First texts. The article demonstrates how there has been a noticeable shift in the communications strategy of N4C vis-à-vis ‘traditionalists’, and moreover that models of environmental framing and affective heuristics help to explain the strategic value of this risk reframing for the nuclear industry. It further argues that this reframing of risk gives rise to an ethical paradox, wherein strategic advocates of nuclear energy as a climate mitigation tool could be compelled to withhold important aspects of the nuclear story from the public to promote what they understand to be an urgently-needed tool for saving the planet.

摘要

近年来，一群核能支持者围绕“气候优先”的概念联合起来，认为核能是应对气候变化的必要组成部分。气候第一方面的一个值得注意的补充是半正式的气候核子传播运动 (N4C)。本文通过比较 N4C 的关键信息和更“传统”的气候第一文本中风险概念披露的程度，建立在先前对气候第一的道德批评的基础上。本文展示了 N4C 与“传统主义者”的沟通策略如何发生显着转变，此外，环境框架和情感启发式模型有助于解释这种风险重构对核工业的战略价值。