Future of Nuclear Energy & Digitization Survey
This survey collects demographic information and professional opinions to contribute to the University of Sharjah's Nuclear Energy System Simulation and Safety (NES) Group's research analyzing how different groups evaluate nuclear policy and technological implementation using multi-criteria decision-making methods. Your responses will support a deeper understanding of expert–public differences, potential biases, and the factors shaping nuclear decision priorities. Your honest responses will help create accurate results and shape nuclear decisions in a way that recognizes diverse perspectives.
Data Collection Notice
No personally identifying information will be shared outside of the paper's listed co-authors. Your data will be handled in accordance with ethical academic research standards. For the paper, all identifiers (name & organization) will be removed and only referred to by groups. If you indicate you would like to be acknowledged, your name & organization can be included (indicated in the form below). For any questions about your participation in this research, please contact the research supervisor Dr. Bassam (bkhuwaileh@sharjah.ac.ae)
Part 1: Personal Details & Demographics
Full Name
First Name
Last Name
Age
*
Gender
*
Please Select
Male
Female
Country of Residence
*
Country of Origin/Ethnic Background
*
Issuing Country of Highest Degree of Education
*
Level of Education
*
Please Select
High School / Equivalent
Bachelor's Degree
Master's Degree
PhD/Doctorate
Other
Field of Study/Degree Specialization
*
Current Occupation/Role:
*
Current Organization/Company
Work Experience in Nuclear/Energy Sector (Please briefly describe)
*
Years of Experience in Nuclear/Energy Sector
*
None
Less than 1 Year
1-3 Years
4-7 Years
8-15 Years
15+ Years
Familiarity with Nuclear Energy Concepts
*
1 (Unfamiliar)
2
3
4
5 (Expert)
General Attitude Toward Nuclear Energy
*
Strongly Opposed
Somewhat Opposed
Neutral
Somewhat Supportive
Strongly Supportive
Perceived Priority of Safety in Nuclear Decision-Making
*
1 (Not Important)
2
3
4
5 (Very Important)
Trust in Nuclear Regulators and Institutions
*
1 (No Trust)
2
3
4
5 (High Trust)
Familiarity with Digital Technologies (AI, automation, etc)
*
1 (No familiarity)
2
3
4
5 (Expert)
Are you part of an organization that works with Nuclear power plants, Government or regulatory authorities, Waste management agencies, AI / digital systems providers, Academia or research institutes?
*
Yes
No
What nuclear reactor designs do you think is the most promising? What factors lead to your conclusion?(Whether already implemented or yet to be built: PWR, SMR-SFR, etc. If unfamiliar, please leave blank.)
*
Would you like to receive the final research summary?
*
Yes
No
Would you like to be acknowledged by name for your contribution to our research? If yes please include your name and position/organization to mention you by, if any.
*
Part 2: Reactor Type Ratings & Criteria Weighting
For this section, you are asked to rate each reactor type (column) based on how well it adheres to a criteria (row) from 1 (not matching criteria) to 5 (adheres well to criteria). Please be sure to horizontal scroll to see more columns, and feel free to leave empty any area that you are unfamiliar with.
Rate how well each reactor design (only for the designs you are familiar with) performs against the following criteria on a scale of 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent).
*
Rows
PWR
SFR
MSR
GT-MHR
Pebble Bed HTGR
Gas-cooled fast reactors (GFR)
Standard PHWR
Technical & Maturity:
TRL, Standardization, Reliability (SDG 9)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Safety & Resilience:
Passive Safety, CDF, Proliferation Resistance (SDG 3, 11)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Economic Performance:
LCOE/LUEC, CAPEX per kWe, Timeline, ROI (SDG 7, 8)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Operational Versatility:
Load Following, Desalination, Heat (SDG 7, 9)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Environmental Stewardship:
Life-cycle Emissions, Resource Efficiency, Footprint (SDG 13)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Regulatory & Social:
Public Acceptance, Licensing, Int'l Regs (SDG 11, 16)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Assign a weight from 1 (Least Important) to 5 (Most Important) for evaluating reactor types.
*
Rows
Rating
Technical & Maturity
1
2
3
4
5
Safety & Resilience
1
2
3
4
5
Economic Performance
1
2
3
4
5
Operational Versatility
1
2
3
4
5
Environmental Stewardship
1
2
3
4
5
Regulatory & Social
1
2
3
4
5
Part 3: Digitization Ratings & Criteria Weighting
For this section, you are asked to rate each proposed/existing type of technology to be implemented in nuclear power plants (column) based on how well it adheres to a criteria (row) from 1 (not matching criteria) to 5 (adheres well to criteria). Please be sure to horizontal scroll to see more columns, and feel free to leave empty any area that you are unfamiliar with.
Rate how well each digital application performs against the following criteria on a scale of 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent).
*
Rows
AI Predictive Maintenance
Digital Twin
CyberSecurity Monitoring
AI Predictive Maintenance
Operator Training using AI/Digital Humans
Autonomous Machinery & AI Controlled Robotics
Remote Control of Plant Operations
AI-Assisted Reactor Control Room & Operation
Operational Excellence:
Reliability, Efficiency, TRL (SDG 9, 7)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Safety & Risk:
Safety impact, Cyber risk, Operations effect (SDG 3, 11)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
System Integration:
Scalability, Legacy integration, Data (SDG 9)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Economic Viability:
Impl. cost vs. O&M savings (SDG 8)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Human Capital:
Adaptability, Training, Human interaction (SDG 8)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Sustainability:
Energy consumption of digital infra (SDG 13, 7)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Regulatory Acceptance:
Compliance, Licensing, Auditability (SDG 16, 9)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Assign a weight from 1 (Least Important) to 5 (Most Important).
*
Rows
Rating
Operational Excellence:
1
2
3
4
5
Safety & Risk:
1
2
3
4
5
System Integration:
1
2
3
4
5
Economic Viability:
1
2
3
4
5
Human Capital:
1
2
3
4
5
Sustainability:
1
2
3
4
5
Regulatory Acceptance:
1
2
3
4
5
Part 4: Waste Management Options Ratings & Criteria Weighting
For this section, you are asked to rate each proposed/existing method of managing nuclear waste (column) based on how well it adheres to a criteria (row) from 1 (not matching criteria) to 5 (adheres well to criteria). Please be sure to horizontal scroll to see more columns, and feel free to leave empty any area that you are unfamiliar with.
Rate the following strategies against the criteria from 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent).
*
Rows
Dry Cask
Deep Geological
Centralized Interim
Partition & Transmutation
Volume & Radioactivity Reduction
Decontamination
Classification
Technical Integrity:
Containment, Siting stability (SDG 11, 9)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Operational Safety:
Transport, Monitoring, Sec. waste (SDG 3, 11)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Financial Life Cycle:
LCOE, Long-term maintenance (SDG 7, 8)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Security & Proliferation:
Anti-theft, Intrusion, Diversion (SDG 11, 16)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Environmental Impact:
Land use, Ecosystem, Bio-protection (SDG 13, 15)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Policy & Social:
Public Acceptance, UAE/Int'l Policy Align. (SDG 11, 17)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Assign a weight from 1 (Least Important) to 5 (Most Important).
*
Rows
Rating
Technical Integrity:
1
2
3
4
5
Operational Safety:
1
2
3
4
5
Financial Life Cycle:
1
2
3
4
5
Security & Proliferation:
1
2
3
4
5
Environmental Impact:
1
2
3
4
5
Policy & Social:
1
2
3
4
5
Part 5: Governance Ratings & Criteria Weighting
For this section, you are asked to rate each proposed future Nuclear Power Plant operations & regulation (governance) types (column) based on how well it adheres to a criteria (row) from 1 (not matching criteria) to 5 (adheres well to criteria). Please be sure to horizontal scroll to see more columns, and feel free to leave empty any area that you are unfamiliar with.
Rate the following strategies against the criteria from 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent).
*
Rows
Centralized Regulator
Dual Model
Hybrid Decentralized
Institutional Strength:
Independence, Checks & Balances, Expertise (SDG 16, 17)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Operational Agility/Flexibility:
Speed of response, Innovation, Crisis (SDG 11, 9)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Capacity Building:
Expertise, Knowledge retention, Succession (SDG 4, 8)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Innovation & Global:
Responsiveness to innovation, Int'l standards (SDG 9, 17)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Economic Efficiency:
Administrative cost, Resource optimization (SDG 8)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Social Trust:
Public transparency, Community alignment (SDG 11, 3)
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Assign a weight from 1 (Least Important) to 5 (Most Important).
*
Rows
Rating
Institutional Strength:
1
2
3
4
5
Operational Agility:
1
2
3
4
5
Capacity Building:
1
2
3
4
5
Innovation & Global:
1
2
3
4
5
Economic Efficiency:
1
2
3
4
5
Social Trust:
1
2
3
4
5
Submit
Should be Empty: