The Adoption of Multiattribute Utility Theory for the Evaluation of Plutonium Disposition Options in the United States and Russia

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511611308.025

24 - The Adoption of Multiattribute Utility Theory for the Evaluation of Plutonium Disposition Options in the United States and Russia

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012

John C. Butler ,

Alexander N. Chebeskov ,

Jianmin Jia and

Edited by

Ralph F. Miles Jr. and

Detlof von Winterfeldt

Show author details

John C. Butler: Affiliation:
A. B. Freeman School of Business, Tulane University
Alexander N. Chebeskov: Affiliation:
State Scientific Center of Russian Federation, Institute for Physics and Power Engineering
James S. Dyer: Affiliation:
McCombs School of Business, University of Texas-Austin
Thomas A. Edmunds: Affiliation:
Systems and Decision Sciences Section, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Jianmin Jia: Affiliation:
Faculty of Business Administration, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Vladimir I. Oussanov: Affiliation:
State Scientific Center of Russian Federation, Institute for Physics and Power Engineering
Ralph F. Miles Jr.: Affiliation:
California Institute of Technology
Detlof von Winterfeldt: Affiliation:
University of Southern California

Book contents

Get access

Summary

ABSTRACT. At the end of the Cold War, the United States and Russia entered into agreements that reduced the numbers of nuclear weapons in their arsenals. The possibility that excess plutonium recovered from dismantled weapons could fall into the hands of terrorists has been characterized as a “clear and present danger” by the National Academy of Sciences. Other disposition considerations include plutonium's potential for use as an energy source and its environmental impacts. A team of U.S. decision analysts was commissioned by the Department of Energy's Office of Fissile Materials Disposition to develop a multiattribute utility model to help evaluate alternatives for the disposition of the excess-weapons plutonium. Subsequent to the U.S. study, Russian scientists modified the model with the aid of the U.S. team, and used it to evaluate Russian disposition alternatives.

At the end of the Cold War, the United States and Russia entered into arms limitations and reduction agreements that reduced the numbers of nuclear weapons that would be in the arsenals of each nation. When these nuclear weapons are dismantled, plutonium pits – the triggers for modern nuclear weapons – are stored in anticipation of their ultimate disposal. Estimates of the numbers of weapons to be dismantled vary, but may be on the order of 15,000 in the United States and perhaps twice that many in Russia [NAS 95].

Type: Chapter
Information: Advances in Decision Analysis
From Foundations to Applications
, pp. 489 - 513

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611308.025 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Butler, J. C., Morrice, D., and Mullarkey, P. (2001). A multiple attribute utility theory approach to ranking and selection. Management Science, 47, 800–816.CrossRef Google Scholar

Chebeskov, A. N., Korobeinikov, V. V., Oussanov, V. I., Zavadsky, M. I., Tikhomirov, B. B., and Iougai, S. V (2001). Methodology of the multi-attribute system analysis of the selected scenarios for plutonium utilization. Brussels May 14–16, 2001.Google Scholar

Chebeskov, A. N., Oussanov, V. I., Tikhomirov, B. B., Nevinitsa, V. A., and Pshakin, G. M. (1998). Preliminary results of systems analysis on plutonium utilization options in Russia. Paper presented at the workshop on the ISTC Project No 369, Brussels, Belgium, April 6–7, 1998.Google Scholar

Chebeskov, A. N., Zavadski, M. I., and Ousssanov, V. I. (1999). Multi-attribute analysis of Plutonium use in nuclear reactors. Paper presented at the Third Meeting of the Contract Expert Group, Dimitrovgrad, Russia, June 7–9, 1999.Google Scholar

[DOE-PEIS 96]. U.S. Department of Energy. (1996). Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, DOE/EIS-0229. Office of Fissile Materials Disposition.

[DOE-ROD 97]. U.S. Department of Energy. (1997). Record of Decision for the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. United States Department of Energy; Office of Fissile Materials Disposition.

[DOE-TSR 96]. U.S. Department of Energy. (1996). Technical Summary Report for Surplus Weapons-Usable Plutonium Disposition, DOE/MD-0003 Rev. 1. Office of Fissile Materials Disposition.

Dyer, J. S., Edmunds, T. A., Butler, J. C., and Jia, J. (1996). A proposed methodology for the analysis and selection of alternatives for the disposition of surplus plutonium. Paper presented at the International Meeting on Military Conversion and Science “Utilization of the Excess-Weapon Plutonium: Scientific, Technological and Socio-Economic Aspects.” Villa Olmo, Como, Italy, March 20, 1996.Google Scholar

Dyer, J. S., Edmunds, T. A., Butler, J. C., and Jia, J. (1997). Evaluation of alternatives for the disposition of Surplus weapons-usable plutonium. Technical Paper 1997–1. Amarillo National Research Center.Google Scholar

Dyer, J. S., Edmunds, T. A., Butler, J. C., and Jia, J. (1998). A multiattribute utility analysis of alternatives for the disposition of surplus weapons-grade plutonium. Operations Research, 46, 749–762.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dyer, J. S., Edmunds, , Chebeskov, T. A., Oussanov, A. N., Butler, V. I., Jia, J. C., , J. (2005). The Adoption of Multi-attribute Utility Theory for the Evaluation of Plutonium Disposition Options in the United States and Russia, Interfaces vol. 35, no. 1.Google Scholar

Hammond, J. S., Keeney, R. L., and Raiffa, H. (1998). Even swaps: A rational method for making trade-offs. Harvard Business Review, 76, 137–149.Google Scholar PubMed

Keeney, R. L., and Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with Multiple Objectives. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

[MIN-RF-AE 00]. Ministry of Russian Federation for Atomic Energy. (2000). Strategy of nuclear power development of Russia in the first part of XⅪ century: The main principles. Moscow: Ministry of the Russian Federation for Atomic Energy.

[NAS 94]. National Academy of Sciences. (1994). Management and Disposition of Excess Weapons Plutonium. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

[NAS 95]. National Academy of Sciences. (1995). Management and Disposition of Excess Weapons Plutonium – Reactor Related Options. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.