CER Document

Argument: Nuclear is the energy source of our present and future.

Pro - Yes, nuclear energy should be the energy Con - No, nuclear energy should not be the
source of the present and future. energy source of the present and future.

COST COST

Claim: Though expensive Nuclear power Claim: Nuclear power plants are not as cost
plants can be cheap to run. effective as you may believe.

Evidence (include a source): An important Evidence (include a source): Estimated cost

thing to take into account when it comes to nuclear in 2002 - 2008 was 2 billion to as high as 9 billion
power plants is the amount of federal subsidies and per unit. Union of Concerned scientist
incentives given which make running nuclear seem (http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-power/cost-nuclear-
more attractive. Basic Economics of Nuclear power)
Power. In Georgia a nuclear power plant was estimated to
(http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/schul cost around 14 billion which would be separated in
tz2/) with 5% going design and licensing 7%, and etc.
Even if it had a carbon tax of 100 per CO2 ton it Overall it goes into 8 different cost. (Nuclear World
would still be cheaper than fossil fuels. Economics Orginizations) (http://www.world-
of Nuclear Power nuclear.org/information-library/economic-
(http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/schul aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx)
tz2/) Early on uranium was cheap with around 11$ per
Nuclear power plants can produce large amounts pound in 2003 yet in (uranium quick facts) but in
of very cheap and affordable electricity for the 2007 it rose to 100$ per pound showing how
public. NEI (http://www.world- unstable its price can be and how few are willing to
nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the- mine it. (Uranium quick facts)
environment/environment-and-health-in-electricity- http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/guide/facts/
generation.aspx)
http://www.world-nuclear.org/information- Reasoning: Even though they cost as much
library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear- as a coal plant that is only the surface of the actual
power.aspx cost. All the real cost come from the different
Reasoning: Power plants have plenty of insurances, uranium, and if there is ever the case
incentives aside from the fact that the plant itself is where something goes wrong.
going to cost about as much as a coal fired power
plant.

ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT

Claim: Very little carbon emissions. Claim: Nuclear waste

Evidence (include a source): You can use Evidence (include a source): Spent reactor
already clean nuclear energy to power electric fuel storage must stored away in storage
vehicles (via being used to charge them) making containers filled with water. If not properly stored it
things in a way twice as clean. (Nuclear energy is a danger. (Energy infromation administration)
institute) https://www.nei.org/Issues- https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm/dat
Policy/Protecting-the-Environment a/index.cfm?page=nuclear_environment
There is no direct CO2 emissions meaning it is We still experience effects from chernobyl where
clean. (energy information administration) thousands of tons of soil needed to be removed
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm/dat and livestock even in Britain had to be monitored.
a/index.cfm?page=nuclear_environment (The Guardian)
Causes for there to be wildlife monitoring around https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/ma
plants with a multitude of safeguards causing for y/12/effects-chernobyl-uk-farmers
the environment around to be protected. The mining and refining of fuel for nuclear reactor
https://www.nei.org/Master-Document- (uranium and plutonium) can cause harm as this
Folder/Backgrounders/Fact-Sheets/Nuclear- does release CO2 and the mining of such material
Energy-and-the-Environment can damage the landscape.
There is a lot recycled when it comes to nuclear https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm/dat
power plants typically the fuel ensuring there is not a/index.cfm?page=nuclear_environment
as much waste.
https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/5530462222 Reasoning: The mining for fuel to power such
3.pdf reactors damages nearby wildlife and releases
enough carbon emissions to make this less
Reasoning: There is no carbon emission and environmentally sound.
when the waste is taken care of properly this can
environmentally safe.

HEALTH EFFECTS HEALTH EFFECTS

Claim: Extremely dangerous and can cause
Claim: Not as dangerous as perceived and multiple defects and cancers.
there are a multitude of safety measures taken to
ensure this. Evidence (include a source): Residents living
near nuclear power plants have shown more stress
Evidence (include a source): Many safety and concerns due the past. (so there is a
standards are for the prevention of there being a psychological element).
nuclear meltdown or the large release of radiation. http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2014/ph241/rasoo
http://www.world-nuclear.org/information- ly2/
library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/safety- There are different forms of radiation each there
of-nuclear-power-reactors.aspx own form of danger. Working at a nuclear plant you
The risk the evidence over six decades shows that risk fission products entering your body and this
nuclear power is a safe means of generating cause damage and if not wearing proper equipment
electricity. The risk of accidents in nuclear power you risk external exposure to radiation.
plants is low and declining. The consequences of http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2014/ph241/rasoo
an accident or terrorist attack are minimal ly2/
compared with other commonly accepted risks. There are a multitude of symptoms coming from
Radiological effects on people of any radioactive radiation poisoning this being bleeding from the
releases can be avoided. nose, mouth, gums, and rectum, bruising,
http://www.world-nuclear.org/information- confusion. dehydration, diarrhea, fainting, fatigue
library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/safety- fever, hair loss, inflammation of exposed areas,
of-nuclear-power-reactors.aspx mouth sores, nausea and vomiting, open sores on
the skin, skin burns, sloughing of skin, sores in the
Reasoning: With the multitude of safety standards esophagus, stomach or intestines, vomiting blood,
cancer is not as high a risk as it used to be and you and lastly weakness.
will not have to worry about lung problems that you https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/000026.htm
risk with burning coal.
Reasoning: Radiation is always a risk as it is
higher than normal no matter what and the miners
do face risk as they can get radioactive materials
into their lungs.

INFRASTRUCTURE INFRASTRUCTURE

Claim: Nuclear power plants can be hooked Claim: It would be too costly and difficult to
up onto already existing power lines so more convert to nuclear energy and it cant power all
reliance on wont be as difficult. things.

Evidence (include a source): With a Evidence (include a source): global power

complete combustion or fission, approx. 8 kWh of consumption today is about 15 terawatts. Currently,
heat can be generated from 1 kg of coal, approx. the global nuclear power supply capacity is only
12 kWh from 1 kg of mineral oil and around 375 gigawatts. And estimates to reach this quota of
24,000,000 kWh from 1 kg of uranium. power production say there is a need to have
https://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/f/fue 15,000 total nuclear reactors. (Phys org)
lcomparison.htm https://phys.org/news/2011-05-nuclear-power-
 world-energy.html
The US power grid is divided in three smaller and it
that helps make it less difficult to convert certain There is nowhere near enough uranium needed to
fossil fuel based plants into nuclear. power such an endeavor (yes there is plutonium
https://energy.gov/articles/top-9-things-you-didnt- but you need uranium to create this). (Phys org)
know-about-americas-power-grid https://phys.org/news/2011-05-nuclear-power-
world-energy.html
Nuclear power plants will cost as much as a coal
plant. (union of concerned scientist)
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-power/cost-nuclear- Reasoning: With intricate designs and high safety
power standards building a plant will take time and will
need to be placed in safe locations where there is
Reasoning: Plants are not more expensive and water.
can make much more energy as well as be hooked
up to local power grids.

SUSTAINABILITY/LONGEVITY SUSTAINABILITY/LONGEVITY

Claim: With new technology arising we can Claim: There is only so much easy to access
draw out how much energy we get from each bit of uranium in the world making this energy source
uranium. possibly last less than fossil fuels.

Evidence (include a source): We can get Evidence (include a source): All uranium is
24,000,000 kWh from one kg of uranium showing it mined from the earth's crust, yet this is all of the
will last longer than fossil fuels per poundage. easy to get to uranium. Much of it can be extracted
(european nuclear org) from seawater yet this is an expensive and not very
https://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/f/fue resourceful way to get to uranium.
lcomparison.htm (phys org)
https://phys.org/news/2011-05-nuclear-power-
Plutonium is a bi product of uranium in a reactor world-energy.html
and can be used as fuel for nuclear reactors. So in
a way you are using uranium twice. Reactors need to be retired every 50 to 70 years,
(UNI) so this will leave waste and it takes time for them to
http://www.world-nuclear.org/information- be built. (scientific american)
library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/fuel- https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nuclear-
recycling/plutonium.aspx power-plant-aging-reactor-replacement-/

There have estimates of up to more than 5,000 Only 200 years worth of easy to access and safe to
years (at our current) worth of energy from nuclear use Uranium left on the (Scientific american)
energy if we use it to its full potential. (phys org) earth.https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ho
https://phys.org/news/2011-05-nuclear-power- w-long-will-global-uranium-deposits-last/
world-energy.html
Reasoning: Uranium is just another short term
Reasoning: Plutonium can extend how long it last solution with high gains. And power demands will
and we can find more efficient ways to extract rise and the time they have will only shorten.
uranium from seawater.