Resolved: The United States should Significantly Increase its Use of Nuclear Energy

*** Due to Lack of Room, w/o making the Argument max to long (I think debaters should be concise) If you need to see any sources please ask and I will post next Round I affirm the Resolved: The United States should significantly increase its use of nuclear energy Before I begin I would like to make a Quick Definition Significantly as Defined by Princeton Universities wordnet is- in an important way or to an important degree 1. Nuclear energy does not help the climate 2. Nuclear energy harms the environment 3. Nuclear Energy efficiency 4. Nuclear energy economically. Contention One: Nuclear Energy does not help the climate ~Looking towards Japan's nuclear plant capacity from 1965 to 1995 Japan's capacity went up from zero to over 40,000 MW. During the same period Carbon Dioxide emissions went up from about 400 million tons to about 1200 million tons. ~Major studies conducted by MIT and the IAEA state that if nuclear power is to play a meaningful role in addressing climate and reducing carbon emissions. We would need to Triple the number of reactors in the US [currently 104], and at least quadruple the number of reactors across the world [currently 440], all by the year 2050. Even with this astronomical increase, you would only reduce carbon emissions by about 20%. And logistically speaking, the nuclear industry is capable of building only 12 reactors per year worldwide. Contention Two: Nuclear energy harms the environment Sub point A: Nuclear Waste and Radioactivity ~Dr. Mark Winfield, who examines Nuclear Energy, finds that an estimated 90 - 100,000 tons of waste can be attributed to uranium production for domestic energy purposes. ~As long lived decay products such as Thorium-230 and Radium-226 are not removed, they are turned to sludge which contains 85% of the initial radioactivity of the ore. In addition, the sludge contains heavy metals and other contaminants such as arsenic, and chemical reagents used during the milling process. ~Furthermore, although the Yucca Mountain repository, as proposed, can house as much as 122,000 tons of waste, congress has mandates that it be limited to 77,000 tons. There are already about 64,000 tons of used reactor fuel at commercial plants in 33 states waiting to be shipped to Nevada. Sub Point B: Air Pollution ~As found by with Helen Caldicott, Nuclear reactors consistently release millions of radioactive isotopes into the air and water each year. These releases are unregulated because the nuclear industry considers these particular radioactive elements to be biologically inconsequential. This is not so. These unregulated isotopes include the noble gases krypton, xenon, and argon, which are fat-soluble, and if inhaled by persons living near a nuclear reactor, are absorbed through the lungs, it then migrates to the fatty tissues of the body. These radioactive elements which emit high energy gamma radiation can mutate the genes in the eggs and sperm and cause genetic disease. Sub Point C: Water ~The State of New York estimates that the Indian point reactors cause the mortality of more than one billion fish a year. ~In the case of the Oyster Creek Reactor in Tim's River New Jersey, the State Department of Environmental protection estimates that the cooling system kills millions of fish, shrimp, and other aquatic creatures each year and that dead marine life expelled from cooling systems back into the source stream create a shadow effect blocking sunlight to underwater organisms and limiting oxygen uptake. Contention Three: Nuclear energy efficiency ~Nuclear reactors require a steady flow of cool water in order to operate. In recent years, elevated temperatures in rivers and ocean water have caused nuclear power reactors to be taken off-line. Hot water not only may violate the technical specifications for reactor core cooling, hot water does not cool the reactor condenser, which simply means, the device does not work ~The short comings of nuclear power reliability were also evident in July 2006 when, in Sweden back up generators malfunctioned during a power outage, forcing shutdown of the reactors at forsmark. Plant workers reported to Swedish media that it had come close to a meltdown. Following the incident, Swedish officials shut down half of Sweden's ten nuclear plants triggering record price increases Contention Four: Nuclear Energy has negative economic ramifications ~According to the Center for American Progress, Nuclear power plant construction costs, materials labor and engineering rose by 185 percent between 2006 and 2007 More recently costs have been increasing even faster, American Electric Power Company CEO Michael Morris states "I'm not convinced we'll see a new nuclear station before the 2020 timeline, citing realistic costs of about 4,000 dollars per kilowatt. Since then, the prices utilities are quoting for nuclear have soared 50-100 %.