Nuclear > Wind

Wind energy is preferable over nuclear energy for several reasons. For the reasons presented below, I am in firm negation of the resolution. Contention 1: The dangers of nuclear power. A) Every dollar spent on nuclear is one less dollar spent on clean renewable energy and one more dollar spent on making the world a comparatively dirtier and a more dangerous place, because nuclear power and nuclear weapons go hand in hand, says"Mark Z. Jacobson, an American scientist (1). If we rely on nuclear power for energy, we are opening ourselves to the temptation of nuclear weapons. B) There are now over 148,274 invalids on the Chernobyl registry in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine. There is widespread agreement regarding a rise in thyroid cancer in those who were exposed to the radiation when they were very young. There are reported rises in other thyroid diseases, immune system disorders, and learning problems in children. There are extensive reports of high rates of heart and blood problems and lung and gastrointestinal disorders. However, the cause of these problems is not agreed among scientists and professionals. Some contribute these conditions to the stress of having been exposed to radiation and to the decline in medical care and income following the break up of the Soviet Union in 1991. Many of those exposed at the time of the accident have now reached adulthood and are having children. There are some indications that these children may be suffering from radiation effects on their parents (2). Nuclear power is very dangerous, as it involves radiation. Radiation has very dangerous health effects. As shown in the data above, many people are still having medical complications from Chernobyl's nuclear meltdown in 1986." C)"If a meltdown were to occur, the accident could kill and injure tens of thousands of people, leaving large regions uninhabitable. And, more than 50 years after splitting the first atom, science has yet to devise a method for adequately handling long lived radioactive wastes (3). We have no way to completely control nuclear energy. The waste is to dangerous to be dealt with." Contention 2: Nuclear power is not as environmentally friendly as wind. A)"The front end of the cycle is not clean. Every gram of 20% uranium ore brings to the surface some 3000 becquerels of Radium-222. Radium also gives off radon which gives off alpha radiation--a hazard for mine/mill workers (4). The waste put off by nuclear power is extremely hazardous. There is only so much of it we can safely contain before an accident is bound to occur." B) Moreover, nuclear reactors themselves give off tritium radioactive gas into the air--not so clean after all! (4). This radioactive gas goes into the atmosphere. There is no effective way to deal with it. C)"Some 93% of the refrigerant chlorofluorcarbon produced in the USA is used in the enrichment of uranium fuel for nuclear power. These compounds are 10,000 times more efficient than carbon dioxide at trapping heat, and therefore are a potent destroyer of the ozone layer in the stratosphere (4). While nuclear power may not emit as much c02 as oil and natural gas, it instead emits a gas more potent than c02. Switching to nuclear power will not help to stop or decrease global warming but instead will increase it. D)"Wind energy is a source of renewable energy. It does not contaminate, it is inexhaustible and reduces the use of fossil fuels, which are the origin of greenhouse gases that cause global warming. In addition, wind energy is a "native" energy, because it is available practically everywhere on the plant, which contributes to reducing energy imports and to creating wealth and local employment (5). Wind energy does not emit greenhouse gases or much less radioactive particles. It has no greenhouse effect associated with it, making it a much better option than nuclear when looking at the environment." E)"Wind energy does not generate waste or contaminate water"an extremely important factor given the scarcity of water. Unlike fossil fuels and nuclear power plants, wind energy has one of the lowest water-consumption footprints, which makes it a key for conserving hydrological resources (5). Wind power has no water footprint either. While nuclear power takes water to work and in turn contaminates it with radioactive waste, wind power neither relays on, or contaminates water. Contention 3: Wind energy is favored by the people. A)"No fewer than two in three Americans want the U.S. to put more emphasis on producing domestic energy using solar power (76%), wind (71%), and natural gas (65%) (6). Americans want wind over nuclear power. America's survey results are a sample of what the world wants. If governments across the world drop wind energy in favor of nuclear, they are causing strife between them and their people. B)"WASHINGTON, D.C.///March 22, 2011///While a drop in public support for nuclear power would be expected after an incident like the Fukushima reactor crisis, the nuclear disaster in Japan has triggered a much stronger response among Americans, a majority of whom would freeze new nuclear power construction, stop additional federal loan guarantees for reactors, shift away from nuclear power to wind and solar power, and eliminate the indemnification of the nuclear power industry from most post-disaster clean up costs (7). As if the survey wasn't enough, this will further show that people do not want nuclear power any more. They instead want wind energy, a better, safer, cleaner alternative. (1) (http://mobile.brainyquote.com...) 2. (http://www.friendsofchernobylcenters.org...)" 3"http://www.greenpeace.org... 4 http://www.icucec.org...) 5"http://www.acciona.com... 6 (http://www.gallup.com...) 7 (http://www.civilsocietyinstitute.org...)