Nuclear Power

Thanks, Think! I. FrameworkDifferent responsibilities yield different moral calculations. A lawyer's moral duty to his client, requires him to uphold the client's confidentiality even if that client were to confess to a crime. If that client confessed to someone who did not have this duty of confidentiality to him, however, it would not be wrong of this third party to report the confession to the police. A parent, in virtue of their special relationship to their child, has moral responsibilities to their child that they do not have for other children. It seems wrong for a parent who had the time to skip their child's graduation or to fail to help their child with homework. It would not be wrong, however, for a parent do abstain from attending the graduation of a random child or to not help that random child with homework. In a similar vein to these cases, governments have special duties of care to their own citizens, both because citizens contribute to their societies in unique ways (they pay taxes, they vote, they serve on juries, etc), which entails reciprocal obligations from the state to pay citizens back for these contributions, but also because of the more ephemeral sociocultural and moral connections that people share with their countries. It is important also to note that, in each of these three cases, failing to recognize the validity of these special obligations is highly problematic. Without attorney client privilege, the right to due process would be infringed; if parents had equal obligations to all children, (a) parents could never devote sufficient time to their own child and (b) virtually all parents living today would be immoral by that standard, which is obviously preposterous; and, if government's had equal obligations to all people, (a) they could never devote sufficient resources to their own citizens and (b) governments would not be repaying citizens for the services they contributed to and contracted for. Therefore, the standard for this debate is simple: countries ought to do what is in the best interests of their citizens. If prohibiting nuclear power is in the best interest of the citizens, then you ought to vote Pro. II. Environmental DamageA. Meltdowns"The destruction of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. .. resulted in massive radioactive contamination of the Japanese mainland. .. Some 4,500 square miles--an area almost the size of Connecticut--was found to have radiation levels that exceeded Japan's allowable exposure rate. .. Cesium-137. .. will maintain ownership of the exclusion zone for centuries. " [1] Chernobyl was similarly catastrophic. For example, "[b]ecause radioactive caesium is continuously taken up and passed on by organisms in forest ecosystems, the animals and vegetation in affected forests and mountains are particularly contaminated. Forest food products such as mushrooms, berries and game contain the highest recorded levels of caesium-137. " [2]B. Uranium Mining"To produce the 25 tons or so of uranium fuel needed to keep your average reactor going for a year entails the extraction of half a million tons of waste rock and over 100,000 tons of mill tailings. These are toxic for hundreds of thousands of years. .. Contamination of local water supplies around uranium mines and processing plants has been documented in Brazil, Colorado, Texas, Australia, Namibia and many other sites. .. These tailings contain uranium, thorium, radium, polonium, and emit radon-222. " [3]III. Health RisksA. Meltdowns"Once a large amount of radioactive cesium enters an ecosystem, it quickly becomes ubiquitous, contaminating water, soil, plants and animals. It has been detected in a large range of Japanese foodstuffs, including spinach, tea leaves, milk, beef, and freshwater fish up to 200 miles from Fukushima. .. Routine ingestion of foods contaminated with so-called 'low levels' of radioactive cesium has been shown to lead to its bioaccumulation in the heart and" other organs. "This process occurs much faster in children than in adults. " [1] The evidence I cited earlier regarding Chernobyl also presents a case for how the disaster there may have poisoned certain foodstuffs for years to come. "Damage caused by the Chernobyl disaster is estimated at some $235 billion. ..2 million people. .. suffered from its consequences" and 1.3 million still live in contaminated areas. "Medical effects of the disaster saw a dramatic growth of cancer. .. Among children, thyroid cancer incidence went [up] 40 times since the explosion, [and was up] 2.5 to 7 times among adults. " [4] B. Uranium Mining"Uranium miners experience higher rates of lung cancer, tuberculosis and other respiratory diseases. The production of 1,000 tons of uranium fuel generates approximately 100,000 tons of radioactive tailings and nearly one million gallons of liquid waste containing heavy metals and arsenic in addition to radioactivity. These uranium tailings have contaminated rivers and lakes. " [5]C . Proximity and Plant Safety"Even when reactors operate normally, statistically significant increases in infant and fetal mortality near US reactors, in childhood leukemia near German reactors, and in cancer near UK reactors, suggest that (even without any accidents) those living near reactors could face higher health risks. " [6] "More than 75 percent of the nation's nuclear plants have reported a radioactive leak in their lifetimes. .. They've also suffered explosions, fires and corrosion. " [7] "Leaks from at least 37 of those facilities contained concentrations exceeding the federal drinking water standard--sometimes at hundreds of times the limit. .. [R]egulators. .. have weakened safety standards for decades to keep the nation's commercial nuclear reactors operating within the rules. " [8] The problems with regulators are unlikely to abate if nuclear power continues to be used; namely because regulators may feel pressure from governments to keep the plants up-and-running, particularly if the governments have not invested in alternative sources of energy. IV. ViolenceA. ProliferationThe presence of nuclear plants could tempt irresponsible countries or those facing external threats to use the plants to produce weapons-grade material. The more nuclear weapons, the greater the risk that one would be accidentally launched, stolen, or fired, leading to a less safe world situation. Precedent for this exists: "Expanded use of nuclear power would increase the risk that commercial nuclear technology will be used to construct clandestine weapons facilities, as was done by Pakistan. " [5]B. Cyberterror/Cyberattacks"Nuclear power plants may be vulnerable to cyber attacks, which might. .. lead to substantial releases of radioactive material with consequent loss of lives, radiation sickness and psycho-trauma, extensive property destruction and economic upheaval. " [9] Precedent for this kind of attack also exists. The US-Israeli Stuxnet Virus, for example, was used against Iran, causing "roughly a fifth of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges" to "spin out of control. " [10] This kind of threat is particularly dangerous, because it could come from a lone wolf or terror group, but also from a highly sophisticated state actor, as was the case in Stuxnet. C. TerrorismIn 2007, gunmen managed to gain access to the control room of South Africa's Pelindaba Nuclear Plant--an attack so well executed many felt it had insider assistance. [11] In 2002, al-Qaeda was found to have diagrams of American nuclear power plants. [12] In 2016, the Brussels bombers appeared to have tailed the head of Belgium's nuclear program in the hopes of abducting him and using him to gain access to a nuclear facility. [13] Terrorists have looked into strikes on nuclear reactors, and it may only be a matter of time before an attack occurs. Terrorist attacks could involve triggering a meltdown at a power plant or stealing radioactive material from a plant, a fuel reprocessing facility, on route to a disposal location. Terrorists could steal material for a bomb, trigger a meltdown, aerosolize and disperse nuclear material, or use nuclear material to contaminate soil or water. "Unlike accidents, which occur at random, terrorists carefully choose the site of their attacks. .. choosing weather conditions that would maximize the impacts on an attack. " The effects of an attack on the spent fuel "at a pressurized water reactor [could] be 54,000 to 143,000 extra cancer deaths; 2,000 to 7,000 square kilometers of agricultural land condemned; and economic costs of $117 to $556 billion from evacuation. " Such an attack could release up to 17.5x more cesium than Chernobyl. [14]D. WarNuclear plants have been targeted in military conflicts. [15] Plants put nearby civilians in conflict zones in danger from attacks and meltdowns. V. CostsAdvanced nuclear power costs more per megawatt hour than a variety of fossil fuels as well as various clean energy sources like geothermal, hydroelectric, and wind. [16] "The [UK's] energy department shows that it expects onshore wind power and large-scale solar to cost around £50-75 per megawatt hour. .. in 2025. New nuclear is anticipated to be around £85-125 per MWh" by that time. " [17] As green tech develops, we can also expect innovations and greater competition to drive down prices further. VI. Sources1 - . http://tinyurl.com...2 - . http://tinyurl.com...3 - . http://tinyurl.com...4 - . http://tinyurl.com...5 - . http://tinyurl.com...6 - . http://tinyurl.com...7 - . http://tinyurl.com...8 - . http://tinyurl.com...9 - . http://www.state.gov...10 - . http://tinyurl.com...11 - . http://tinyurl.com...12 - . http://tinyurl.com...13 - . http://tinyurl.com...14 - . http://tinyurl.com...15 - . http://tinyurl.com...16 - . http://tinyurl.com...17 - . http://tinyurl.com...Because nuclear power is dangerous and costly, it ought to be prohibited.