Why shouldn't australia embrace nuclear power?

Question

I'm currently writing a debate as negative to "we should embrace nuclear power". Why do you think that Australia as a nation shouldn't embrace nuclear power?

Answer 1

If we embrace nuclear power: where are we going to store the spend fuel waste? this is a massive problem as it lasts for thousands of years emmiting deadly radiation.
where is the nuclear reactors going to be located? in my suburb? i hope not. what if thee is a leak of some sort(melt down chernobly style) (google: chernobly russia) i dont want to be affected by this radiation.
hoew is the material going to be transported safely?whith tewrrorism at front of mind, do you think it wold be safe to cruise throught the city of melbourne sydney adelaide brisbane with potentially deadly stuff sitting on the back of a truck, what if some terroist bombed it? it would kill half of the city easily before it could be contained by emergency workers who would be dead within a week of trying to clean up the mess. do you know how many helicopter pilots died from radiation exposure after flying over chernobly to drop wet cement on the plant to try to stop the radiation getting out?

It may be clean in the environmental sense that it doesnt cause too much greenhouse emssions, but there are alternatives that have not been properly embraced by the government, wind and thermal rock technology has a way to go before being viable but there is much more safety i those options.

Answer 2

Well, I can say that I am for the advancement of the technology of nuclear power - technology that would make nuclear power safe, efficient, and allow waste to be reused, not just thrown away. Future technology allows this. Arguments saying that nuclear power is dangerous and waste disposal is costly can be countered with the idea that new technology will make nuclear power less so. Not only that, but nuclear power plants produce no carbon dioxide, therefore clean in that respect, and creates the most energy per mass amount of fuel. Look up Generation IV nuclear power plants. We currently are at Generation III, which are just advanced versions of Generation II power plants. Fukushima Daichi, commissioned in the 70's, is one example of a Generation II power plant. Generation I are just prototypes. What I would be against is building more nuclear power plants using old technology. Also imagine a nuclear power plant that can convert nuclear reactions directly into electrical energy, unlike the steam turbine conversions we have today. Steam turbines rely on heat, and is very inefficient (efficiency rate of 35-40%). Also, fusion power is also something interesting to look into. They create much more energy than fission reactions. The nuclear material used in fusion reactions, such as tritium, are lighter and have a much shorter half-life than uranium (like 12 years vs 250,000 years). Unfortunately, essentially all, or almost all, of the nuclear power plants in the world use fission instead of fusion.

Answer 3

There are many reasons but the main problem is that no-one, anywhere, at any time to date has devised a clean, safe and environmentally responsible way to dispose of the waste material that is generated by the creation of nuclear energy.

This is a link to a very good briefing paper from Dr Helen Caldicott :

http://www.helencaldicott.com/pdf/cantim070702.pdf

It goes into some detail as to why a nuclear future for Australia is not a good idea.

Answer 4

I dont know anything about Australia, but here goes my quick thaughts, in which case I see only two valid reasons to prohibit nuclear facilitation:

1. Nuclear power enables the ability to embrace nuclear weapons.

2. The result of a nuclear meltdown will include serious long-lasting damage (usually death) to all life in which it consumes, in which case Australia is known for being a special contributor to the rarest species of life in the world.

Other than that, nuclear energy creates effecient amounts of usable energy and is being used extensively in the medical field to cure various illnesses.

Answer 5

Well, look at it this way... nuclear power has had 60 years of the best minds working on a way to make it safer and less wasteful - and they still have no solution! I doubt another 60 years would help. It's old technology, move on already.

The Germans are dismantling their plants. They have wind technology and it's marvellous. No pollution, no problems, new jobs. Anyone who went to the Word Cup knows all about it.

Answer 6

where are you gonna put the nuclear, 200,000 year, waste? will it stay where you put it, will there be an earth quake for the first time in that spot, will someone come along in 1000 years and unwittingly dig it up, suffering the consequences, will it leach into your water supply because the containment process didn't last as long as you thought it would? Is it necessary, and worth the risk, to continue this lavish, unsustainable life style?

Answer 7

Embrace??? That's such a weaselword expression.

You should argue:
"I would rather hug a tree than embrace nuclear power".

hahahahaha - sorry, couldn't help myself, argh
Someone will give you some proper tips :)

Edit - hey, you thumbs down person, I know it's a serious debate but I'm just trying to give the kid a laugh - it's the Australian way. Der!

Answer 8

The amount of cost involved in extracting the fuel, processing it, the special safeguards needed, transportation, and waste removal, combine to make nuclear not as cost effective as is sometimes claimed.

Answer 9

Why take on something that is by it's nature a possible danger when we have sun, wind and sea movement in abundance. I know there are arguments relating to cost but surely we could overcome that with a bit of commitment and the will to succeed.

Answer 10

because are arrogant American president thinks only the good old USA should have nuclear power or weapons, he wants to be able to destroy other countries without them having the ability to strike back,we are such a righteous country. so Australia better not try to develop nuclear power or you can rest assured bush will attack you.