Nuclear power is a clean source of electrical energy and the United States

Government should provide incentives for the construction of new nuclear power
plants throughout the United States including the Four Corners region.

Opening Statement:
Hi, my name is Avra Saslow, and I am here to argue against the motion that nuclear
power is a clean source of electrical energy. I want to thank Tatum, Dakota, and
Conor for describing the advantages of nuclear energy. Like my peer Tony, I agree
with you that nuclear energy has tremendous advantages: low cost, minimal
greenhouse gases and a production of a lot of energy with very little uranium. Except
there is one major problem, and that is that this advanced source of electrical power
is subject to human error, with consequences that could have massive
repercussions.

For example, last year, the Fukushima plant in Japan, which had the most
sophisticated technology, failed as a consequence of a natural disaster combined
with human error. The ocean got hit by an earthquake, which created a tsunami,
which consequently crashed into a nuclear power plant and resulted in a major
nuclear meltdown. In Fukushima, electrical systems and multiple backup systems
failed to provide the necessary coolant that every nuclear system requires to prevent
a meltdown. The problem with a nuclear meltdown is that if radioactive material
escapes from containment, it is extremely toxic to all life for billions of years, and we
have no way to remove it. Not only did fail safe systems fail to contain the process,
but when scientists were analyzing the problem and considering to flood it with sea
water, they hesitated for some hours before going ahead and doing it. Per Peterson,
chairman of nuclear engineering at UC Berkeley said that was a very questionable
decision. If the injection of seawater had been initiated earlier, the damage of fuel
could have been limited greatly or even prevented.

Now undoubtedly these are all very smart scientists. I focus on this example in detail
because it is the the best example of how human designed systems will fail
unexpectedly. In my view, it is irresponsible to provide incentives to create new
nuclear power plants that will inevitable be subjected to human error and create an
unclean environment. After Fukushima, thousands of people were irradiated, and
marine life was exposed to the toxic radioactive material for thousands and
thousands of miles. Does this sound clean? Please join me in opposing this motion.

Closing Statement:
In closing, I respectfully disagree and am still opposed to the motion. One of my
opponents biggest arguments is that nuclear power has very low costs. However,
low cost does not equate to clean energy, and the motion, is in fact debating whether
or not nuclear power is clean. Their other argument, being that it produces minimal
greenhouse gases, and therefore is clean, is also flawed. Just because nuclear
power doesnt emit carbon dioxide, doesnt mean it is clean. If nuclear waste is not
contained, it is one of the dirtiest byproducts known to man. It is radioactive, it
permeates all life forms surrounding it, it causes cancer and destruction. Can you
really say that nuclear power is an entirely clean substance? Please join me in
opposing this resolution.