By Michelle Hu
<[email protected]>

The issue of how best to obtain energy to sustain our nation is one of the biggest ones the president-elect will have to face.

Last month’s Public Forum debate topic addressed the issue of significantly increasing the use of nuclear energy. It forced me to research an issue that I admittedly knew little about. The negative arguments personally drew me in.

Nuclear energy will create new jobs: true, each proposed nuclear power plant will create around 400 to 700 new jobs according to the Nuclear Energy Institute. However, these jobs can’t be given to people like Joe Six Pack. Plants must be operated by trained officials who usually have a college degree or higher. In addition, these workers must be willing to undergo continuous work at levels of high risk.

Nuclear energy will decrease our dependence on foreign oil: false. The reason why the United States purchases oil is to refine it for gasoline, which powers cars. Nuclear energy can only provide for electricity, which powers buildings and appliances. Unless all of the cars in the nation became electric cars, we would still have to import oil from other nations. In fact, nuclear energy will make us more dependent on other nations. Nuclear power plants rely on a certain isotope of uranium, uranium-238, which makes up only 5 percent of the world’s supply according to University of California Santa Barbara. The United States has little to no uranium, and therefore must import it from uranium-rich nations such as Russia or Australia. This means that we would not only rely on the Middle East for oil, we would also have to turn to Russia for uranium.

Nuclear energy is clean and efficient: false. Nuclear energy actually emits about 2 million tons of carbon dioxide into the air each year. This is due to mining for uranium, transporting the pellets internationally and refining them. Every method of producing energy will emit greenhouse gases, but in comparison to wind, water and solar energies, nuclear energy is misleading in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.

Nuclear energy will sustain us: false. According to Professor Edward Keller at UCSB, the world’s uranium deposits will run out in 30 years. Each nuclear power plant also has a limited lifespan of 30 years. This is due to the fact that nuclear energy is produced by fission, which is the splitting of uranium atoms. The building is constantly bombarded by particles and will deteriorate within three short decades. Due to this, the plant must be decommissioned after its use has been fulfilled. Decommissioning costs $200 to $500 million.

Nuclear energy is a good investment for the future: false. In fact, each power plant costs around $4 billion to build according to the Nuclear Energy Institute. Due to these ridiculously high costs, the U.S. government currently gives nuclear energy companies as much as $60 billion more in subsidies each year than other renewable energy companies. This money is diverted from cleaner, more efficient and sustainable methods of producing energy.

As the nation moves on from the Bush Administration, it is important to keep in mind that the environment supercedes party lines. Any decision made by either party will affect liberals and conservatives alike. With this in mind, it is imperative to ensure that the best decision for the nation’s energy future is made. Clearly, nuclear power plants should not make up the view from planes, but instead, wind farms or solar panels.

—

BY THE NUMBERS

• 3,000 tons of high-level waste each year are produced by commercial nuclear power plants in the U.S. alone
• It can take 20 to 30 years to move from the planning to the opening of a nuclear reactor
• 30 years until the world’s Uranium supply runs out
• 35 percent is the low amount of thermal efficiency of nuclear power plants
• 400 to 700 highly skilled jobs created with each new plant

DEBATEPEDIA.COM / SOURCE