Tuesday, March 13, 2007

No to Nukes

Just a little write-up I had to do for a class debate:

No to Nukes

Council meeting ends with veto of nuclear power station application

By Johan van de Ven and Tom McFadzean

All names have been changed for legal reasons

Present were a plethora of expert witnesses and activists from around the globe, including political troublemakers, Greenpeace. What ensued was a heated debate with Alpha Waste, inc., the contracted waste management group, and the aforementioned Greenpeace dominating the floor. But one thing is for sure: Melbourn, if the council's recommendation is taken into consideration, will not be scarred with a nuclear power plant. The source of the argument was Alpha Waste's claim that all nuclear waste would be stored underground. Greenpeace did not like the idea, arguing that hazardous nuclear waste could seep into soil or the water table, contaminating the region's natural resources, and hence the food supplies. Another point made was that research into nuclear technology inhibited progress made in the quest for clean, renewable industry, as it took up valuable government grants. However, anti-terror expert Arjen van Leenen, a researches at the National Laboratory in the Netherlands, reminded the council that even in poorer countries, nuclear facilities were “very secure.” One example given was that of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Facility, near San Diego, in the US. It has two airbases within a 30 mile radius. Despite hostile questioning from the Friends of the Earth representatives, van Leenen also pointed out that there has never been an instance of nuclear terror, “looks like the world learnt a valuable from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”
The debate boiled down to a vote, which swayed against the motion.

No comments: