Actions

Nuclear Energy GSSS 2010 Debate: Difference between revisions

From Santa Fe Institute Events Wiki

 
(9 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
==Topic Brainstorm==
==Topic Brainstorm==


Resolved: Nuclear energy production should not be a part of the US energy supply.
<b>Resolved: Nuclear energy production should not be a part of the US energy supply.</b>


*Affirmative:
<b><u>*Format:</u></b>
:Introduction - Moderator - 3 minutes
:Opening Arguments - 5 minutes
:First Rebuttals  - 3 minutes
:Back and Forth  -  Max 1 minute per team
:At 25 Minute Mark....
::Closing Statements- 2 minutes
:Wrap Up - Moderator - 1 minute
:: Each round keeps the same A->B order decided by coin at the beginning of the debate


Critical readings & resources
<b><u>*Affirmative:</u></b>
 
<i>Critical readings & resources</i>


--From [http://www.ieer.org/ The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research • IEER]
--From [http://www.ieer.org/ The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research • IEER]
Line 29: Line 39:
[http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/plants/contents.asp]
[http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/plants/contents.asp]


[[Media:ThermoLimits.pdf‎| Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy]]
<b><u>*Negative:</u></b>
<i>Critical Readings and Resources:</i>


*Negative:
[http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/application/pdf/unitedstatescphaccord_app.1.pdf US Pledge to Copenhagen Accord]


Critical Readings and Resources:
[http://sites.nationalacademies.org/Energy/Energy_043338 National Academy of Sciences: America's Energy Future]
 
[http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/ MIT's The Future of Nuclear Power]


[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TXN-4XGBG60-2&_user=56761&_coverDate=03%2F31%2F2010&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1403052854&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000059541&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=56761&md5=bf1816498a73a33710e3398d61127b17 Role of nuclear energy to a future society of shortage of energy resources and global warming]
[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TXN-4XGBG60-2&_user=56761&_coverDate=03%2F31%2F2010&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1403052854&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000059541&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=56761&md5=bf1816498a73a33710e3398d61127b17 Role of nuclear energy to a future society of shortage of energy resources and global warming]
--From [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TXN-4XGBG60-2&_user=56761&_coverDate=03%2F31%2F2010&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1403052854&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000059541&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=56761&md5=bf1816498a73a33710e3398d61127b17]


[http://globalchange.mit.edu/files/document/MITJPSPGC_Reprint_10-3.pdf Potential climatic impacts and reliability of very large-scale wind farms]
[http://globalchange.mit.edu/files/document/MITJPSPGC_Reprint_10-3.pdf Potential climatic impacts and reliability of very large-scale wind farms]
--From [http://globalchange.mit.edu/files/document/MITJPSPGC_Reprint_10-3.pdf]
 
[http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es801747c Net Radiative Forcing from Widespread Deployment of Photovoltaics]


[http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/liquid-fluoride-thorium-reactors Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors: An old idea in nuclear power gets reexamined]  
[http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/liquid-fluoride-thorium-reactors Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors: An old idea in nuclear power gets reexamined]  
--From [http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/liquid-fluoride-thorium-reactors]
 
[http://www.nei.org/filefolder/Infographic_-_Land_Needed_by_Wind_and_Solar.jpg Land Needed by Wind and Solar]
 
[http://www.agu.org/journals/gl/gl0613/2006GL026780/ Three Gorges Dam affects regional precipitation]

Latest revision as of 13:20, 21 July 2010

2010 Global Sustainability Summer School


Topic Brainstorm

Resolved: Nuclear energy production should not be a part of the US energy supply.

*Format:

Introduction - Moderator - 3 minutes
Opening Arguments - 5 minutes
First Rebuttals - 3 minutes
Back and Forth - Max 1 minute per team
At 25 Minute Mark....
Closing Statements- 2 minutes
Wrap Up - Moderator - 1 minute
Each round keeps the same A->B order decided by coin at the beginning of the debate

*Affirmative:

Critical readings & resources

--From The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research • IEER

Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy [WARNING: link is to full text, 257 pgs.]

The Technical and Economic Feasibility of a Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free Energy System in the United States, Arjun Makhijani. March 4, 2009

Nuclear isn't necessary, from Nature Reports Climate Change

--From Caldicott, H.

Nuclear energy: money can't buy love by David Noonan, ABC (Aus), 3 March 2010]

--From Union of Concerned Scientists: A Resurgence of Nuclear Power Poses Significant Challenges [1]

--Natural Resources Defense Council: New Nuclear Power Plants Are Not a Solution for America's Energy Needs [2]

Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy

*Negative:

Critical Readings and Resources:

US Pledge to Copenhagen Accord

National Academy of Sciences: America's Energy Future

MIT's The Future of Nuclear Power

Role of nuclear energy to a future society of shortage of energy resources and global warming

Potential climatic impacts and reliability of very large-scale wind farms

Net Radiative Forcing from Widespread Deployment of Photovoltaics

Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors: An old idea in nuclear power gets reexamined

Land Needed by Wind and Solar

Three Gorges Dam affects regional precipitation