NationStates Jolt Archive

RECOGNIZING that greenhouse gasses from coal and oil plants are damaging our atmosphere.

ALSO RECOGNIZING that wind, solar, wave, and other renewable energy sources are prohibitively expensive to put into large scale operation.

BE IT RESOLVED that United Nations members will voluntarily commit to the construction and operation of the latest Generation III nuclear reactors, which operate safely, produce no emissions, do not pollute, and require less initial capital to construct than previous generations.

FURTHERMORE this act will put into place the gradual replacement of the coal and oil energy market by the nuclear and hydrogen power market.

Whilst _Myopia_ fully supports the use of nuclear power to solve the current global environmental problems, I think your proposal needs to recognise that some nations are able to resolve their energy problems using only renewables. I'd prefer your proposal to go something like this: a recognition of the commitments previously made regarding greenhouse emissions, a recognition that renewables are not always a practical solution to the problem, and an endorsement and promotion of nuclear power as an alternative energy source, whilst simultaneously welcoming the use of non-polluting renewables.

This however, is not the bill's intention. Its intention is to provide an economically and environmentaly viable alternative to the coal based energy market. It does not prohibit the development of other renewable energy sources, but it does affirm that none of them can feasibly take up the bulk of any nation's energy requirements without ridiculously high taxation and the destruction of countless acres of land to create the power equivalent of a single nuclear power station.

But the bill requires that all nations convert to nuclear plants, no matter where they get their energy. This means that Nargopia, which operates entirely on solar power, would be forced to convert to a more dangerous and more expensive system for no good reason. Listen to Myopia, please.

This does not require anything, it is a voluntary initiative. Also, it is only more expensive in terms of capital costs, operational costs are the lowest of any means of power production.

Nuclear Power is very safe, the latest Generation III reactors automatically shut down in the event of an emergency passively, meaning no outside input of commands or power is trequired to avoid a disaster.

BE IT RESOLVED that United Nations members will voluntarily commit...
Now I see why we're all confused. Your wording is contradictory. You can't say that the UN will resolve that nations WILL do something voluntarily, it doesn't make sense. Try "URGES UN members to commit..."

Fission reactors are so last century.

This is the real problem:

FURTHERMORE this act will put into place the gradual replacement of the coal and oil energy market by the nuclear and hydrogen power market.

If a nation wants to replace their coal and oil markets with wind and solar power, they should be applauded, not told that they ought to be using nuclear.

By all means, have the UN endorse nuclear power as one good alternative to fossil fuels, and encourage nations to consider using it, but your proposal should explicitly state that non-polluting renewables are still perfectly acceptable - contrary to what you say, some nations can and do supply their energy needs without fossil or nuclear fuels.

Whilst I agree that nuclear power is safer than most people believe, it still carries some danger (fissile materials can be stolen during transit, terrorist or military sabotage on a nuclear plant could cause catastrophe, and there is still a small chance of accidental disasters), and it is important to remember the problems associated with the waste products. Your proposal ought to include a clause urging nations which use nuclear power to enact suitable measures to ensure safety, security and environmental protection regarding fissile materials, power plants, and radioactive waste.

Yes.... you heard the blurb!
Scientists at Labs in our principle city, Venerable Libertaria, have developed cold Fusion and in a truely Venerable gesture we offer the technology for free to the nations of the world!

Not only does this render your proposal null, and many other proposals, but it also prooves a point i was making in a previous thread about silly stuff, whilst perfectly plausible on the chalkboard of scientists and futurists, leaves the proposer scratching his/her head as they could not have forseen the reply when researching their proposal.

Sometimes i feel this is not the United Nations, but the twilight zone, where anything and everything can be :confused: a reality.

I think that all nations should have the right to chose their own source(s) of energy.

Yeah why don't we stop using fossil fuels which pollute the environment now and go to nuclear power so we can be in danger with no place to put it in 50 years later.

Let it go people! Dont make me come over there! :sniper:

Ah the wonderment of cold fusion :p

Perhaps instead of moving to current energy sources that would need upgrading themselves in a few years, the UN nations all agree to research and do widespread testing of new energy sources and begin implementing the next phase of renewable energy sources such as hydrogen, solar, wind, etc.

The People's Republic of Slap Yo Mama would whole heartedly support an initiative to begin work on the next phase of energy sources rather than just implement sources that would need to be fixed themselves in the next few years.

Slap yo Mama is to be congratulated on a wonderful idea. We should flesh it out some what dont you think ?

Perhaps instead of moving to current energy sources that would need upgrading themselves in a few years, the UN nations all agree to research and do widespread testing of new energy sources and begin implementing the next phase of renewable energy sources such as hydrogen, solar, wind, etc.

The People's Republic of Slap Yo Mama would whole heartedly support an initiative to begin work on the next phase of energy sources rather than just implement sources that would need to be fixed themselves in the next few years.
hydrogen isn't a renewable energy source.

Hirota is several years ahead of the UN in nuclear power usage (we had to be - Uranium is pretty much plastered over Hirota).

Thus we would welcome this proposal, and would be prepared to offer consultancy services to nations in need as part of a bundled trade agreement to export Uranium to those nations

<hears the joyful cheers of Hirotan accountants>

being also a large uranium producer, we like the idea of this concept. but there are two concerns. while more efficient, nuclear power still relies on a finite resource. and also, while there is less air polution, there is the task of disposing of spent, yet still radioactive, rods. some nations dont have the resources to dispose of them properly, or dont want to dispose on them. this could lead to them put pressure on other nations to handle them, which is something Resisancia will not do.

Latin Slavia believes that this proposal is not quite specific enough. Our country operates on Nuclear Fusion and Solar Power, but recognizes that some nations can operate on the minor forms of renewable energy (wind power, hydro power, etc.) and therefore believes that this proposal must include a cause for such sources. Anything is better than coal or oil