NationStates Jolt Archive

Nuclear Large Water Vessel Act
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.


Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: All Businesses
Proposed by: East Tennesee Island

Description: Description: if Passed this proposal will make it illegal for ships to powered by Any kind of Oil based Fuel.

RECOGNIZING:Studies showing that one days trip on a container vessel can use as much gas as a compact car can for 150 years.

RECOGNIZING:That this is the main reason the fuel supply is being drained

REALIZING:That Nuclear Fission is a much safer than Oil power

ALSO REALIZING: the benefit of Less oil spills from Less Oil in Oil Tankers

NOTING: This proposal Has no effect on Small Pleasure Craft(Yacths,Small Fishing Boats,Tour Boats etc..etc..)

ALSO NOTING: That this proposal Does effect military Ships as well


Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 124 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Sat Jan 7 2006




I see a couple of bad uses of grammer here but otherwise what do you think

I think that, as I'm not keen on condemning the UN to die of starvation, I will oppose this.

That reminds me: I must ask our Minister for Science how the 'International Nuclear-powered Aircraft Project' , which we began -- along with St Edmund Air, Ohmigodtheykilledkenny and The Palentine -- shortly after the Fossil Fuel Reduction Act was passed, is getting on...

That reminds me: I must ask our Minister for Science how the 'International Nuclear-powered Aircraft Project' , which we began -- along with St Edmund Air, Ohmygodtheykilledkenny and The Palentine -- shortly after the Fossil Fuel Reduction Act was passed, is getting on...

http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/fossilfuels1td.jpg

http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/fossilfuels1td.jpg

Would you like to join this research programme?

You'd be better off talking to the chair of the Uranium Magnates Organisation (Omigodtheykilledkenny). I'll bring this topic to their attention.

You'd be better off talking to the chair of the Uranium Magnates Organisation (Omigodtheykilledkenny). I'll bring this topic to their attention.

They're already involved.

Would you like to join this research programme?

The people of Cluichstan most certainly would.

They're already involved. I guess I am already involved then :)

Consider me interested.

The people of Cluichstan most certainly would.

Okay, I'll dig out the details for you.


(OOC: I really planned to do some RP with this earlier, but work & other problems pushed it out of my mind...)

You never really defined what ships are being included, just those that aren't. Define the specific ships and give a time table for switching over and you've got our vote. On a side note, Kernwaffen's navy is nuclear powered anyways so this proposal really only applies to our economy because less oil being burned in ships= more oil for tanks and planes...

after reading this draft I didn't know to laugh or cry.

although military vessels have had nuclear power for a long time its still not practical for all ships to be nuclear powered.

Does the author have a burgeoning nuclear power industry because that what its sounds like.

If this passes a lot of nations will be knocked back to sailing ships again. so The Empire will oppose this stupid idea of a draft.

While Iccara is all for supporting the reduction of environmental pollution with the obsoletion of fossil fuels, the lack of direction in the proposal makes it difficult to accept. As is noted, all vessels of sizable tonnage (ie: larger than small craft, including military) are affected. Unfortunately the legalities of an immediate transition to nuclear power on a national level (many nations dedicate specific authorities, mostly linked to their respected governments, for controlling nuclear power) are overwhelming. Even if national legislation of nuclear energy is expanded, the logistics of implementing new vessels based off of nuclear power in the civilian world is a "nightmare".

If a working resolution is to be realistically effective, there would have to be a measured transition much like the Fossil Fuel Reduction Act. Anything more than that would economically obliterate our nations by the proverbial hip.

Finally just to play Devil's Advocate, the use of nuclear power over fossil fuels has its own problems. The disposal of nuclear waste is a problem, as is the repercussions of a catastrophic event of just one reactor on a vessel such as a transport. Nuclear fallout, even the most minor of it, lasts centuries if not more.

Mark Sandoval
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Iccara

Nuclear Large Water Vessel Act
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.


Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: All Businesses
Proposed by: East Tennesee Island

Description: Description: if Passed this proposal will make it illegal for ships to powered by Any kind of Oil based Fuel.

RECOGNIZING:Studies showing that one days trip on a container vessel can use as much gas as a compact car can for 150 years.

RECOGNIZING:That this is the main reason the fuel supply is being drained

REALIZING:That Nuclear Fission is a much safer than Oil power

ALSO REALIZING: the benefit of Less oil spills from Less Oil in Oil Tankers

NOTING: This proposal Has no effect on Small Pleasure Craft(Yacths,Small Fishing Boats,Tour Boats etc..etc..)

ALSO NOTING: That this proposal Does effect military Ships as well


Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 124 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Sat Jan 7 2006

Allow, me before beginning my denunciation of this resolution, to make clear my opinion of nuclear power. Nuclear power is for Compadria and myself, a necessary evil in the fight against an energy troubled future, rising emissions of potentially damaging and Greenhouse Effect inducing gasses into the atmosphere and other environmentally and societally unhealthy side-effects of dirty power sources. Yet it should be a stop-gap measure, one used until a more efficient, still cleaner and safer method is to be adopted. There are indeed some instances where nuclear power on board vessels is a viable concept, yet to mandate it be used on all would be wrong for three reasons.

Firstly, the construction of a nuclear reactor is an expensive enterprise, involving on average sums of between 3 billion and 5 billion US $ to construct (RL reference). Equally, decommissioning of an obsolete or disused reactor involves similar sums. For such reasons, poorer nations would be reduced to an even more primitive transport networks. This does not take into account the costs required in order to convert an entire fleet into one that uses nuclear power, nor the costs of technological modifications, nor of refits nor even of fulfilling regulations. It is simply too much.

Secondly, reactors may be designed to be safe, but at sea there are far more complicating factors than on land. Whether has a greater effect on the vessels than an ordinary nuclear power plant and should a vessel sink, it could contaminate entire areas of great natural beauty or that are heavily populated. Furthermore, trained technicians would have to be employed on each ship and cost-cutting by private companies trying to comply with this resolution could lead to disastorous short-falls in necessary training and safety equipment and procedure.

Thirdly, it should be noted that due to the advent of fusion technology, the entire fleet could become oboslete within a short period of entering into compliance with this resolution.

I should note that the proposal was done with the best of intentions and acknowleges a difficult issue, yet we should look for safer, less costly and perhaps even cleaner alternatives, to the nuclear option prescribed here.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.