Round 1
Shan Amarnani – Steam turbines are used to generate electricity. This is the most common method of generating electricity in the U.S. Coal and other fossil fuels are used to boil water to create the steam needed to spin turbines which generate electricity. This method of burning coal has been used for centuries. Unfortunately, it’s unsustainable and creates by-products which are very harmful to the environment. Nuclear energy is an economical alternative to coal since it is relatively cost efficient and produces very little radioactive waste for the amount of electricity it produces. Uranium-235 is used in a fission reaction where the atom splits into two light atoms called fission products. The mass of the fission product is smaller compared to the original U-235 atom since some of the mass is converted into energy. This energy is released as heat. This heat is used to turn water into steam to spin the turbines.
Anthony Lackey – Nuclear energy certainly seems to be a great alternative to fossil fuels. However, it comes with its own risks: storage of nuclear waste and the dangers of a meltdown, not to mention radiation fallout risks. For example the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, which is still spreading radiation throughout the ocean. A complete recovery isn’t expected until 2050 or later. The unfortunate sides of nuclear energy are many, while if we look to the pros of alternate energy resources like wind power, solar energy or geothermal we find that the largest risk in existence for most of these is limited only to the space we utilize in our efforts to produce plants of economic size. It is a small price to pay to have a downed wind turbine block the road to work for a day than to have nuclear fallout destroy the breadbasket which are our oceans.
Round 2
Lackey – The current method for maintaining a nuclear power generation site requires a large upfront cost to prepare; in addition to expensive fuel production costs the back end of the process requires intense labor and equipment costs. Spent fuel rods from a generation IV reactor require storage for a near indeterminate time period to ensure the public safety. The estimates range from 15 million years up to a near infinite number. This leads to storage sites that require intense scrutiny to ensure compliance to guidelines and procedures. While following strict protocols the cost to our environment has not been calculated yet since we have not seen the seepage effect on groundwater yet. Further options exist in the aerospace realm with large solar collectors located in space where atmospheric interference isn’t a problem, with additional work on microwave at-distance transmission of electricity we find that these actually clean options outweigh the dirty option of nuclear power.
Amarnani – While there have been a few accidents with nuclear power plants, it should not deter us from acknowledging that it is still one of the better alternatives out there today. Accidents happen due to negligence to a certain degree. This can certainly be corrected by imposing more stringent procedures to ensure that what happened in Fukushima does not happen again. While wind power, solar energy and geothermal all seem like feasible alternatives, the electricity generated by these alternatives simply cannot keep up with the energy demands of the world. Furthermore, the cost associated with putting up solar panels and wind turbines far outweigh their benefits since the energy generated by these alternatives are much smaller compared to a fission reaction. The energy density of uranium-235 is 83,140,000 MJ/kg. Compare this with just 24 MJ/kg for coal and it is clear that nuclear energy is by far the most cost-effective method of producing electricity.
Round 3
Amarnani – Recent advancements in technology have allowed us to explore and learn more about the benefits and drawbacks of nuclear energy. While it is true that disposing of radioactive by-products from uranium-235 fission reactions may prove to be a challenge, with thorium based nuclear reactions, this problem is essentially eradicated. A liquid fluoride thorium reactor, commonly referred to as LFTR, is a much more sustainable option should we choose to go with nuclear energy. Thorium is more abundant than uranium, it does not use water for cooling which makes a hydrogen explosion, making a Fukushima incident basically impossible and thorium fuels can breed fissile uranium-233. This uranium can later be used in various kinds of nuclear reactors. The discovery of LFTR essentially makes an already feasible idea of using nuclear reactors to generate energy an even attractive way to generate electricity. This is why nuclear energy is the way of the future.
Lackey – For areas that are far off of the grid, the best option will still be to go with renewable energy, the nuclear option is not an end-all be-all deal. We need to diversify our energy dependence to give humanity freedom from a single source and to develop all of our energy options. Our energy portfolio, as it stands shows a deep dependence upon fossil fuels, and if we turn our efforts to only using nuclear energy one day we will find that – like coal – we have used it up and now have to jump ship to a new method. If we instead develop intelligent divisions between our energy options and balance our usage, we can maximize the time each will be able to contribute to the advancement of humans upon Earth. Our energy assets are a shared resource across the Earth and need to be managed correctly, there is no single answer to our diverse energy needs, but one thing is certain – our dependence on fossil fuels needs to be a thing of the past.
