Good morning ladies and gentlemen. Today’s motion is “Nuclear power is the best source of energy for the future.” While some people advocate the use of nuclear power continuously, we strongly oppose this statement. How can it be called “best”, when it exerts deleterious impacts on both humans and nature?
First of all, the use of nuclear power does involve high risks and may put us humans in jeopardy. We must be extremely vigilant and aware that nuclear power comes with considerable short comings. By no means is the source of nuclear power reliable. Take the Chernobyl Nuclear Crisis as an example. There was a leakage of nuclear power decades ago. Find what were the consequences? I can answer you: death and trauma. Many lost their precious lives due to this single accident. Aside from that, the crisis is still posing detrimental impacts on the following innocent generations. Many of the infants are born with defects and die shortly after birth. Some are deformed and are utterly devoid of the ability to take care of themselves. It is solely a tragedy. Why should we consider nuclear power as good, and even the best, when it brings about such consequences? Could our dear opponents refute the disastrous impacts of nuclear power and put forward convincing figures to back it?
A good source of energy should enable users to feel confident about it. Ironically, it is apparent that people worldwide have no confidence in nuclear power. The leakage of power of the Fukushima nuclear plant last year in Japan has tarnished its reputation. It stroke a severe psychological blow to people and most, if not all of us, have lost our faith in nuclear power. Further use will only indubitably trigger fear and social instability. It is unlikely for people to accept it and so how can we expect that it can do any good to us in the future?
Of course, nuclear power has its upsides. This is to a certain extent irrefutable. However, we firmly believe that when judging whether it is good, on even whether it is the best, we must take multitudinous perspectives into account. We do not deny that some of the sources of power, like fossil fuels, are finite, whereas nuclear power can sustain for a much longer time. If we are to take an optimistic view, it can perhaps address the problem of shortage of fuels in the near future. But what about nature?
Some advocates and proponents make a stand for nuclear power, thinking that it is more environmentally-friendly. Paradoxically, instead of doing good, nuclear power does bring harmful, if not adverse, impacts to the environment. For example, a huge amount of hot water is needed to cool the nuclear plant. And where does this hot water go next? It is disposed straight into the ocean, which means, the marine creatures are being threatened by the hot water. Some parts of the ocean also become inhabitable. In the long run, some vulnerable species like corals might become extinct, thus reducing the initially rich biodiversity. Moreover, as aforementioned, any accident may lead to catastrophic consequences and creatures, including humans, might be killed on a massive scale.
Some may argue that in the future, nuclear power will be well-developed and a lot safer. I hold reservations towards this seemingly sensible claim. Yes, advancement in technology may bring about improvement. However, we should bear in mind that mother nature is always unpredictable. It is always better to be safe than sorry, as the proverb goes.
We assert that the rationale behind using nuclear power in future is to conserve the environment. And so, we believe that using renewable energy is the best alternative. On the one hand, it causes no harm to both humans and the environment. On the other hand, it is able to sustain our needs. It is undeniable that it is not used widely now. However, an incontrovertible fact is that it is gaining in increasing popularity and people do start to recognize its merits. We surely take a sanguine view of its use in the future.
Why should we stubbornly support nuclear power, given that it is a curse to the planet? Why should our dear opponents still cling to such a dangerous source of energy after knowing its undesirable impacts? If they fail to prove with concrete evidence the safety of nuclear power or refute the world of good of renewable energy, today’s motion must fall. Thank you!