BIRT Ontario Should Discontinue the use of Nuclear Power: Con

Watch out for:

 Pro resolution definition (phase out, eliminate outright, transition to green energies etc.)

Research:

 Ontario’s nuclear energy usage as a percentage of total power generated in the province
 Coal mining deaths against total Nuclear accidents
 Annual coal usage health risks (asthma, air pollution, smog etc.)
 Accidents from coal mining (Chile, China, America) against Chernobyl, Fukushima, 3 Mile Nuclear
accident
 Focus on Ontario’s safe history, how Candu reactors work better than the others, suggest
alternatives
 Cost efficiency, safety, longevity and sustainability of the resource
 Transition away from uranium core reactors
 Public perception; does not need to be changed
 Focus on future of Ontario, not near term goals. Nuclear in our future, costs over a long period
vs. early coal advantages

Good morning, Honourable Judge, Patient Timekeeper, Worthy Opponents and my most
esteemed colleague. The resolution before us today is BIRT Ontario Should Discontinue the use of
Nuclear Power. We as the con side firmly believe that nuclear power should remain a part of Ontario’s
energy plan, and if possible, even expanded. I will first rebut some of my opponents’ points, then go on
to talk about the economic and health benefits of nuclear energy.

Rebuttal First

My opponents have stated that (______), and we believe that …….

Nuclear energy is long known to be the safest and most efficient form of electricity generation.
Powering close to 50% of Ontario homes and businesses, with a spotless, no death safety record in our
province, it is most certainly a viable, safe form of energy. While opponents may say that renewable
sources, such as wind and solar are cheaper and better for the environment, it must be noted that they
cost too much to start up, and require too much land, from flooding or the placement of solar panels.
Furthermore, these sources are solely dependent on environmental conditions, such as availability of
sunlight and wind, while a nuclear plant can be built almost anywhere. It takes over one million solar
panels to power 25,000 homes, while just one small nuclear power plant would do, nothing on the scale
of the plants we use in Ontario.

The safety of nuclear plants has always been an issue by anti-nuclear critics because of the
accidents at Fukushima and Chernobyl. However, the resolution of this debate focuses on Ontario, and
not about the nuclear plans of other countries or provinces. Although I am not trying to downplay the
potential of nuclear, the same risk remains with any energy source; whether it be a coal explosion, a
dam bursting or a turbine failure. If we compare the amount of deaths per terawatt hour
(1,000,000,000,000), which is one trillion watts, coal mining globally causes 161 deaths from mining,
pollution and other factors, while nuclear energy, which is even safer than solar and wind, has a death
per terawatt rating of 0.04. I obtained this data from the World Health Organization and the European
study group Externe.

The future of Ontario is one that is nuclear powered. Dalton McGuinty has stated that nuclear
energy will be maintained and expanded in Ontario until at least 2025, with the plan to build 2 new
reactors at Bruce Power and Darlington respectively. In addition to these new plants, our current plants
are scalable to provide more power for Ontarians. The Bruce Nuclear Plant is capable of 6000 MWh,
however we are only using around 2/3’s of that.