Matters Of Debate | Issue 11

Matters Of Debate | Issue 11

New Zealand should embrace nuclear energy

This column is written by the Otago University Debating Society, which meets for social debating every Tuesday at 6pm in the Commerce Building

Affirmative, by By Old Major

Of the renewable energy methods which exist at present (i.e. geothermal, wind, hydroelectric, solar) nuclear fission is the most proficient, supplying 14 percent of the world’s electricity, and providing the only green source which can currently match the energy output of fossil fuels. It should be the bread and butter of a nation devoted to its ‘pure and green’ image. Yet David Lange’s impassioned campaign to establish the country as a nuclear free zone has made anything with the word ‘nuclear’ anathema to many New Zealanders. Since the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament in 1959, we as a nation have been in staunch opposition to atomic weapons. Yet with nuclear power established as a rich energy source, bereft of the restrictions associated with nuclear weapons, surely the policy now does more harm than good for New Zealand?

The nuclear disasters of Chernobyl and Fukushima are terrible; but in perspective, of over 500 reactors spanning half a decade of operation, barely one percent have faced any potential crisis. According to the World Nuclear Organisation (WNO), who claim “even a major accident and meltdown (as at Fukushima in 2011) would not endanger its neighbours”, the risk or irradiation does not outweigh its potential benefits. The few reactors which have faced problems are those fitted with outdated, degraded technology which is no longer permitted to exist. There is no question that such events have cautioned the nuclear industry and ensured tightening of its safety threshold and its policy for environmental preservation; it is, as the WNO states, “the only energy-producing industry which takes full responsibility for managing all its wastes, and bears the cost of this.”

And yet, our evolving technology offers methods to ameliorate the risks that we associate with nuclear power. Thorium, an element abundant in minerals throughout the earth’s crust, provides a fertile material for nuclear fission which requires far less uranium and produces a more stable reaction with fewer harmful by-products. Yet use of thorium as nuclear fuel is impeded by lack of research and innovation in this area, and continued stigmatisation of nuclear energy will do little to alleviate delays in studying them. 

To conclude, the field of nuclear science holds massive potential for the future of green energy.The sooner the better it will be, that we can surpass our concerns about the industry and gain a better understanding of its potential benefits to New Zealand.

Negative, by Squealer the Pig

Chernobyl! Fukushima! See how easy that was? I’ve already won this argument. News flash to the person writing the other side: Nuclear disasters happen and they’re pretty shitty. Countries have been moving towards phasing out nuclear power; after the disaster at Fukushima, Germany immediately shut down eight of its 17  reactors and is working towards having them all closed by 2022. New Zealand is also on a major fault-line, no matter how well built the reactors are, there is always a chance that there might be a disaster. It’s not a risk that we should take.
 

A further point of concern is that nuclear power plants are liable to attack by terrorist organisations. After the Paris attacks, security has been heightened at plants in the region. The Belgian government is providing everyone in the country with iodine pills. The Dutch government has ordered 15 million pills. Why? Because these countries think there is a risk terrorists will successfully attack a nuclear power plant; iodine pills help to reduce radiation build-up. If that’s what you want New Zealand to look like, sure, go for it. I’m just not so sure how good we’d be at stopping a potential attack. I mean the police can’t even stop people lighting couches on fire.

Highly radioactive waste is created as a by-product of nuclear power. One of the most common ways of getting rid of nuclear waste is to bury it deep underground. If that sounds as childish as fuck to you, you’re right. It’s like these governments are cats who are trying to bury their shit. There are different estimates of how long the waste remains radioactive for, ranging from 10,000 years to millions of years. It’s not pleasant to find week old cat poo in your sandpit, similarly it wouldn’t be nice for people in a few thousand years time to dig down and find radioactive nuclear waste. On top of that there’s also always the potential of leaks.

I won this argument with the first two words. And then I said more stuff. Clearly New Zealand shouldn’t turn to nuclear energy. 

This article first appeared in Issue 11, 2016.
Posted 12:16pm Sunday 15th May 2016 by Otago University Debating Society.