Date: Sunday, July 17, 2016

Participants (from 10 countries):

Host: Rick

Co-Host: Johny

Teams:

Panel PRO (Team A): Heytham, Hanieh, Amin
Panel CON (Team B): Imad, Mahmud, Mario
Audience (Team C): Johny, Behnam, Djamila, Rojhano
Just Listening: Amara.

Team A summary:

It’s safe. We only have to improve the safety measures when generating it.
It is cheap source of energy and it is more abundant.
NE is the most effective alternative of all the kind of sources that have been used before for many reasons. NE, is 100% safe because we have Nuclear engineers. It doesn’t have gas emissions like fossil energy. It is unlikely to exacerbate the global warming. In terms of effectiveness, despite it’s a cheap source of energy, it provides a huge amount of energy that can be converted into electrical energy for ex. NE, is the best source unlike the solar and wind energies that are weak and not that much productive. NE should be imposed in countries like china. NE has a multitude of advantages and doesn’t have any disadvantage (not very well structured argumentation)
Fossil fuel doesn’t provide much energy and it’s less abundant: Before choosing the best source we need to know what we have. Study advantages and disadvantages of each one. If we are able to solve and fix these disadvantages, effects and potential harm, then, we need to use this source. The natural sources although safe cant’ not meet the needs of a country. They can only meet local needs. NE source energy, using some protective technics, we can prevent accidents. If we use the source in a strategic way, it can be an effective efficient and safe source. There is no perfect source energy, they all have pro and cons but this one is the best one.
Even if there are not perfect source of energy, it can prevent pollution and most of the problems that fossil energy is producing.
All sources of energy have pros and cons. Nuclear energy just has less cons.
If we talk about safety, I thought about safety of most common energies used these days, fossil fuels, most of these energies are more harmful than nuclear energy itself. If we think about gas emissions and its side effects, like diseases, the effects on the environment, the NE, is safer than these energies. Accidents happen because of NE, but if we think about a way to better manage and control and handle this source, it will be good and prevent these accidents. However, as we suffer from lack of energy in the world, one day we’ll not have enough energy to live. The idea here, is that it’s good to use NE but do a better job in creating a safe environment.
Although there have been tragedies with nuclear energy, the incidents are less common than while searching, managing and producing energy based on fossil fuel.

Team B summary:

NE is considered as a very dangerous energy as it contains Uranium but it’s efficient. We just need to consider its effects on the environment and people. NE required a lot of investments, big infrastructures and where they are implemented; they are dangerous to people living around and the environment around. Very often, people are obliged to leave their homes because of this.
People, who extract Uranium from mines, refuse to do it due to the radiation dangers that this process often produces.
Nuclear energy is like a big time bomb: Every NE is a potential atomic bomb, if anything happens, it will be a disaster. It is not pollution free. If we talk about Hiroshima, India and other places, people are protesting, and if people are protesting, it means there is something wrong. If we talk about other energies like solar and wind one, they are not as much productive as NE, but they are accessible to people. We can feet homes with solar panels. It costs money but it’s worth it. We don’t need to rely on NE forever; we need to work on other alternatives.
If nuclear energy does not contribute in the air pollution it doesn’t mean it does not produce other kind of pollution. There have been cities and population of a certain area near power plants is affected by the effects that these plants produce on the water, air, and other mediums.
Nuclear energy alone cannot provide for an entire city, least of all a country.
Only rich country can afford having nuclear power plants.
NE energy is needed to provide energy for manufactures for example. If proper measures are provided, there shouldn’t be much disaster. In some areas for example, people can’t work with solar energy because they don’t have much access to this source. NE is expensive and some countries can’t afford that.

Team C summary:

Johny: Both teams are right. It has been said that all energies have pros and cons, I’m not sure I agree on that. Some energy are clean and safe. For example sun, it produces unlimited clean source of energy for us and we don’t have to worry about the radiation that it produces (thanks to the Earth’s magnetic field and Ozone). Both have cons and pros and I think I will be fair.

Behnam: When you say it is effective and efficient because of this and that. I didn’t get something from team A. you should have mentioned some pros. Only Yusuf in team B mentioned some nice points.

Djamila: Team B was closer to the objective of the argumentation. They provided coherent argumentation and clear statements.

Rojhano: Agreed with Team A.

Rick's take away: There were some interesting points. The cause/effect factor is important. As long as you have the safe infrastructures in place, it is effective and efficient. NE is expensive; one reactor costs one billion dollars. There is no good technology to manage nuclear waste and some people use it for weapons. The plus side is huge energy, small amount of waste.
There is the economic and political side of it. Because big companies like NE users tend to block investors that would like to start exploring alternative energy sources. Completion will always be an issue and will very often bloke evolution and revolution.

Votes:

Johny remained undecided.
Behnam remained undecided.
Djamila voted for team B.
Rojhano voted for team A.

It was a tie. Thanks everyone for participating. We are sorry that we could not record this discussion so we apologize for not offering the audio recording. Nevertheless, we hope we can always post these blogs with a recording file.

Listen Online

This discussion was not recorded. We apologize for that.