World Energy Cabinet (Cabinet Wars v2.0)

World Energy Council Cabinet Wars v2.0

Cabinet Wars v2.0

Honoring The Past, Challenging The

Future


Cabinet Wars which had its inaugural

conference Cabinet Wars 2014,

has returned with its second edition to the

anticipation of the debating circuit of

Karachi. Cabinet Wars v2.0 consists of six

Cabinets with diverse and intellectually

challenging topics focusing on

broadening the thought horizons of

tomorrows generations. Cabinet Wars is

an independent venture by a group of

enthusiastic students to introduce cabinet

discussions in Karachis Debating Circuit. The

concept is an innovation of MUNs as

students take roles of key figures to

discuss the most pressing challenges in

alternate universes, secret

societies, conspiracy theories and policy

making in the halls of power.


Study Guide: World Energy Council (WEC)

TOPIC: Feasibility of Alternative Energy

Sources

Fossil fuel is running out and when it does that moment will be a pivotal power shifting instance where

the oil dependent countries will hunt for energy producing alternatives. The Alternate fuel race will raise

major concerns as countries who are interested in generating nuclear energy will desperately require

acceptance. Nuclear energy may be susceptive for countries with huge power grids but is its

implementing practical enough and is that practicality overall feasible or is there a better alternative out

there. Lets see if you can figure out a way to keep the lights on.


About WEC

The World Energy Council (WEC) is the principal impartial network of leaders and practitioners

promoting an affordable, stable and environmentally sensitive energy system for the greatest benefit of

all. Formed in 1923, WEC is the UN-accredited global energy body, representing the entire energy

spectrum, with more than 3000 member organizations located in over 90 countries and drawn from

governments, private and state corporations, academia, NGOs and energy-related stakeholders.

This is another WEC meeting where you have to come up with global, regional and national energy

strategies and publish an authoritative white paper to facilitate the worlds energy policy dialogue. The

World Energy Congress, held over 20 times since the WECs founding, is recognized as the worlds

premier energy gathering. As we move forward through the 21st century, the WEC continues to grow

and expand, building on its long and stable history as one of the key players on the global energy scene.

History of the Problem

Climate change and its negative affects has become an ever-increasing issue. Many countries are looking

for different energy sources that would cause less environmental damage. Currently most of the energy

being used now is fossil fuels such as petroleum and coal. Fossil fuels are formed from the natural decay

of organic material such as plants or animals. Fossil fuels are considered a nonrenewable resource

because they take millions of years to be created. They have a negative impact on the environment

because when fossil fuels are burned they produce gases. These gases can become trapped in the

earths atmosphere and do not allow the suns energy to escape from the atmosphere. This is causing

the earth to warm and causes harmful environmental affects and health affects for people.

The current methods of producing, refining and utilizing energy have negative impacts on the

environment. Not only does the burning of fossil fuels damage the environment, but it can also cause

serious health problems for people. Coal is often burned as part of the process in producing electricity.

The gases that are released when the coal is burned enter the atmosphere as air pollution, which can

damage to peoples heath by causing respiratory

issues such as asthma.

Renewable energy is a sustainable alternative to

the fossil fuels that are being used, without the

negative impact on the environment. Renewable

energy can be used immediately, like with solar

or wind power, and they also does not run out.

The world relies heavily on fossil fuels, to power

cars, heat homes, and many other uses. However

the earths supply of fossil fuels is rapidly


diminishing as demand continues to increase. Possible alternatives to fossil fuels are solar power,

hydropower, tidal power, wind power, geothermal energy and nuclear energy, though it is a

controversial form of power. These types of renewable energies are non-pollutants and replenish-able

making them a better option than the fossil fuels currently being used.

Many countries have begun to utilize alternative energies, though the conversion from fossil fuels to

alternative energies is slow:

The United States still gets approximately 82% of its energy from fossil fuels. Since 2011 the U.S.

is making strides to use more alternative energy with 11.7% of its energy coming from an

alternate energy source. In 2009, President Barack Obama called for the doubling in use of

renewable energy in the next three years and in his 2012 State of the Union Address the

President reaffirmed his commitment to renewable energy. The U.S. also has multiple

government agencies that monitor the environment; its effect and use of renewable resources

such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), The Department of Energy (DOE), Natural

Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and many others.

Brazil, which is considered a developing country, is one of the leading examples of a developing

country using renewable energy rather than fossil fuels. 85.4% of all of Brazils energy comes

from renewable resources, particularly sugarcane ethanol which the country has in abundance.

After an oil shortage in the 1970s Brazil focused on developing renewable energies, which is the

reason behind their advanced use of these energy sources.

The Peoples Republic of China is rapidly

developing its use of renewable energy. China

has begun to invest more capital in its renewable

energy program during the 2000s focusing

specifically on hydropower and nuclear power.

Though China does still mine and use coal for

energy and the environmental recovery from

that has been very slow.

There are grave international consequences if the world

does not begin to move away from fossil fuels and

increase its use of alternative energies. The greatest

threat that fossil fuels pose is to the environment. Global

warming is an important issue that cannot be ignored. If

something is not done to slow and stop the greenhouse

by 80% effect people can expect to see an increase in

unusual and strong weather patterns such as hurricanes

and droughts, the spread of disease, the rising of sea

levels, an increase in temperature, and the depletion of

natural resources. This is an issue that affects the entire

world and can prove very dangerous is something is not


done by the international community to address it and makes strides toward solving the issue.

Efforts have been made in the past like WEC and such is the case of the Renewable Energy Agency (REA)

which was founded in 2003 with the goal of protecting the environment by using renewable energies,

informing the public on the use of renewable resources, and promotes research on the issue. REA works

with international organizations and governments to promote the research and implementation of

renewable energy. REA is currently working on the study of the potential of anaerobic digestion

technologies implementation in agriculture of Ukraine with US EPA Assistance, A Landfill Gas Feasibility

Study and Collection System and Flare Installation at The Rivne Landfill, Publishes the Ukrainian

magazine Green Energy, and has multiple other projects.

Alternate Energy Solutions Solar:

Solar energy can be used for heating, cooling or electrical power generation. Solar heat has long

been employed in passively and actively heated buildings, as well as district heating systems.

Examples of the latter are the Drake Landing Solar Community is Alberta, Canada and numerous

district systems in Denmark and Germany. In Europe, there are two programs for the application

of solar heat: the Solar District Heating (SDH) and the International Energy Agency's Solar

Heating and Cooling (SHC) program.

Wind:

Wind energy research dates back several decades to the 1970s when NASA developed an

analytical model to predict wind turbine power generation during high winds. Today, both

Sandia National Laboratories and National Renewable Energy Laboratory have programs

dedicated to wind research. Sandias laboratory focuses on the advancement of materials,

aerodynamics, and sensors. The NREL wind projects are centered on improving wind plant

power production, reducing their capital costs, and making wind energy more cost effective

overall.

Ethanol bio-fuels:

As the primary source of bio-fuels in

North America, many organizations

are conducting research in the area of

ethanol production. On the Federal

level, the USDA conducts a large

amount of research regarding ethanol

production in the United States. Much

of this research is targeted toward the

effect of ethanol production on

domestic food markets. Sandia


National Laboratories conducts in-house cellulosic ethanol research and is also a member of the

Joint BioEnergy Institute (JBEI), a research institute founded by the United States Department of

Energy with the goal of developing cellulosic bio-fuels.

Other bio-fuels:

From 1978 to 1996, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory experimented with using algae

as a bio-fuels source in the "Aquatic Species Program. A self-published article by Michael Briggs,

at the University of New Hampshire Biofuels Group, offers estimates for the realistic

replacement of all motor vehicle fuel with biofuels by utilizing algae that have a natural oil

content greater than 50%, which Briggs suggests can be grown on algae ponds at wastewater

treatment plants. This oil-rich algae can then be extracted from the system and processed into

biofuels, with the dried remainder further reprocessed to create ethanol.

The production of algae to harvest oil for biofuels has not yet been undertaken on a commercial

scale, but feasibility studies have been conducted to arrive at the above yield estimate. In

addition to its projected high yield, alga-culture (unlike food crop-based biofuels) does not entail

a decrease in food production, since it requires neither farmland nor fresh water. Many

companies are pursuing algae bio-reactors for various purposes, including scaling up biofuels

production to commercial levels.

Several groups in various sectors are conducting research on Jatropha curcas, a poisonous

shrub-like tree that produces seeds considered by many to be a viable source of biofuels

feedstock oil. Much of this research focuses on improving the overall per acre oil yield of

Jatropha through advancements in genetics, soil science, and horticultural practices. SG Biofuels,

a San Diego-based Jatropha developer, has used molecular breeding and biotechnology to

produce elite hybrid seeds of Jatropha that show significant yield improvements over first

generation varieties. The Center for Sustainable Energy Farming (CfSEF) is a Los Angeles-based

non-profit research organization dedicated to Jatropha research in the areas of plant science,

agronomy, and horticulture. Successful exploration of these disciplines is projected to increase

Jatropha farm production yields by 200-300% in the next ten years.

Geothermal:

Geothermal energy is produced by tapping into the thermal energy created and stored within

the earth. It is considered sustainable because that thermal energy is constantly replenished.

However, the science of geothermal energy generation is still young and developing economic

viability. Several entities, such as the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Sandia

National Laboratories are conducting research toward the goal of establishing a proven science

around geothermal energy. The International Centre for Geothermal Research (IGC), a German

geosciences research organization, is largely focused on geothermal energy development

research.


Hydrogen:

Over $1 billion of federal money has been spent on the research and development of hydrogen

fuel in the United States. Both the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Sandia National

Laboratories have departments dedicated to hydrogen research.

Thorium:

Thorium reactors have been studied since shortly after World War II, with the first prototype

(the Molten-Salt Reactor Experiment) operating from 1964-1969. Research is being actively

pursued in several countries. The energy available from thorium based nuclear reactors exceeds

the power than can be generated through the worlds supply of uranium, coal and oil combined,

as one ton of thorium can produce as much energy as 200 tons of uranium. Thorium based

nuclear reactors offer comparatively safer, smaller, and more efficient reactors than uranium

fuel cycle reactors. Thorium mining is also safer and more efficient than uranium, as Thoriums

ore, monazite, generally contains higher concentrations of thorium than the percentage of

uranium found in its respective ore. This makes thorium a more cost efficient and potentially

less environmentally damaging fuel source. Thorium reactors produce either uranium-232,

which is extremely dangerous due to high levels of gamma radiation but is not viable for nuclear

weapons, or they can be designed (through the introduction of protactinium-233) to produce

uranium-233 which can be used for nuclear weapons instead.

Disadvantages of Renewable Energy The generation of alternative energy on the scale needed to replace fossil energy, in an effort to reverse

global climate change, is likely to have significant negative environmental impacts. For example, biomass

energy generation would have to increase 7-fold to supply current primary energy demand, and up to

40-fold by 2100 given economic and energy growth projections. Humans already appropriate 30 to 40%

of all photo-synthetically fixed carbon worldwide, indicating that expansion of additional biomass

harvesting is likely to stress ecosystems, in some cases precipitating collapse and extinction of animal

species that have been deprived of vital food sources. The total amount of energy capture by vegetation

in the United States each year is around 58 quads

(61.5 EJ), about half of which is already harvested as

agricultural crops and forest products. The remaining

biomass is needed to maintain ecosystem functions

and diversity. Since annual energy use in the United

States is ca. 100 quads, biomass energy could supply

only a very small fraction. To supply the current

worldwide energy demand solely with biomass would

require more than 10% of the Earths land surface,

which is comparable to the area use for all of world

agriculture (i.e., ca. 1500 million hectares), indicating


that further expansion of biomass energy generation will be difficult without precipitating an ethical

conflict, given current world hunger statistics, over growing plants for biofuel versus food.

Given environmental concerns (e.g., fish migration, destruction of sensitive aquatic ecosystems, etc.)

about building new dams to capture hydroelectric energy, further expansion of hydropower in the

United States is unlikely. Wind power, if deployed on the large scale necessary to substitute fossil energy,

is likely to face public resistance. If 100% of U.S. energy demand were to be supplied by windmills, about

80 million hectares (i.e., more than 40% of all available farmland in the United States) would have to be

covered with large windmills (50m hub height and 250 to 500 m apart). It is therefore not surprising that

the major environmental impact of wind power is related to land use and less to wildlife (birds, bats, etc.)

mortality. Unless only a relatively small fraction of electricity is generated by windmills in remote

locations, it is unlikely that the public will tolerate large wind farms given concerns about blade noise

and aesthetics.

There are additional issues that may arise from switching to alternative energy. Increasing the nations

use of natural gas for electricity generation could result in adverse economic consequences, especially

since natural gas currently costs about four times more than coal. Furthermore, if there were a

widespread switching to natural gas from coal some countries would become increasingly dependent on

international supplies. Also, large-scale fuel switching would require substantial investments in pipeline

storage and storage capacity and new terminals to process imported natural gas. There is also the

question of whether to convert existing coal-burning plants or to construct new ones. Burning natural

gas at an existing coal plant would require a pipeline with the ability to meet the plants fuel supply

requirements. It would also require expansion of interstate and intrastate pipelines to transport

increased volumes of natural gas Overall it would be more feasible and cost-effective to construct new

natural gas units than to switch coal-burning plants.

Nuclear Power Proposed as Renewable Energy Legislative definitions of renewable energy, used when determining energy projects eligible for subsidies

or tax breaks, usually exclude conventional nuclear reactor designs. Physicist Bernard Cohen elucidated

in 1983 that uranium dissolved in seawater, when used in Breeder reactors (which are reactors that

"breed" more fissile nuclear fuel than they consume from base fertile material) is effectively

inexhaustible, with the seawater bearing uranium constantly replenished by river erosion carrying more

uranium into the sea, and could therefore be considered a renewable source of energy.

In 1987, the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), an independent

organization published Our Common Future, in which breeder reactors, and, when it is developed,

fusion power are both classified within the same category as conventional renewable energy sources,

such as solar and falling water.

30,000 to 60,000 years is one estimated supply lifespan of fission-based conventional/light water

reactor reserves if it is possible to extract all the uranium from seawater, assuming current world energy

consumption. Alternatively this is about 6,500 years with a potential nuclear reactor fleet of 3,000 GW, a

quantity of electricity six to seven times higher than the current world civil nuclear power capacity.


All in all Fusion power would provide more energy for a given weight of fuel than any fuel-consuming

energy source currently in use, and the fuel itself (primarily deuterium) exists abundantly in the Earth's

ocean: about 1 in 6500 hydrogen(H) atoms in seawater(H2O) is deuterium in the form of (semi-heavy

water). Although this may seem a low proportion (about 0.015%), because nuclear fusion reactions are

so much more energetic than chemical combustion and seawater is easier to access and more plentiful

than fossil fuels, fusion could potentially supply the world's energy needs for millions of years.

The Nuclear Debate The Debate Itself

Pros and cons of nuclear power plants As a result of the current discussion how further global warming

could be prevented or at least mitigated, the revival of nuclear power seems to be in everybody's - or at

least in many politician's - mind. It is interesting to see that in many suggestions to mitigate global

warming, the focus is put on the advantages of nuclear power generation, and its disadvantages are

rarely mentioned. While virtually the whole world stands against the development and use of nuclear

weapons, attitudes vary when it comes to the development and use of nuclear energy. Proponents of

nuclear energy tout it as a form of clean energy since it releases virtually none of the harmful CO2

emissions associated with fossil fuel. However, construction of nuclear power plants does emit great

amounts of CO2, as construction instruments and processes, such as trucks, cranes, front-end loaders,

etc., rely on other sources of energy - especially fossil fuels.


In addition, the health and environmental costs of nuclear energy are horrific. The possibility of

accidents, such as that of Chernobyl or Three Mile Island, the threat of nuclear terrorism, the potential

for horizontal nuclear proliferation, the damaging effects from the entire nuclear cycle, from uranium

mining to nuclear waste, all indicate that the risks of nuclear energy far outweigh the benefit.

Nuclear energy is a hot button political issue. Iraq and North Korea managed to develop clandestine

nuclear weapons programs under the guise of "peaceful" nuclear energy, only for their weapons

programs to be discovered later. (Iraq's program was dismantled mostly through the Gulf War and the

ensuing inspections by IAEA.)

This WEC meeting will combine all previous efforts taken by man to understand Nuclear Energy,

safeguard it or simply prevent or boost its production. Below you'll find all the facts you need to know

about nuclear energy technology, its environmental consequences, its political and historical

background, and the current issues surrounding it today.

The Nuclear Fuel Cycle (The Stages)

1. Uranium mining

Uranium is extracted from underground and open pit mines. For every ton of uranium oxide

produced, thousands of tons of wastes, or tailings, are left behind. Often the tailings are simply

dumped on the land near the mine and left to the effects of the elements. Wind carries radon

gas and radioactive dust from these tailings for many miles. Contaminated rainwater enters the

soil, the watershed, and, eventually, the food chain, endangering the health of people, animals,

and the planet. Uranium mining on indigenous and tribal peoples' lands has devastated local

communities and environments in North America, Australia, Africa, and Asia.

2. Enrichment

After mining the uranium mineral is refined to uranium oxide, called yellowcake. This natural

uranium is processed and then enriched. Industrial processes enrich uranium by concentrating

the amount of its fissile isotopes to 3% or more for use as reactor fuel. Uranium can be further

enriched for use in nuclear weaponthe technology used to enrich uranium to 3% is the same

as is used to enrich it to 20%, the level necessary for use in a nuclear weapon.

3. Reprocessing

Reprocessing is a chemical reaction that separates plutonium and uranium from fuel which has

been irradiated in reactors. The plutonium is important for weapons production, while the

uranium is basically a byproduct that can be recycled as fuel. Because reprocessing is also part

of the civilian nuclear fuel cycle, reprocessing is a key link between civilian nuclear power and

nuclear weapons production. Thus, the existence of a reprocessing plant is what gives a country

the ability to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons. Four-fifths of the plutonium in the world

today has been produced by commercial nuclear power reactors. This spread of plutonium


through nuclear power has increased the number of potential nuclear weapons states to 46. The

five declared nuclear weapons nationsChina, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the

United Statesare only one-ninth of the real "nuclear club".

4. Radioactive waste

By the year 2000, the nuclear industry had created 201,000 tons of highly radioactive irradiated

(used) fuel rods. Waste from nuclear energy production must be safely and securely stored for

between 10,000 years and 240,000 years in order to prevent health and environmental disasters

from radioactive contamination. None of the 44 countries with nuclear reactors has a solution

to the waste problem. The wastes are either kept in "temporary", above-ground storage

facilities or buried in shallow pits. Wastes have been dumped directly into the ground, lakes and

oceans of the world. A 2003 MIT study projected that, if the world expands its nuclear energy

production to 1,000 gigawatts by 2050 (an increase of 2% per year), a new storage facility equal

to the currently planned capacity of Yucca Mountain would have to be created somewhere in

the world about every three to four years to permanently store the spent nuclear fuel.

Politics of Nuclear Energy

Countries such as Iraq, Iran, and North Korea have brought the connection between nuclear energy and

nuclear weapons into the international spotlight. As the media coverage grows around these stories, it is

important to remember the cold hard facts about the types of nuclear technology each country actually

possesses. Please visit the IAEA's site for a profile of each country, or Reaching Critical Wills own annual

shadow report for more comprehensive information.

Pakistan

Pakistan is an active member in various international organizations in the field of nuclear energy, and

exchanges operating data regularly with IAEA, WANO and COG. The Fuel Channel Integrity Assessment

Programme (FCIA) of Karachi NPP was undertaken with the help of IAEA and COG, Canada. An

independent review of KANUPP steam generators was also carried out under contract by a Canadian

utility. An IAEA seismic safety review mission inspected the plant in 1993. The findings of the mission are

eminently satisfactory. A project, "Improved Safety Features of KANUPP" is in progress under the

auspices of the IAEA.

The design and safety review of CHASNUPP was carried out by an IAEA mission in 1993 and Pre OSART in

March 1999. An IAEA OSART Mission of CHASNUPP is being conducted from 12-29 January 2004. PAEC

shares its operating information with other Nuclear Power Plant operators, through IAEA, WANO and

COG. Both the nuclear power plants KANUPP and CHASNUPP are under the IAEA Safeguards.

India

International co-operation is through multilateral mechanism with IAEA as well as through bilateral

mechanisms. Under the aegis of the IAEA, India has trained a number of personnel, particularly from the

developing countries. India has also hosted a number of workshops, seminars and training courses. The

expertise of India's scientists and engineers is made available to other countries through IAEA.


Iraq

After the first Gulf War, IAEA inspectors discovered a clandestine nuclear weapons program in Iraq,

which Iraq had maintained was intended strictly for peaceful nuclear purposes. The IAEA, operating

under the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement (a weak verification regime mandatory under the NPT),

had failed to effectively detect Iraqs clandestine program. This IAEA failure led to the development of

the Model Additional Protocol, a much more stringent and intrusive inspections regime. More and more

States are beginning to support the idea of the Model Additional Protocol as a precondition to the NPT

Article IV entitlement.

Doubts over Iraqs nuclear weapons program during the second Bush administration lead to further IAEA

inspections. While the United Nations and many States around the world wanted to continue

inspections, the second Bush administration felt that inspections would not be able to provide

conclusive answers. As a result, the US decided to initiate the current war without approval from the UN.

North Korea

The events surrounding North Koreas attempts at developing nuclear weaponry from nuclear energy

capabilities illustrates the dangers of nuclear energy proliferation. One particularly interesting aspect of

the USs reactions to North Koreas nuclear developments is in how markedly different it is from its

reaction to allegations about Iraqs nuclear development.

Iran

Under the NPT, all countries are allowed to develop nuclear power for peaceful uses, under the

inspection of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). They are also allowed to enrich uranium to

the level needed to make fuel for nuclear power, again under the IAEA's monitoring. However, the same

technology can be used to enrich uranium further in order to make nuclear weapons. Whether or not

Iran is secretly developing or intending to develop nuclear weapons, by hiding its uranium enrichment

program for 18 years from the IAEA Iran has violated the NPT and alarmed the international community.

Nuclear Energy and Climate Change

The phenomenon known as global warming has been documented by scientists. CO2 build-up in

the atmosphere causes solar energy to be trapped thus raising the average global temperature

and causing potentially harmful climate and ecological change.

A reduction of CO2 emissions generated by human activity is necessary to slow or at least

reduce the contribution of human activity to this ecologically menacing phenomenon.

70% of world electricity comes from Fossil Fuels. About 16% of the worlds electricity comes

from Nuclear Power and 14% from Renewable Resources.

Increased use of nuclear energy should be the solution to dependence on fossil fuels and thus

help reduce global CO2 emissions.


Nuclear power usage has environmental, health, and security risks that make it an undesirable

substitute for fossil fuels. Many sources of renewable energy do not pose such great risks, and

thus should be explored.

Nuclear power is a Clean Source of Energy that can safely and effectively be used to produce

electricity without CO2 emissions.

Research has shown that taking into account the entire nuclear fuel cycle, between 34 and 60

grams of CO2 are emitted per generated kilowatt hour (kWh). Estimates place the CO2 per unit

of energy at 4-5 times higher than the average quantities of CO2 produced from renewable

energy sources.

Nuclear energy is not a clean source of energy because it produces massive amounts of toxic,

radioactive waste. In the US, this currently amounts to 2,000 metric tons of highly radioactive

waste per year.

Waste from nuclear energy production must be safely and securely stored for between 10,000

years and 240,000 years in order to prevent health and environmental disasters from

radioactive contamination.

The Three Mile Island and Chernobyl disasters caused environmental, economic, health, social

damage to the areas and communities in the regions.

Advantages of nuclear power generation

Nuclear power generation does emit relatively low amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2). The emissions of

greenhouse gases and therefore the contribution of nuclear power plants to global warming is therefore

relatively little. Also the technology is readily available; it does not have to be developed first. It is

possible to generate a high amount of electrical energy in one single plant.

Disadvantages of nuclear power generation

The problem of radioactive waste is still an unsolved one. The waste from nuclear energy is extremely

dangerous and it has to be carefully looked after for several thousand years (10'000 years according to

United States Environmental Protection Agency standards).

High risks: Despite a generally high security standard, accidents can still happen. It is technically

impossible to build a plant with 100% security. A small probability of failure will always last. The

consequences of an accident would be absolutely devastating both for human being as for the nature.

The more nuclear power plants (and nuclear waste storage shelters) are built, the higher is the

probability of a disastrous failure somewhere in the world.

Nuclear power plants as well as nuclear waste

could be preferred targets for terrorist attacks.

No atomic energy plant in the world could

withstand an attack similar to 9/11 in New York.

Such a terrorist act would have catastrophic

effects for the whole world.


During the operation of nuclear power plants, radioactive waste is produced, which in turn can be used

for the production of nuclear weapons. In addition, the same know-how used to design nuclear power

plants can to a certain extent be used to build nuclear weapons (nuclear proliferation).

The energy source for nuclear energy is Uranium. Uranium is a scarce resource; its supply is estimated to

last only for the next 30 to 60 years depending on the actual demand.

The time frame needed for formalities, planning and building of a new nuclear power generation plant is

in the range of 20 to 30 years in the western democracies. In other words: It is an illusion to build new

nuclear power plants in a short time.

Is nuclear energy sustainable?

For several reasons, nuclear power is neither green nor sustainable. Both the nuclear waste as well as

retired nuclear plants are a life-threatening legacy for hundreds of future generations. It flagrantly

contradicts with the thoughts of sustainability if future generations have to deal with dangerous waste

generated from preceding generations.

Uranium, the source of energy for nuclear power, is available on earth only in limited quantities.

Uranium is being consumed (i.e. converted) during the operation of the nuclear power plant so it won't

be available any more for future generations. This again contradicts the principle of sustainability.

Is nuclear power renewable energy?

Nuclear energy uses Uranium as fuel, which is a scarce resource. The supply of Uranium is expected to

last only for the next 30 to 60 years (depending on the actual demand). Therefore nuclear energy is not

a renewable energy.

TOPIC: Feasibility of Alternative Energy SourcesAbout WECThe World Energy Council (WEC) is the principal impartial network of leaders and practitioners promoting an affordable, stable and environmentally sensitive energy system for the greatest benefit of all. Formed in 1923, WEC is the UN-accredited globa...History of the ProblemAlternate Energy SolutionsDisadvantages of Renewable EnergyNuclear Power Proposed as Renewable EnergyThe Nuclear Debate

World Energy Cabinet (Cabinet Wars v2.0)

Documents

Transcript of World Energy Cabinet (Cabinet Wars v2.0)