South Korea should decrease its reliance on nuclear energy

1. South Korea should decrease its reliance on nuclear energy

2. p. 82 Peak of global oil production

3. the point at which we produce the most oil we will everproduce. After that point, we will only produce less and less oil until it is all used up. The price of oil will never be reduced after this point, because there is too much demand and not enough supply “peak oil”

4. Hubbert curve predicts peak of global oil production – in 1956

5. Public safety is more important than energy development The problem: global warming

6. Air pollution kills • 2,000,000 people every year according to the WHO in 2010 • Air Pollutionleads to greenhouse gases, which leads to global warming • Coal Mining kills • 1,000,000 deaths per year according to the WHO (p. 83) • Coal is 100 times more radioactive than nuclear reactors, per amount of energy produced! According to U.S. Dept of Energy/Scientific American Effects

7. Impacts of global warming

8. Fuels created from dead plants over millions of years • Petroleum products: • Oil, • coal, • natural gas • These fuels are the primary sources of industrial pollution Causes: Fossil Fuels

10. Relatively clean and safe-1/100,000 meltdown accidents will kill you • Coal: 4,025x deadlier(p. 84) • Natural gas: 100x deadlier • Oil: 900x deadlier • Provides high paying jobs • Research and development will continually enhance the technology • Continuously runs unlike the alternatives which can only be used during certain times Solutions: Benefits of Nuclear Energy

11. Solution? World nuclear energy use France 75%+ ; 50 reactors Japan 50%-75% ; 51 reactors Korea: 20%-50% ; 21 reactors United States 0%-25% ; 104 reactors (!)

12. Nuclear Power 101

13. Operating expenses, Nuclear vs. other energy types Source: University of Stuttgart, Germany, 2009 http://us.arevablog.com/2009/12/14/copenhagen-and-climate-change-chart-of-the-day/

14. 40% of all electricity Will build 18 nuclear power plants (45 trillion won) by 2030 Goal-Export 80 nuclear reactors worth (400 trillion won) by 2030 Korea Nuclear Power

15. Value: Energy Development Explanation: Our goal should be to consume less, and be more energy efficient. Nuclear energy is a step towards achieving this – even if it puts some people at risk. The alternative is to put everyone at risk of dying from the effects of global warming. Justification: this is the greatest good for the greatest number – yes some people might be at a small risk, but the alternative places all 7 billion people on earth at risk from global warming. Con – Energy Development

16. Nuclear energy is safer than the alternatives • Coal: 4,025x deadlier(p. 84) • Natural gas: 100x deadlier • Oil: 900x deadlier • Only 1/100,000 meltdown accidents will kill you • Nuclear energy is cheaper • Than any fossil-fuel-based energy, according to U.S. EIA • Cheaper than all other clean technologies for preventing CO2 emissions. Con – Energy Development

17. Eventually nuclear waste disposal will be solved • In around 100 years it is reasonable to assume we will have a way of rendering nuclear waste non-radioactive. (p. 84) • Already, solutions are developing • Reuse of nuclear waste • Transmutation – rendering waste less harmful • These are less significant problems than global warming. • Alternatives to nuclear energy Con – Energy Development

18. Nuclear reactors are very expensive to build/operate • last only 30-40 years • Vulnerable to natural disasters • Creates fear of meltdowns • Japan lost $700 billion in investment after Fukushima meltdown • Nuclear waste is dangerous • No disposal mechanism • Vulnerable to terrorism • There are other clean energy options The Bad Side

19. Fault lines & nuclear reactors

20. Mining waste is within 50 feet of the Hopi aquifer Uranium mining waste causes cancer, kills animals, and threatens water for Native American tribes

24. Nuclear waste dumps in the U.S. as of 2002 131 dump sites in 39 (out of 50!) sates. Almost 130,000 tonnes of waste produced in 2002

25. Chernobyl, Ukraine - 1986

26. 3 mile island , New York, U.S.A.– meltdown 1979

27. Fukushima, Japan – 2011

28. Value: Public Safety • Explanation: Government’s top priority should be safety of citizens, and this especially applies to public services like electricity generation – if people die because of power production, they cannot use that electricity. • Justification: Energy development is important, but unsafe energy development does far more harm than good, for humans and the planet. • Nuclear reactors are dangerous • p. 85: According to the Korea Times, 3 April 2011, “Korea’s nuclear reactors broke down 89 times over the past 10 years due to malfunctions.” • p. 86: Cannot control natural disasters that could destroy nuclear reactors. • (p. 85) Easy target for North Korea Pro – Public Safety

29. Nuclear energy is too expensive • p. 85 According to the Korea Times, 3 April 2011, malfunctions in Korea’s nuclear reactors “resulted in a whopping \333 billion ($299 million) in loss, implying serious safety risks involved.” • Korea is too dependent on nuclear energy • p. 85 According to the Korea Times, 3 April 2011, Korea “operates 21 nuclear reactors which provide about 40% of the national power supply.” • If these fail/meltdown, there will be blackouts nationwide. • Easy target for North Korea (p. 85) Pro – Public Safety

30. Countries should develop many renewable energy sources • If one fails, the others provide backup energy • Creates many jobs and cheaper energy • China, the E.U., and 35 U.S. states have a renewable energy portfolio goal • 20-30% by 2020 Renewable Energy Portfolios

31. Geothermal

32. Tidal power

33. wind Locating wind farms out at sea can reduce visual pollution while accommodation for fishing and shipping lanes.In addition, the wind is typically more consistent and stronger over the sea,

34. solar