Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[5]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[4]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[5]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-10-15 10:58:59.424
	1	+2016-10-15 10:58:59.0

Caselist.CitesClass[4]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,58 @@
	1	+=Environmental Justice 1AC=
	2	+
	3	+==Contention 1- Framing==
	4	+
	5	+====We need to embrace the state as a heuristic – passive activism fails ====
	6	+Zanotti 14, Dr. Laura Zanotti is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Virginia Tech. Her research and teaching include critical political theory as well as international organizations, UN peacekeeping, democratization and the role of NGOs in post-conflict governance."Governmentality, Ontology, Methodology: Re-thinking Political Agency in the Global World" – Alternatives: Global, Local, Political – vol 38(4):p. 288-304,. A little unclear if this is late 2013 or early 2014 – The Stated "Version of Record" is Feb 20, 2014, but was originally published online on December 30th, 2013. Obtained via Sage Database.
	7	+By questioning substantialist representations of power and subjects, inquiries on the possibilities of political agency are reframed in a way that focuses on power and subjects’ relational character and the contingent processes of their (trans)formation in the context of agonic relations. Options for resistance to governmental scripts are not limited to ‘‘rejection,’’ ‘‘revolution,’’ or ‘‘dispossession’’ to regain a pristine ‘‘freedom from all constraints’’ or an immanent ideal social order. It is found instead in multifarious and contingent struggles that are constituted within the scripts of governmental rationalities and at the same time exceed and transform them. This approach questions oversimplifications of the complexities of liberal political rationalities and of their interactions with non-liberal political players and nurtures a radical skepticism about identifying universally good or bad actors or abstract solutions to political problems. International power interacts in complex ways with diverse political spaces and within these spaces it is appropriated, hybridized, redescribed, hijacked, and tinkered with. Governmentality as a heuristic focuses on performing complex diagnostics of events. It invites historically situated explorations and careful differentiations rather than overarching demonizations of ‘‘power,’’ sromanticizations of the ‘‘rebel’’ or the ‘‘the local.’’ More broadly, theoretical formulations that conceive the subject in non-substantialist terms and focus on processes of subjectification, on the ambiguity of power discourses, and on hybridization as the terrain for political transformation, open ways for reconsidering political agency beyond the dichotomy of oppression/rebellion. These alternative formulations also foster an ethics of political engagement, to be continuously taken up through plural and uncertain practices, that demand continuous attention to ‘‘what happens’’ instead of fixations on ‘‘what ought to be.’’83 Such ethics of engagement would not await the revolution to come or hope for a pristine ‘‘freedom’’ to be regained. Instead, it would constantly attempt to twist the working of power by playing with whatever cards are available and would require intense processes of reflexivity on the consequences of political choices. To conclude with a famous phrase by Michel Foucault ‘‘my point is not that everything is bad, but that everything is dangerous, which is not exactly the same as bad. If everything is dangerous, then we always have something to do. So my position leads not to apathy but to hyper- and pessimistic activism.’’84
	8	+
	9	+
	10	+====Our discussions cannot be based on ideal theory—we must engage in policy discussions but policies mean nothing unless they change the values to the people they affect. ====
	11	+Curry 14 Dr. Tommy J. Curry The Cost of a Thing: A Kingian Reformulation of a Living Wage Argument in the 21^^st^^ Century. 2014
	12	+Despite the pronouncement of debate as an activity and intellectual exercise pointing to the real world consequences of dialogue, thinking, and (personal) politics when addressing issues of racism, sexism, economic disparity, global conflicts, and death, many of the discussions concerning these ongoing challenges to humanity are fixed to a paradigm which sees the adjudication of material disparities and sociological realities as the conquest of one ideal theory over the other. In "Ideal Theory as Ideology," Charles Mills outlines the problem contemporary theoretical-performance styles in policy debate and value-weighing in Lincoln-Douglass are confronted with in their attempts to get at the concrete problems in our societies. At the outset, Mills concedes that "ideal theory applies to moral theory as a whole (at least to normative ethics as against metaethics); ~~s~~ince ethics deals by definition with normative/prescriptive/evaluative issues, ~~it is set~~ against factual/descriptive issues."At the most general level, the conceptual chasm between what emerges as actual problems in the world (e.g.: racism, sexism, poverty, disease, etc.) and how we frame such problems theoretically—the assumptions and shared ideologies we depend upon for our problems to be heard and accepted as a worthy "problem" by an audience—is the most obvious call for an anti-ethical paradigm, since such a paradigm insists on the actual as the basis of what can be considered normatively. Mills, however, describes this chasm as a problem of an ideal-as-descriptive model which argues that for any actual-empirical-observable social phenomenon (P), an ideal of (P) is necessarily a representation of that phenomenon. In the idealization of a social phenomenon (P), one "necessarily has to abstract away from certain features" of (P) that is observed before abstraction occurs. This gap between what is actual(in the world), and what is represented by theories and politics of debaters proposed in rounds threatens any real discussions about the concrete nature of oppression and the racist economic structures which necessitate tangible policies and reorienting changes in our value orientations. As Mills states: "What distinguishes ideal theory is the reliance on idealization to the exclusion, or at least marginalization, of the actual," what we are seeking to resolve on the basis of "thought" is in fact incomplete, incorrect, or ultimately irrelevant to the actual problems which our "theories" seek to address. Our attempts to situate social disparity cannot simply appeal to the ontologization of social phenomenon—meaning we cannot suggest that the various complexities of social problems (which are constantly emerging and undisclosed beyond the effects we observe) are totalizable by any one set of theories within an ideological frame be it our most cherished notions of Afro-pessimism, feminism, Marxism, or the like. At best, theoretical endorsements make us aware of sets of actions to address ever developing problems in our empirical world, but even this awareness does not command us to only do X, but rather do X and the other ideas which compliment the material conditions addressed by the action X. As a whole, debate (policy and LD) neglects the need to do X in order to remedy our cast-away-ness among our ideological tendencies and politics. How then do we pull ourselves from this seeming ir-recoverability of thought in general and in our endorsement of socially actualizable values like that of the living wage? It is my position that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s thinking about the need for a living wage was a unique, and remains an underappreciated, resource in our attempts to impose value reorientation be it through critique or normative gestures) upon the actual world. In other words, King aims to reformulate the values which deny the legitimacy of the living wage, and those values predicated on the flawed views of the worker, Blacks, and the colonized (dignity, justice, fairness, rights, etc.) used to currently justify the living wages in under our contemporary moral parameters.
	13	+
	14	+====We must distance ourselves from traditional ethics and consider the oppressed—this includes the environment and how it affects minority groups. ====
	15	+Cone 7 July, 2007. JAMES H. CONE "Whose Earth Is It Anyway?" https://sojo.net/magazine/july-2007/whose-earth-it-anyway. RW.
	16	+Do we have any reason to believe that the culture most respon- sible for the ecological crisis will also provide the moral and intellectual resources for the earths liberation? White ethicists and theologians ap- parently think so, since so much of their discourse about theology and the earth is just talk among themselves. But I have a deep suspicion about the theological and ethical values of white culture and religion. For five hun- dred years whites have acted as if they owned the world s resources and have forced people of color to accept their scientific and ethical values. People of color have studied dominant theologies and ethics because our physical and spiritual survival partly depended on it. Now that humanity has reached the possibility of extinction, one would think that a critical assessment of how we got to where we are would be the next step for sensitive and caring theologians of the earth. While there is some radical questioning along these lines, it has not been persistent or challenging enough to compel whites to look outside of their dominating culture for ethical and cultural resources for the earths salvation. One can still earn a doctorate degree in ethics and theology at American seminaries, even at Union Seminary in New York, and not seriously engage racism in this so- ciety and the world. If we save the planet and have a society of inequality, we wouldnt have saved much. According to Audre Lorde, "the master's tools will never dismantle the masters house."z4 They are too narrow and thus assume that people of color have nothing to say about race, gender, sexuality, and the earth - aH of which are interconnected. We need theologians and ethicists who are interested in mutual dialogue, honest conversation about justice for the earth and all of its inhabitants. We need whites who are eager to know something about the communities of people of color-our values, hopes, and dreams. .Whites know so little about om churches and communities that it is often too frustrating to even talk to them about anything that matters. Dialogue requires respect and knowledge of the other - their history, culture and religion. No one racial or national group has all the answers but all groups have something to contribute to the earth's healing. Many ecologists speak often of the need for humility and mutual dialogue. They tell us that we are all interrelated and interdependent, in- cluding human and otherkind. The earth is not a machine. It is an organism in which all things are a part of each other."Every entity in the universe," writes Catherine Keller, "can he described as a process of interconnection with every other being."25 If white ecologists really believe that, why do most still live in segregated communities? Why are their essays and books about the endangered earth so monological - that is, a conversation of a dominant group talking to itself? Why is there so much talk of love, humility, interrelatedness, and interdependence, and yet so little of these values reflected in white people's dealings with people of color?
	17	+
	18	+====Our Relation to the oppressed is the key for fixing destructive human behavior- just talking about immediate affects on minorities is never enough. We must also listen to their experiences and how they connect to their environments. ====
	19	+Cone 2 July, 2007. JAMES H. CONE "Whose Earth Is It Anyway?" https://sojo.net/magazine/july-2007/whose-earth-it-anyway. RW.
	20	+The survival of the earth, therefore, is a moral issue for everybody. If we do not save the earth from destructive human behavior, no one will survive. That fact alone ought to be enough to inspire people of all colors to join hands in the fight for a just and sustainable planet. Eanding the Ecological Critique. We are indebted to ecologists in all fields and areas of human endeavor for sounding the alarm about the earth's distress. They have been so effective in raising ecological awareness that few people deny that our planet is in deep trouble. For the first time in history, humankind has the knowledge and power to destroy all life - either with a nuclear bang or a gradual poisoning of the land, air, and sea. Scientists have warned us of the dire consequences of what human beings are doing to the environment. Theologians and ethicists have raised the moral and religious issues. Grassroots activists in many com- munities are organizing to stop the killing of nature and its creatures. Politicians are paying attention to people's concern for a clean, safe envi- ronment. "It is not so much a question of whether the lion will one day lie down with the lamb," writes Alice Walker, "but whether human beings will ever be able to lie down with any creature or being at all."2o What is absent from much of the talk about the environment in First World countries is a truly radical critique of the culture most responsible for the ecological crisis. This is especially true among white ethicists and theologians in the U.S. In most of the essays and books I have read, there is hardly a hint that perhaps whites could learn something of how we got into this ecological mess from those who have been the victims of white world supremacy. White ethicists and theologians sometimes refer to the disproportionate impact of hazardous waste on blacks and other people of color in the U.S. and Third World and even cite an author or two, here and there throughout the development of their discourse on ecology. They often include a token black or Indian in anthologies on ecotheology ecojustice, and ecofeminism. It is "political correct" to dem- onstrate a knowledge of and concern for people of color in progressive theological circles. But people of color are not treated seriously that is, as if they have something essential to contribute to the conversation. Environmental justice concerns of poor people of color hardly ever merit serious attention, not to mention organized resistance. How can we cre- ate a genuinely mutual ecological dialogue between whites and people of color if one party acts as if they have all the power and knowledge?
	21	+The Role of the Ballot is to affirm the best liberation strategy for the oppressed.
	22	+
	23	+
	24	+==Contention 2- Environmental Racism==
	25	+Nuclear power causes resource contamination which destroys minority communities and their environments—majority of mines and dumping sites are placed in communities of color
	26	+Rozman 14: Izzati Rozman, 2014. ARGUMENTATIVE REPORT: SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT NUCLEAR POWER ENERGY BE BANNED GLOBALLY? https://www.academia.edu/10107346/. RW.
	27	+The danger of uranium mining over the years deftly covers explicit issues which remain underneath the discussion partly because of the nature of the process itself and the precarious unease it bring upon the subject. The upshots of uranium mining blatantly destroys the livelihood of indigenous people, depleting precious potable water resources and bring hazardous effect towards human and environment. Firstly, whenever there is a talking about the uranium extraction, we have to bear in mind that about 70 per cent of the world's uranium reserves are located on lands owned by indigenous peoples. The acts of mining blatantly destroys the livelihood of indigenous people because of the obliteration of the village, pollution and contamination of the water source and deprivation of aborigine’s land and pastures. The government of Nigeria is among those proponents of the nuclear power’s advocates who granted 122 permits to foreign investors for the mining of uranium ore in Tuareg, one of the region in the country with the huge area that constitute the major northern part of the country with total disregard to the right of the people residing there (Nuclear Information and Resource Service, 2013). Those people reside nearby the uranium fields are also vulnerable to the threat of expropriation and deportation to other places like exactly happened in India in 1996. Supported by the local police force, the huts, barns and fields of people residing in Indian village of Chatijkocha are flattened without any warning by the company’s bulldozer to create additional space for the uranium mine (Ross, 2011). Secondly, the effect of uranium mining also depletes precious drinkable water sources. In order to separate the uranium from the ore, large amounts of water are needed during the process, yet many uranium mining areas suffer one common major setback, a water shortage problem (International Energy Association, 2005). The enormous water consumption of mining operations and uranium ore processing plants competes with the need of the people, livestock and agriculture that live nearby the mining plants. To illustrate the problem clearly, recent research conducted by the Namibian water utility or NamWater recently demonstrated that the country would be left with shortage of 54 million cubic metres of water annually, eleven times the resources available from the entire Omaruru river delta if the future projected proposal of uranium mines in Namibia were commissioned (Greenpeace, 2008). The third threats of uranium mining generally come from the contaminated sludge that potentially brings hazardous effect to people and environment. An exactly of 0.2 per cent of uranium proportion are needed to produce 998 kilograms of contaminated sludge which later likely to be deposited in hollows and artificial lakes (Nuclear Information and Resource Service, 2013). The dangerous tailing of the ore which contain 85 per cent of the initial radioactivity and other toxic substances such as arsenic bordering on contaminating both air and groundwater for thousands of years. To make it worse, any slight chance of dam failure or landslide would commence the biggest disastrous consequences that might affect all. The similar phenomenon happen on the tailings pond of the Atlas Mine in Moab, Utah, United States in which toxic and radioactive substances have been already leaking freely into the groundwater for about a decade already. This polluted groundwater then migrates into the nearby Colorado River, which provides drinking water to 18 million people. According to the United Nations, the radioactive dust of a dried-up tailing reservoir in Khazhastan poses a threat to Aktau, a city with 150,000 inhabitants and there are countless uranium sludge disposal sites located in narrow valleys in Kyrgyzstan as well that can potentially cause an international disaster to the human health (Maclellan, 2014).
	28	+
	29	+====Nuclear Energy dumps there because they profit from and reinforce racism globally. Prohibition takes a stance against that profit cycle. ====
	30	+Chen 11: ,,conducted ethnographic research as a Fulbright fellow in ShanghaiMichelle Chen pursuing doctoral studies at the City University of New York "The Radioactive Racism Behind Nuclear Energy" MAR 23, 2011 http://www.colorlines.com/articles/radioactive-racism-behind-nuclear-energy ,,
	31	+
	32	+====South Africa is not alone, however. Conflicts over uranium mining, waste, and nuclear energy development have emerged across the Global South, including recently in Niger and South Asia. Jim Green of Friends of the Earth Australia noted that Australian aboriginal communities have resisted radioactive waste dumping on their lands in violation of their sovereignty and human rights. Globally, he said, "the nuclear industry profits from and reinforces racism. Backed by its political partners, the industry forces uranium mines, nuclear reactors, radioactive waste dumps and weapons tests on to the land of indigenous peoples." Although the specter of nuclear weaponry still looms in debates on North Korea and Iran, the core of today's nuclear crisis lies in the gears of global capitalism. After a long chill following the disasters in Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, governments have in recent years responded to climate change issues by rebranding nuclear as a fossil fuel alternative. We don't know if the fallout from Fukushima will brake the industry's renewed momentum in the U.S., but as long as truly clean energy sources like wind and solar remain starved of investment—and the public memory of past meltdowns fade—the temptations of nuclear power may continue to eclipse fears of its global consequences. Richard Falk, U.N. Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights, commented in Al Jazaeera on the link between the Cold War lust for nuclear weapons and the harnessing of nuclear power for "civilian" energy exploitation. To understand the lessons of Fukushima, he wrote: ~~W~~e must take account of the incredible Faustian bargain sold to the non-nuclear world: give up a nuclear weapons option and in exchange get an unlimited ''pass'' to the ''benefits'' of nuclear energy... And we know that governments will be under great pressure to renew the Faustian bargain despite what should have been clear from the moment the bombs fell in 1945: This technology is far too unforgiving and lethal to be managed safely over time by human institutions, even if they were operated responsibly, which they are not. If safety in the nuclear age can't be guaranteed for all, the industry and its friends in government can always try a more efficient method of managing risk: confine the danger====
	33	+
	34	+
	35	+====The Uranium Mining and purification process is uniquely terrible- bad mining conditions, unstable transport, and uranium floating in mills substantially increased the probability of radioactive inhalations.====
	36	+Quandelacy 10: ,,Talia Quandelacy Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health "NUCLEAR RACISM: URANIUM MINING ON THE LAGUNA AND NAvAjO RESERvATIONS" TuftScope 2010 http://s3.amazonaws.com/tuftscope'articles/documents/52/6.0'Nuclear'Racism'Uranium'Mining'on'the'Laguna.pdf,,
	37	+The mining process extracted the ore from under- ground and open mines. Both open and underground mining required the use of explosives to loosen the ore from the earth; explosives were used to create shafts and "ball- rooms" for the underground mines and to clear away large debris and chunks of land for the open mines. At the Jack- pile site on the Laguna reservation, blasting was required three times a day for each type of mining.6 For both the open and underground mines, explosions occurred every eight hours. Blasts were periodic throughout the day and the workers were constantly entering into recently blasted areas to collect pieces of ore. One worker recalls, "When they did the blasting, they inhaled the smoke and dust...I fainted twice and they had to drag me out."4 The condi- tions around the explosions weres very dangerous above ground, but were far worse in the underground mines. Conditions inside of the mines were atrocious. Ventilation was poor and dust from the explosions was always present in the air. Those who worked underground were subjected to dimly lit tunnels: "It was not until 1963 that he ~~Wilson Benally~~ was given one of those masks...He was also given a helmet with a lamp. Before that, he used lamps that provided light from a slow-burning powder."4 Many, if not all, of the workers were not informed of the health hazards from working in the mines and around the milling facilities. In the mines, few workers wore masks to sprotect their air passageways and ended up inhaling the dust: "The dust stayed in the air a long time...you could smell the gunpowder. When you blew your nose, it was yellow dust."4 Many other dangers existed in the mines. There was a constant danger of debris falling from the ceil- ings and hitting the miners: "When he ~~Dan Benally~~ was in the mines, the rocks collapsed on him. One of the rocks tore the skin off his side and stomach, too. They had to do a skin graft. He lost part of his eyesight."4 The underground workers worked some of the lon- gest shifts, most often from seven in the morning to eight at night and were kept underground for the entire duration, except for an hour break for lunch.6 It was necessary to keep the uranium mines open constantly to nd as much ore as possible. Driving the pieces of uranium-ore from the mines to mills was also dangerous. The combination of poorly made roads and the poor conditions of the trucks made it very likely for accidents to occur. The trucks had no start- ers or brakes, and the workers had to start-roll them.4 The roads that connected the mines to the milling facilities were poorly made, and were often very rugged and bumpy. Some workers were paralyzed when the trucks ipped over and crushed drivers.4 Once at the mills the process was no so safer. The ore went through a re ning process once it was transported to the milling facilities. The milling separated the ura- nium-ore from other minerals and rocks. Giant grinders and crushing belts were used to break down the ore into a ner substance.6 The ground ore substance was bathed in sulfuric acid, which separated out the uranium. The end product of the milling process called yellowcake is ura- nium oxide (U3O8), a yellow-colored powder.2 Yellowcake was the beginning process of enriching the uranium to the desired uranium isotope, U235. In the mills, loading the ore onto the crushing belts was dangerous because workers had to manually shovel ore. Sometimes the shovels would get caught in the belts that exerted such force, that workers would be dragged into the belts themselves. Many workers lost arms as a result of this.6 The air in the mills was toxic, with powdery uranium everywhere in the buildings. When the workers had to clean up the dust, they only had dust scrubbers and vacuums, and without masks, often inhaled much of the dust: "We worked with acids, ammonia...this was all dusty. There were fumes in there. It really stunk. There was no ventilation. This was a danger, but no one ever told us at the time."4
	38	+
	39	+====After the process, waste dumping was also racist. ====
	40	+Alldred et al 9: ,,Mary Alldred and Kristin Shrader-Frechette Doctoral student Alldred is in the Department of Ecology and Evolution at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, in Stony Brook, New York. Dr. Shrader-Frechette is O’Neill Fam- ily Endowed Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, and Director of the Center for Envi- ronmental Justice and Children’s Health, all at the University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana. "Environmental Injustice in Siting Nuclear Plants" ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Volume 2, Number 2, 2009,,
	41	+US nuclear-waste policies in stages (8)–(9), radioactive waste transport/storage, likewise have already caused EIJ (as serious contamination at Hanford, Maxey Flats, Sa- vannah River, and other cases have shown), and EIJ also is likely when future waste-containment canisters fail— long before the million years that (the US National Acad- emy of Sciences says) nuclear wastes must be completely secured.22 Because the US government has falsified and manipulated data on radioactive-waste risk22,23,24 (much of which will be borne by Appalachian, Latino, and Na- tive-American populations, who live in higher propor- tions near existing and proposed nuclear-waste-storage sites),3 United Nations and nuclear-industry studies warn that the US government may underestimate future waste- repository-radiation doses by 9–12 orders of magnitude.25 Yet even if proposed future US nuclear-waste standards are met, their leniency likely will impose EIJ on future generations. After 10,000 years, they would allow expo- sures of 100 millirems/year (limits 1,000 percent higher than current standards for US Department of Energy fa- cilities). They also use only mean or average dose to as- sess regulatory compliance. This means that, provided that the average person’s exposure is no more than 100 millirems, many other people would be allowed to receive higher, even fatal, doses.8,26
	42	+
	43	+
	44	+====Thus, the Plan Text: The United States federal government ought to prohibit the production of nuclear power through decommissioning of all current nuclear facilities—the plan will be issued through four steps====
	45	+
	46	+====Schmittem 16 **~~Schmittem, Marc (Analyst for EU-Japan Energy Cooperation ). "Nuclear Decomissioning in Japan- Opportunities for European Companies". EU-Japan Centre for Industrial Cooperation. Tokyo, March 2016. http://www.eu-japan.eu/sites/default/files/publications/docs/2016-03-nuclear-decommissioning-japan-schmittem-min'0.pdf~~ NB====**
	47	+Decommissioning is the responsibility of the operator of a nuclear facility. The NRA defines the decommissioning of NPPs in Japan by the following four activities: Dismantling of the relevant reactor ~~includes~~ (1), transfer of nuclear fuel (2), removal of irradiated material (3), and the disposal of radioactive waste (4)19. Within these boundaries, nuclear operators can design their own decommissioning strategies. The 1currently preferred approach for commercial NPPsin Japan combines immediate dismantling with deferred dismantling. Immediate dismantling is a strategy where dismantling begins immediately after the approval of the project, whereas in deferred dismantling, the reactor is first placed in safe storage for a number of years to reduce the radioactive inventory. The operators of commercial power reactors in Japan have opted for such safe storage periods, but the dismantling of secondary facilities will begin as soon as possible. Like the decommissioning strategies of many other countries, the basic decommissioning strategy in Japan consists of sequential stages: Site preparation (including site characterisation, defueling and decontamination), safe storage, and deconstruction and dismantling (DandD) (see Figure 1). Waste management and disposal is also a part of the decommissioning process. The basic strategy envisions this as only becoming an issue during the DandD stage, but in practice waste from decommissioning also needs to be handled at earlier stages. While this is acknowledged in the individual decommissioning plans for Japanese reactors, lingering problems with waste management have led to delays in some ongoing decommissioning projects (see the description of the individual decommissioning projects in Part II and the discussion of waste management later in this chapter). The newest decommissioning plans also show a tendency for more prolonged safe storage periods.¶ In the first stage of the decommissioning project, the fuel in the reactor core and the spent fuel¶ pool (SFP) is retrieved and transported to either a temporary storage site21 or a reprocessing¶ plant22¶ . After a survey and characterisation of the radioactive inventory of the facility, systems¶ and facilities are decontaminated to reduce the radioactive dose rates in the work spaces and to¶ prepare the site for dismantling. In the second stage, the reactor core is placed in safe storage, during which basic safety, monitoring and cooling systems are maintained. This stage is meant to reduce the radioactive inventory in the reactor through natural decay processes. The duration of this phase is usually around 10 years for physicochemical reasons, but a certain period of relative inactivity in the decommissioning process might also be necessary for some utilities to recover the financial losses from the premature or long-term shut-down of the reactor after the Fukushima accidents (see part I.6). The dismantling of non-essential and redundant systems and speripheral facilities also begins at this point. The safe storage stage is followed by the DandD stage. During this phase, again in a number of sequential steps, the various components of the reactor are dismantled. This stage sees the highest demand for specialised equipment, particularly during the dismantling of the highly radioactive reactor pressure vessel (RPV) and its internals, where remote-controlled, submersible equipment is required for safety reasons. After the reactor has been dismantled, the reactor building and the remaining facilities are dismantled. Large quantities of waste, both radioactive and non-radioactive (see section I.4), are generated in this stage. The Japanese strategy envisions the implementation of strategies to reduce the amount of waste, through means such as a clearance system and the recycling of non-radioactive waste. At the end of the decommissioning process an application for verification of completion is submitted to the NRA, which then assesses the final state of the site. If the measurable radioactive dose rates are within the legal limits and all targets of the decommissioning plan have been reached, the NRA formally terminates the licence of the operator and releases the site from regulatory control. The site of the former reactor can then be reused for new purposes. The current plan is to build new reactors on the sites of decommissioned reactors, due to difficulties in acquiring sites for new reactors and an expected unwillingness of the local population to develop the land of the former NPP for agricultural or residential purposes23. However, in light of strengthened safety regulations, stricter licensing criteria and growing opposition to the operation of NPPs in the surrounding communities and local governments, it is not yet known if this strategy will be economically and politically feasible.
	48	+
	49	+====Environmental racism is a continuation of the legacy of slavery, and institutionalizes other forms of oppression. ====
	50	+
	51	+====Bullard 7: Joseph Bullard ~~Director of the Environmental Justice Resource Center at Clark Atlanta University~~, "POVERTY, POLLUTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM: STRATEGIES FOR BUILDING HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES" March 1, 2007. http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:S0SkCJTUZKoJ:www.ejrc.cau.edu/PovpolEj.html+environmental+racism+impactandhl=enandct=clnkandcd=1andgl=us)====
	52	+People of color around the world must contend with dirty air and drinking water, and the location of noxious facilities such as municipal landfills, incinerators, hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities owned by private industry, ~~and~~ government, and even the military.~~3~~ These environmental problems are exacerbated by racism. Environmental racism refers to environmental policy, practice, or directive that differentially affects or disadvantages (whether intended or unintended) individuals, groups, or communities based on race or color. Environmental racism is reinforced by government, legal, economic, political, and military institutions. Environmental racism combines with public policies and industry practices to provide benefits for the countries in the North while shifting costs to countries in the South. ~~4~~ Environmental racism ~~it~~ is a form of institutionalized discrimination. Institutional discrimination is defined as "actions or practices carried out by members of dominant (racial or ethnic) groups that have differential and negative impact on members of subordinate (racial and ethnic) groups." ~~5~~ The United States is grounded in white racism. The nation was founded on the principles of "free land" (stolen from Native Americans and Mexicans), "free labor" (African slaves brought to this land in chains), and "free men" (only white men with property had the right to vote). From the outset, racism shaped the economic, political and ecological landscape of this new nation. Environmental racism buttressed the exploitation of land, people, and the natural environment. It operates as an intra-nation power arrangement—especially where ethnic or racial groups form a political and or numerical minority. For example, blacks in the U.S. form both a political and numerical racial minority. On the other hand, blacks in South Africa, under apartheid, constituted a political minority and numerical majority. American and South African apartheid had devastating environmental impacts on blacks.
	53	+
	54	+Disregard for native land justifies their disposability—only the aff recognizes the value of minority communities
	55	+Green 7 ~~Jim; "RADIOACTIVE RACISM IN AUSTRALIA"; Jim Green Friends of the Earth; Australia; February 2007;
	56	+http://www.foe.org.au/anti-nuclear/issues/oz/racism. Accessed August 8 2016~~ ~~Premier~~
	57	+In "Fallout – Hedley Marston and the British Bomb Tests in Australia" (Wakefield Press, 2001, p.32), Dr. Roger Cross writes: "Little mention was made of course about the effects the bomb tests might have on the Indigenous Australian inhabitants of the Maralinga area, a community that had experienced little contact with white Australia. In 1985 the McClelland Royal Commission would report how Alan Butement, Chief Scientist for the Department of Supply wrote to the native patrol officer for the area, rebuking him for the concerns he had expressed about the situation and chastising him for "apparently placing the affairs of a handful of natives above those of the British Commonwealth of Nations". When a member of staff at Hedley Marston's division queried the British Scientist Scott Russell on the fate of the Aborigines at Maralinga, the response was that they were a dying race and therefore dispensable."
	58	+Ernest Titterton, a leading member of the so-called Atomic Weapons Tests Safety Committee and the main apologist for the British tests, told a 1984 hearing of the Royal Commission into British Nuclear Tests in Australia that if the Aborigines objected to the tests, they could have voted the government out. Yet Aboriginal people did not gain voting rights until 1967. And they accounted for a very small minority of the Australian population.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-10-15 10:59:00.953

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Elysia Segal

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Newark Science ZH

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+5

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+4

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Lexington Weiler Aff

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+SEPTOCT- 1AC- Race

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Bronx