Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[10]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[11]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[10]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-11-14 05:10:13.579
	1	+2016-11-14 05:10:13.0

Caselist.CitesClass[11]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,4 @@
	1	+-FOR COUNTRY SPECIFIC PLANS-
	2	+The plan gets circumvented—Countries will just import from neighboring countries.
	3	+Harrell ‘11: Eben; 5-31-2011; "Germany Bans Nuclear Power," TIME, http://science.time.com/2011/05/31/germany-bans-nuclear-power/Premier
	4	+But other countries—the U.S., U.K., and Poland to name but a few—will proceed with nuclear power despite Fukushima, as will many developing countries. And it’s even questionable whether Germany—with it’s booming, heavy industries—will manage to meet its energy demands without nuclear power. Areva’s CEO Anne Lauvergeon told the Wall Street Journal that Germany would likely have to go the route of Austria, which has opposed nuclear power plants inside its own borders even as it imports nuclear energy from neighboring countries. Of course, Lauvergeon would say this, as it’s French nuclear energy that Germany would likely turn to in the future. But there’s no doubt that, in Germany and elsewhere, meeting increasing energy demands while also tackling climate change will make it difficult to shun any low-carbon energy sources, no matter how troubling. Remember Pacala and Socolow‘s seven “stabilizing wedges,” each of which represents a technology that grows enough to avoid the emission of one billion tons a year of carbon by 2050? To make nuclear power one of these wedges would require tripling the world’s current nuclear power generating capacity by replacing all the world’s reactors and building some 25 reactors (of current average size) every year around the world until 2050.¹ That’s how big these “wedges” need to be: and some even estimate they need to be larger than Pacala and Socolow envisaged. It’s no wonder that some countries feel that nuclear—as a proven, low-carbon source—is worth the risk. Some anti-nuclear campaigners say that the growth required in nuclear generating capacity to even make a dent in the fight against climate change is unattainable—no new reactors were connected to the grid anywhere in the world in 2008 and only two were in connected in 2009. Regulatory hurdles and complicated construction means it takes at least a decade to bring new plants on-line–and possibly more if regulations tighten following Fukushima. But saying the threat of climate change is too large or too urgent for nuclear power seems illogical—we’re going to need as much help as we can get.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-11-14 05:10:15.731

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+x

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+x

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+10

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Sunset bhat Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+SO - Circumvention DA

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Greenhill