The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Nuclear energy should not be used.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/4/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,028 times Debate No: 34491
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




We should not use nuclear power because it is very inefficient. According to, nuclear power is not only dangerous, but also inefficient for these reasons: The inefficiencies discussed relating to the lower steam temperature necessary when using nuclear energy in order to avoid overheating the fuel rods do not include the additional costs of transmission and delivery. Transmission and delivery account for almost 70% of every utility bill because power plants are so far away from the end customer and because so many middlemen are involved with the final distribution. This does not occur with renewable energy that is produced at the location where it is demanded the most. Nuclear energy is not efficient, and there are more efficient forms of producing energy. Why not use the more efficient form?

Con is a site created by a private individual and not an organization that studies the effects of each type of energy. You also fail to mention what the alternative is. I live in a city that is surrounded by hills and is very cloudy most days of the year. That means that solar or wind energy cannot supply my city. However, the form of energy that does is natural gas and coal. Nuclear energy is far cleaner than the two alternatives. Coal and natural gas have to be delivered to my city to because of regulations saying that coal mines and natural gas wells have to be x amount of miles away from a city. It is possible to recycle nuclear energy in a sense but, most see this as a political issue that isn't being debated here right now.
Debate Round No. 1


They said that MGX is created by a private individual. Though that is true, there are other sites that agree with the inefficiency such as, which is an organizational website. This point is not only cited by private individuals but also credible organizations. I have all of the URLs which I can give you if you comment asking for them. Also, the other sources could be windmill farms, solar panels, hydro energy, and many other natural sources that don't destruct.

According to a Nuclear Energy Education article on eHow, While nuclear power plants operate under strict safety codes and emergency procedures, there is no way to fully protect them from natural disasters, terrorist attacks or mere human error. One problem is radiation exposure because no matter how rare, reactor meltdowns and explosions have occurred on a number of occasions, most recently in early March 2011 as part of the tsunami aftermath in Japan. Not only may the explosions themselves cause immense damage, but harmful radiation leaks can cause deadly aftereffects. Radiation can cause mutations or destroy cells in your body. For example, according to Wikipedia, because of the Nuclear Power Plant in Fukushima, Japan about 37 people who were within the 20-30 km zone were affected by the radiation and got diseases. About 2 people got radiation burns and were taken to the hospital. Since nuclear energy is highly hazardous and causes damage that is not worth the benefits, nuclear energy should not be used, as it is doing more harm than good.

Since this is my last argument, I want to thank you for debating with me.


Nuclear radiation is clearly hazardous but the practices at Fukushima were less than safe. Fukushima was not a Chernobyl but it was a horrible occurrence. The reason it made international news is because that because of the hazard of nuclear energy, there are many safety practices. I'd like to share a New York Times headline: No Survivors Found After West Virginia Mine Disaster. Twenty nine people are dead. Certainly the alternative can be just as harmful as nuclear energy. Thank you for letting me debate this with you.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by borao123 4 years ago
This is my first debate. I will respond soon!
No votes have been placed for this debate.