Instigator / Pro
0
1424
rating
24
debates
25.0%
won
Topic

(Mini debate)We should fully embrace thorium nuclear energy

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
0
12
Sources points
0
8
Spelling and grammar points
0
4
Conduct points
0
4

With 4 votes and 28 points ahead, the winner is ...

Kritikal
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Science
Time for argument
Two hours
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
28
1553
rating
7
debates
78.57%
won
Description
~ 144 / 5,000

Pro:

* Has to defend the idea that thorium is the future nuclear energy.

Con:

* Has to state why thorium isn't the future of nuclear energy.

Round 1
Pro
Forfeited
Con
Inherency: Nuclear energy is already safe

Out of any nuclear energy accident, only two (Chernobyl and Fukushima) ever exposed the population to radiation above natural levels. However, nobody actually died because of Fukushima making Chernobyl responsible for all nuclear energy deaths. When we consider that this plant was created a long time ago, and without western regulatory authorities it is easy to see how something like this could happen. In the modern day with greater regulatory authorities, and with a greater scientific understanding it is unlikely this would ever happen again. Most importantly, in the status quo nuclear energy is already by far the safest form of energy. Coal causes 120 deaths per terawatt year, while nuclear causes under 0.01. The next safest form of energy is solar which causes 0.245.[1]

What is actually meant by a thorium reactor 
It is impossible to get nuclear power directly from thorium. Thorium can not start a nuclear chain reaction, which is why it is not used. Instead thorium is broken down into Uranium-233. This is far worse than traditional methods which use U-235 because U-233 produces byproducts when a reaction occurs such as U-232, protactinium, iodine-29, and more. U-232 has a half life of 160,000 years, but iodine-29 has a half life of over 15 million. These by products last longer and are more dangerous, in reality making thorium a much worse alternative to U-235. [2



Round 2
Pro
Forfeited
Con
Flow through my points because my opponent did not respond