[DEFEATED] Convention on Fracking

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: While not being a delegate, I would totally be for the concept of endorsing a resolution just because it needs to come to a vote and not because you support it- but I also invite WA intervention into national affairs because I'm one of those world government fans.

You just try to incorporate Separatists into your world government, heretic! OOCly I accept that as a reason. ICly, my ambassador resents such an impolitic use of political power.

[Defwa]

OOC: While not being a delegate, I would totally be for the concept of endorsing a resolution just because it needs to come to a vote and not because you support it- but I also invite WA intervention into national affairs because I'm one of those world government fans.

You just try to incorporate Separatists into your world government, heretic! OOCly I accept that as a reason. ICly, my ambassador resents such an impolitic use of political power.

Well its obvious there are a lot of disagreements on what the WA is and should be. I think we both agree on what it IS, though. If I were better at communicating with people, I'd try to find an RP region that uses the WA world government model, but eh.

[Mundiferrum]

Fifty miles? What kind of miles? Because by an ancient, technically defunct (yet still commonly, and sometimes officially used) standard here in Mundiferrum, our nation is only 144 miles long, and 96 miles wide. And we have a lot of towns, and a lot of reservoirs (or at least that's what my scientific adviser here is telling me).

Due to my general lack of more detailed knowledge on this subject, in general I would support this, if not for the aforementioned limitation, and also for the lack of finery with regards to the proposal dealing with technicalities (on reading the debate on this and the previously defeated "Fracking Protocol", I could see that there might be some flaws in the definition of fracking, and, due my general background on physics yes, Cicero, I took up physics INACADEMIA-FVIBONVS there too, ye- *ahem* I'm not actually sure whether the issues here were fully, er, full, or just exaggerated).

[Araraukar]

Fifty miles? What kind of miles? Because by an ancient, technically defunct (yet still commonly, and sometimes officially used) standard here in Mundiferrum, our nation is only 144 miles long, and 96 miles wide.

OOC: Scandinavian mile? It's 10 kilometres.

[Mundiferrum]

Fifty miles? What kind of miles? Because by an ancient, technically defunct (yet still commonly, and sometimes officially used) standard here in Mundiferrum, our nation is only 144 miles long, and 96 miles wide.

OOC: Scandinavian mile? It's 10 kilometres.

OOC: Well, no; in fact it's a standard that I've yet to and probably never will define. But I think I stuck my small point there.

[Point Breeze]

This is absolutely ridiculous. I don't need the WA passing environmental legislation and restricting my energy sector with such a broad hand. I'm also quite irked that this was submitted and approved, no less, so quickly.

Sometimes this place bewilders me.

[Kylarnatia]

I'm also quite irked that this was submitted and approved, no less, so quickly.

Well, there are quite a few Eco-friendly regions out there, so that's probably why. ;)

[Illinardo]

I am against this cause and ask that if passed we quickly come to repeal such a horrid and archaic means. We have many new ways to provide energy to this earth than to destroy the very fabric we stand on as a species. We should be looking to refine alternative energy sources and not mining the nonrenewable sources.

[Separatist Peoples]

I am against this cause and ask that if passed we quickly come to repeal such a horrid and archaic means. We have many new ways to provide energy to this earth than to destroy the very fabric we stand on as a species. We should be looking to refine alternative energy sources and not mining the nonrenewable sources.

"Wah. Some of us like the reliability of natural gas. Besides, not every WA nation is full of humans living on Earth. Some don't particularly care what happens to whatever species you're blathering about."

[Illinardo]

There is reliability in other sources like hydro or solar energy and they are renewable energy sources. Eventually the resources we frack will be gone and we will look to theae sources anyway. Why not be progressive and start the future now, that way things are better tomorrow and we can use current reserves and limit mining and work levels periodically over a set time frame as we establish the alternatives.

[Mundiferrum]

There is reliability in other sources like hydro or solar energy and they are renewable energy sources. Eventually the resources we frack will be gone and we will look to theae sources anyway. Why not be progressive and start the future now, that way things are better tomorrow and we can use current reserves and limit mining and work levels periodically over a set time frame as we establish the alternatives.

But our world is flat. Our reserves go down deep FOREVER.

No, I jest. Tbh though, as much as there are alternatives, we can't access them all (yet), so we gotta make do with what we have for now.

[Imperializt Russia]

There is reliability in other sources like hydro or solar energy and they are renewable energy sources. Eventually the resources we frack will be gone and we will look to theae sources anyway. Why not be progressive and start the future now, that way things are better tomorrow and we can use current reserves and limit mining and work levels periodically over a set time frame as we establish the alternatives.

Or, you know, nuclear energy.

[Point Breeze]

There is reliability in other sources like hydro or solar energy and they are renewable energy sources. Eventually the resources we frack will be gone and we will look to theae sources anyway. Why not be progressive and start the future now, that way things are better tomorrow and we can use current reserves and limit mining and work levels periodically over a set time frame as we establish the alternatives.

This is true. But until the day that renewable sources can match the efficiency of fossil fuels arrives, we cannot abandon conventional energy sources. Fracking allows us to research renewable sources while postponing the inevitable energy crisis

[Defwa]

I am against this cause and ask that if passed we quickly come to repeal such a horrid and archaic means. We have many new ways to provide energy to this earth than to destroy the very fabric we stand on as a species. We should be looking to refine alternative energy sources and not mining the nonrenewable sources.

You realize this proposal is trying to (ineffectively and without the much needed advice of the other ambassadors) limit tracking to reduce its environmental impact, right?

You're biting at your nose to spite your face here- if you want people to move towards cleaner energy, the first step is making easy to access dirty energy cleaner to use.

[Araraukar]

Or, you know, nuclear energy.

Yes, because nothing says "clean energy" like waste material staying lethally dangerous for millions of years.

In any case, if the proposal looks to be in danger of passing once it gets to the voting stage, why not let one of our skilled repealists draft an insta-repeal for it?

[Defwa]

Or, you know, nuclear energy.

Yes, because nothing says "clean energy" like waste material staying lethally dangerous for millions of years.

In any case, if the proposal looks to be in danger of passing once it gets to the voting stage, why not let one of our skilled repealists draft an insta-repeal for it?

OOC: Well modern techniques can reduce that greatly. Publicity for modern nuclear energy is surprisingly poor but its light years ahead of what we had in the 70-80s. The negative effects can be less than a comparable amount of energy from fossil fuels or disposal on certain renewable (namely solar and batteries, but that's less of a problem now too)

Living in the future is neat

[Imperializt Russia]

Or, you know, nuclear energy.

Yes, because nothing says "clean energy" like waste material staying lethally dangerous for millions of years.

This implies that a capable nuclear programme has somehow overlooked the capabilities of fast reactors.

[Normlpeople]

In any case, if the proposal looks to be in danger of passing once it gets to the voting stage, why not let one of our skilled repealists draft an insta-repeal for it?

OOC: Well modern techniques can reduce that greatly. Publicity for modern nuclear energy is surprisingly poor but its light years ahead of what we had in the 70-80s. The negative effects can be less than a comparable amount of energy from fossil fuels or disposal on certain renewable (namely solar and batteries, but that's less of a problem now too)

Living in the future is neat[/quote]

OOC: There is also the fact that the amount of nuclear waste created is highly overstated. Its actually quite a small amount.

IC: "While I would hope this wouldn't be in danger of passing, In the current state of this assembly, one cannot be too sure. I will watch for, and support, such a repeal should this appear to be passing"

[Point Breeze]

Remember the Industrial Pollution Control Act? That passed quite easily, I remember, and it was more of a sham than this act.

[Sobreva]

"We would like to see clear, definitive evidence that hydraulic fracturing's risks outweigh the benefits.

Abstain, for now."

[Imperializt Russia]

"We would like to see clear, definitive evidence that hydraulic fracturing's risks outweigh the benefits.

Abstain, for now."

No-one's suggesting that.

What is being suggested is to mitigate apparent or supposed risks.

[Defwa]

"We would like to see clear, definitive evidence that hydraulic fracturing's risks outweigh the benefits.

Abstain, for now."

No-one's suggesting that.

What is being suggested is to mitigate apparent or supposed risks.

I always hate when proposals put me in this position. I support the subject matter but the way they do it is so filled with flaws that I must simultaneously explain why it is needed but why the present proposal needs to be burned.

[Hakio]

Since 2008, the procedure of hydraulic fracturing of petroleum has been banned as a part of former President Trauss's Plan for Reasonable Environmentally Friendly Energy Regulations (PREFER) which was pushed and campaigned for by the Liberal Party. As we have embraced alternative and clean fuel sources we wish to see the same regulations be imposed on the World Assembly so they may reap the benefits as well. Personally, I believe that the risks of fracking without imposed regulation and reduction are very real and not over exaggerated as some may claim. For these reasons and more, I am positively in favor of this resolution and will work with my fellow WA nations in favor of this piece of legislation.

[Chester Pearson]

As we have embraced alternative and clean fuel sources we wish to see the same regulations be imposed on the World Assembly so they may reap the benefits as well.

Well whoopty fucking doo for you. Just because you are a bunch of tree-huggers, that does not mean the rest of us need to be. Stop trying to impose your beliefs upon the rest of us. You are worse than those bible-thumpers from Christian Democrats, or Auralia....

[Defwa]

As we have embraced alternative and clean fuel sources we wish to see the same regulations be imposed on the World Assembly so they may reap the benefits as well.

Well whoopty fucking doo for you. Just because you are a bunch of tree-huggers, that does not mean the rest of us need to be. Stop trying to impose your beliefs upon the rest of us. You are worse than those bible-thumpers from Christian Democrats, or Auralia....

Oh [insert pet name ending in Y (chesty?)]