[PASSED] Promotion of Clean Energy

[Vancouvia]

"dis-incentiviz[ing] the usage of fossil fuels" is a cost to "all industry"

No, disincentives mean lower demand, as incentives are applied to other sources, which would make energy cheaper for industry (the nations are paying for it). A 5% fee is an increase in the cost of doing business, making it more expensive for industry (industry is paying for it). Big difference.

Dis-incentivizing the usage of fossil fuels through a method such as taxation would literally make it more expensive for the industry to do business...

[Mousebumples]

No, disincentives mean lower demand, as incentives are applied to other sources, which would make energy cheaper for industry (the nations are paying for it). A 5% fee is an increase in the cost of doing business, making it more expensive for industry (industry is paying for it). Big difference.

Dis-incentivizing the usage of fossil fuels through a method such as taxation would literally make it more expensive for the industry to do business...

Yes. And that's where the cost comes into things. If they don't use fossil fuels it becomes cheaper for the industry to do business, which is the whole point.

[Wrapper]

No, disincentives mean lower demand, as incentives are applied to other sources, which would make energy cheaper for industry (the nations are paying for it). A 5% fee is an increase in the cost of doing business, making it more expensive for industry (industry is paying for it). Big difference.

Dis-incentivizing the usage of fossil fuels through a method such as taxation would literally make it more expensive for the industry to do business...

Not if you're simultaneously incentivizing other sources. Businesses will go for the cheaper energy, and save money if the government is simultaneously incentivizing alternative energy sources.

[Vancouvia]

For the record I find it a bit ridiculous that I'm forced into speed round defend your proposal at literally the 11th hour because of a statement written five years ago in a draft thread. Could I request that next time this occurs at the 10th hour

I figured this was preferable to having this debate after it reached a vote. My apologies, but my attention has been elsewhere this weekend for various reasons. This thread was not bumped upon submission - which used to be standard practice when I was a more active author - and I hadn't even noticed it had been submitted or reached quorum until earlier this evening.

The concerns were raised earlier by other delegates and representatives. You dismissed them. That doesn't make them non-applicable.

Then was I given an hour to defend myself (less because I wasn't online) or do I have five days?

The concerns were raised and I addressed them. Then the argument turned to whether nuclear energy was clean for two pages.

[Mousebumples]

Anyhow, I'd like to consult with a colleague before yanking this (which would be my perspective), but no other GA mods seem to be around for me to consult with since I noticed this issue, so I'm going to let this proceed to a vote. It's quite possible that the other GA mods saw the proposal in queue and decided it was legal, so rather than going against their opinion on an arguable case (where I could be outvoted), I'll let the voters decide, and we'll go from there.

I'm just hoping that we won't end up needing to use a discard for a second proposal in a row.

[Tinfect]

I'm just hoping that we won't end up needing to use a discard for a second proposal in a row.

OOC:
I think it'd actually be the Third.

[Mousebumples]

I'm just hoping that we won't end up needing to use a discard for a second proposal in a row.

OOC:
I think it'd actually be the Third.

Didn't the Landmine thing pass in there?

[Walff]

"This proposal does nothing but 'encourage'. I hope you all realize that passing bills as open as this just leads to people abusing the open-endedness to their own advantage which may hurt more people than it helps. Walff formally votes against this legislation."

[Vancouvia]

"This proposal does nothing but 'encourage'. I hope you all realize that passing bills as open as this just leads to people abusing the open-endedness to their own advantage which may hurt more people than it helps. Walff formally votes against this legislation."

How could this "open" bill possibly lead to abuse, and why is that abuse currently not occurring

[Franquebec]

"While the people of Franquebec believe in cleaner alternatives to power generation, as well as promoting a safe ecological environment, the resolution fails to acknowledge the status of nations in poorer conditions than ours. We vote against the resolution, and wish to see a more sensible approach that incorporates everyone, and discusses a plan to mature countries relying on dirty technology into cleaner alternatives."

[Vancouvia]

Anyhow, I'd like to consult with a colleague before yanking this (which would be my perspective), but no other GA mods seem to be around for me to consult with since I noticed this issue, so I'm going to let this proceed to a vote. It's quite possible that the other GA mods saw the proposal in queue and decided it was legal, so rather than going against their opinion on an arguable case (where I could be outvoted), I'll let the voters decide, and we'll go from there.

I'm just hoping that we won't end up needing to use a discard for a second proposal in a row.

I appreciate you letting the voters decide instead of a handful of seemingly inactive/silent moderators

[Normlpeople]

I appreciate you letting the voters decide instead of a handful of seemingly inactive/silent moderators

OOC: It'll pass. Hurrdurr, Environment is good man lemmings make sure anything with that category will pass. History has a poor track record of voters dismissing any environmenal legislation, some FAR worse have passed easily.

Hopefully the debate presence of Mall and Mouse are the start if a good trend.

IC: "It does not affect us in any way, however, I loathe Environmental legislation as a principle, and therefore have opposed." Clover said.

[MalwareDie]

I am voting against this because of the inclusion of nuclear energy.

[The Underwood Industrial Empire]

OOC:
I think it'd actually be the Third.

Didn't the Landmine thing pass in there?

OOC: The first one was the booby-trapped aid thing, the second was the right to sexual privacy.

IC:
<Ambassador Taylor stands to address the assembly.>

There are two issues I see with this matter: The first, continuing the line as previously stated by my predecessor during the debate over nuclear safeguards, is the inclusion of nuclear power among the examples of "clean" energy. A nuclear plant is not clean when it melts down, or is destroyed by insurgent attacks. Granted, a coal or oil plant going up is not all that much cleaner, and the fuel added to the fire could potentially be catastrophic if the plant is (for whatever mad reason) close to inhabited areas, but the long-term effects are, in our judgment, far less damaging than the same occurring in a nuclear plant.

Secondly, the U.I.E. - while understanding that the second word in the name is "Industrial" - has recognized that the word need not necessarily mean "polluting"; we have made our own progress towards the desired aims of this resolution, particularly with solar and wind (both things we have a lot of), and we have begun efforts with tidal and geothermal power. But this was by our choice, by a resolution of the Imperial Council of States and duly ratified by the Emperor-President - not forced upon us by the unnecessary, though well-intentioned, meddling of outside influences.

The U.I.E. therefore votes against this resolution.

[Tinfect]

OOC:
I think it'd actually be the Third.

Didn't the Landmine thing pass in there?

OOC:
Yeah, no, as UIE said above, IA's last attempt at Legislation got discarded as well, and I'm pretty sure that happened after the Landmine thing.

[Borosa Ete Whitedemonicaa]

While my Empire uses clean energies and we do encourage all those in Coldbay Imperium to do the same, but we cannot stop them and this farce of a bill will not stop them either, this bill simply seems to exist to waste the time of this august body in the hopes of doing some 'good' when in the reality of this seemingly good bill comes nothing but red-tape for those nations whose industrialization and scientific research have, as of yet reached the point to create such technologies, as a fact I know of several nations who prefer to stay in a primitive state where even the most basics of a highly industrialised and computerized state such as my own.

Patriarch Henrick Whitedemon, of Borosa Ete Whitedemonicaa.

[Ayethe]

The nation of ayethe votes for this resolution only in the understanding that the more advanced nations shall share the secrets of nuclear power with us so that we may... produce our power cleaner and cheaper than our current fossil fuels program. Good day and praise the great sky kitty

[Nilla Wayfarers]

The representatives of the Box of Nilla Wayfarers have reluctantly submitted their votes against this resolution, as they note that in the second operative clause that we would be required to implement available forms of so-called "clean energy." We assume, based on your description of these "clean energy" sources, that the Box is plentiful in them. However, neither we nor many nearby nations understand the sort of technology you speak of. Therefore, we would be required to implement that which could not be implemented.

Our apologies, ambassadors.

[Borosa Ete Whitedemonicaa]

The nation of ayethe votes for this resolution only in the understanding that the more advanced nations shall share the secrets of nuclear power with us so that we may... produce our power cleaner and cheaper than our current fossil fuels program. Good day and praise the great sky kitty

Not necessarily Ayethe, nuclear energy is far from clean. Most of these programs are also very expensive and even the most neighborly of nations will refuse to give technology freely, you may end up traiding away your very freedom to ahear this unenforceable act of insanity. No law should be this open ended nations of my own extream power and advancement could take advantage of nations that are just starting in the WA and in life.

[Normlpeople]

OOC: The Landmine accord passed between the scrapping of the booby trapped aid ban and the sexual privacy act. It doesn't matter though

IC: "Nuclear power is very clean, cheap and efficient when its utilized properly" Clover said. "Yes, should a nuclear plant have some sort of catastrophic meltdown incident then there would be lasting circumstances, which is why this assembly has passed several bills on dealing with and preventing such an incident."

"Wind and Solar are grossly inefficient and expensive, hence why I am pleased to see Nuclears inclusion as a clean power source in the bills text. Nations need some alternative to other 'clean' energy sources that are very expensive, very inefficient and very unreliable, such as wind or solar."

[Separatist Peoples]

"dis-incentiviz[ing] the usage of fossil fuels" is a cost to "all industry"

No, disincentives mean lower demand, as incentives are applied to other sources, which would make energy cheaper for industry (the nations are paying for it). A 5% fee is an increase in the cost of doing business, making it more expensive for industry (industry is paying for it). Big difference.

OOC: That's a textbook category violation if I've ever seen one. I wish this had been addressed by the author during drafting, but experience has shown that attempting to work with Van is rather like attempting to work with a particularly stubborn brick.

[The Auridon Isles]

The delegate of The Auridon Isles would like to retort that, at present, alternative energies such as wind, solar, hydro, etc, are both massively expensive and inefficient. Wind energy, for example, will be abysmally 8% efficent a majority of the time, and can only provide a maximum of 59.3% efficient according to Betz's law. The situations are similar for wind and hydro, and the delegate of the Auridon Isles fears that nuclear energy, while efficient, is not feasible in the current political climate. Therefore, the delegate of The Auridon Isles implores other member nations to vote against the passing of this resolution, because, while good intentioned, the delegate fears that is not based in reality.

[We Couldnt Agree On A Name]

You all realize that this bill does not require you to implement any specific type of energy, right? It simply states that if you have cleaner alternatives to must make a good faith(read: reasonable, diligent and honest) attempt to implement them. You don't need to use energy sources that don't exist, nor do you need to use any that are impractical or unavailable. That's not a reasonable demand and is not required under a good faith effort.

[Ayethe]

We must point out that amazing leaps in nuclear fusion has finally lead to clean safe energy almost 0 radiation is made from smashing he3 atoms together in a reactor and it provides much more power than fission. Alast many wont understand this and many others might not share and force those unable to adhear to buy this power from them

[Wrapper]

We must point out that amazing leaps in nuclear fusion has finally lead to clean safe energy almost 0 radiation is made from smashing he3 atoms together in a reactor and it provides much more power than fission.

OOC: We are not there yet. While fusion reactors are safer and somewhat cleaner than fission reactors, and "mining" source material like deuterium from seawater is cleaner than mining thorium or uranium, you're still dealing with lots of radioactive waste. And, it's still not economically feasible on a large scale. But, we are getting closer.