[PASSED] Safe Disposal of Nuclear Waste

[Makko Oko]

We see no issues with this resolution and support it 100%, however, Ambassador, have you ever given thought to potentially establishing written guidelines for nuclear test disposal, such as underground, above ground or in the ocean? There's always debris left behind, so why not combat it?

[Thousand Branches]

We see no issues with this resolution and support it 100%, however, Ambassador, have you ever given thought to potentially establishing written guidelines for nuclear test disposal, such as underground, above ground or in the ocean? There's always debris left behind, so why not combat it?

I am not gping to establish specific guidelines, that’s what the committee is for. Also bump.

[Makko Oko]

"We do find one flaw that can be rectified however, Ambassador. There are no stipulations as to how this committee will be operated, money doesn't just come out of thin air, something must be funding its operation, but it must be clearly stated as such in the resolution, in addition to that, state member nations duties to that funding. As it stands now, if this resolution were to come to play and it passes, this committee would collapse faster than the Berlin Wall, it has no support to stand on."

[The Forest of Aeneas]

'Full support.'

[Thousand Branches]

"We do find one flaw that can be rectified however, Ambassador. There are no stipulations as to how this committee will be operated, money doesn't just come out of thin air, something must be funding its operation, but it must be clearly stated as such in the resolution, in addition to that, state member nations duties to that funding. As it stands now, if this resolution were to come to play and it passes, this committee would collapse faster than the Berlin Wall, it has no support to stand on."

Again, I think you’re heartily misunderstanding how the WA works. Take a gander at pretty much any modern resolution, they pretty much never specify where money comes from for committees. Actually I’m relatively sure I’ve never seen that before at all.

[Thousand Branches]

Putting this on last call. No idea when I’ll submit but it’ll be at some point and I probably won’t send another warning before I submit (unless it’s been a real long while).

[Thousand Branches]

This has been submitted.

[Fachumonn]

This proposal has been approved.

[Saint Indopeland]

I've spotted an issue with the resolution, and thus I'm voting against. It states that all member states must only dispose of nuclear waste as by the NESC. However it will take time for the NESC, after creation, to make said guidelines. This leaves a buffer time (possibly a few months!) where nuclear waste cannot legally be disposed of, even in a safe manner.

[Wallenburg]

I've spotted an issue with the resolution, and thus I'm voting against. It states that all member states must only dispose of nuclear waste as by the NESC. However it will take time for the NESC, after creation, to make said guidelines. This leaves a buffer time (possibly a few months!) where nuclear waste cannot legally be disposed of, even in a safe manner.

The guidelines are written into the resolution here:

1. Disposal methods must have little to no risk of radioactive contamination.
2. Methods must include proper solidification, compaction and subsequent treatment of nuclear materials to prevent leaching of waste or radioactivity.

The NESC is not charged with creating guidelines, merely determining whether any given method adheres to the guidelines provided to it.

[Saint Indopeland]

The Nuclear Energy Safety Commission (NESC) must:

Investigate methods of nuclear waste disposal and determine those considered safe by the following guidelines

It still must investigate if methods follow the set out guidelines, and investigations take time regardless.

[Wallenburg]

The Nuclear Energy Safety Commission (NESC) must:

Investigate methods of nuclear waste disposal and determine those considered safe by the following guidelines

It still must investigate if methods follow the set out guidelines, and investigations take time regardless.

This does not impede the actual disposal of nuclear waste to any significant degree. The gnomes are quite capable and, with the information already held in the World Assembly's archives, will undoubtedly identify several satisfactory disposal methods in such a timeframe as not to pose a challenge for member compliance.

[Caymarnia]

The former rulers of Caymarnia often relied on foreign experts to even operate our nuclear power stations, much less handle disposal. We have made strides, particularly in ensuring the continued operation of the power stations outside of Caymarnigrad, the national capital, and Lighthaven, our largest city, but the Republic is still very young, and much more needs to be learned... particularly with matters of decommissioning. Our neighbors can only provide so much; properly vetted international experts will make the effort much smoother.

Therefore, in accordance with this morning's vote of the National Council of the People's Will, Caymarnia votes for the measure.

[Berenice Soviet]

I'm voting for so those that endorse nuclear power can be held accountable in how its disposed of. However, I abhor nuclear power as its the worst thing this planet has ever come up with. As soon as I get an issue concerning its use I am moving to ban all nuclear power from my country, as well as ban any and all WMD's as well. We should have learned from Hiroshima and Nagasaki that nuclear power isn't something we're supposed to use.

[WayNeacTia]

I've spotted an issue with the resolution, and thus I'm voting against. It states that all member states must only dispose of nuclear waste as by the NESC. However it will take time for the NESC, after creation, to make said guidelines. This leaves a buffer time (possibly a few months!) where nuclear waste cannot legally be disposed of, even in a safe manner.

Committees are instantly created, fully staffed and have every regulation written and dispersed to member nations the moment a resolution is passed. Compliance is instantaneous. The gnomes are very efficient.

[Gloucester City]

nice idea-

[Fremenilia]

The lands of Aldalia are already bleached by nuclear war. We see no way we can be aided by this.

[Oktorna]

I will note that "radioactive contamination of any kind" includes non-harmful radioactivity exhibited by a great variety of everyday things. For instance, radioactive carbon-14 is in practically all things with significant amounts of carbon, including all organic matter.

That interpretation would require a very unusual definition of contamination.

Would this referenda be extended to coal piles in some way. Being that they tend to be extremely radioactive comparatively in terms of uncontrolled release of contaminated materials.

[The Orwell Society]

We see no issues with this resolution and support it 100%, however, Ambassador, have you ever given thought to potentially establishing written guidelines for nuclear test disposal, such as underground, above ground or in the ocean? There's always debris left behind, so why not combat it?

What he said lol

A wonderful proposal centered on safety and the wellbeing of memberstates. I see no flaws. For!

[Hexalaing]

The Democratic Republic Of Hexalaing would like to note a concern around the following clause in this proposal.

Inspect prospective nuclear waste storage and burial sites to ensure they are geologically stable and at sufficiently lengthy proximity from areas at risk of radioactive contamination.

Hexalaing feels that the definition of "sufficiently lengthy proximity" lacks clarity and provides a potential loophole for nations to determine said proximity themselves, thereby escaping the clauses of the treaty. This could therefore provide a humanitarian and environmental risk that would be directly contradictory to the essence of this proposal.

Hexalaing would also like to note a confusion regarding the specific areas at risk of radioactive contamination, as any area within the range of radioactive decay is at risk of radioactive contamination. Whilst we understand the meaning of the phrase, we believe it may cause uncertainty and confusion if the proposal is to be enforced. Therefore, we suggest changing the wording to something along the lines of "from areas where radioactive contamination would provide a serious threat to the population or natural wildlife". This would be in accordance with the rest of the treaty and clarify the protection of the environment and population.

Hexalaing would like to thank Thousand Branches for this proposal, and recognise its potential importance in the future of nuclear accountability, and to confirm that we are in full support of the rest of the proposal. We would also like to recognise that our suggestions may be flawed themselves and invite and further development, or arguments against.

Thank you.

[Thousand Branches]

Safe Disposal of Nuclear Waste was passed 14,653 votes to 2,506.

[Fachumonn]

Safe Disposal of Nuclear Waste was passed 14,653 votes to 2,506.

Congrats on passing this Ara!