SAFE NUCLEAR POWER

This year, France's resolution is about the safe use of nuclear power. For years countries have owned nuclear power, alleging the use of nuclear energy, however it is now necessary the creation of a Nuclear Power Protocol.
France's major concerns over nuclear power are:
- have other countries sign the NPT
- the quick step in between nuclear energy and nuclear weapons
- the responsable and ethical use of nuclear power
- the issues concerning nuclear waste ( where to put it? new solutions?)
- the use of light water reactors

Any questions, please ask! We will be gald to asnwer!

Au Revoir!

What about countries that sign the NPT
but that think they are better or more important
then rules/laws?

Maybe you should quote something about everybody having the same rights!

Sobald ich meine Positionspapier tun, werde ich in der Lage, sprechen mehr über dieses Thema, da das Papier über dieser

(As soon as I hvae my position paper done, i will be able to talk more about this topic, since the paper is about this )

Spain is in favor of this resolution and it believes that all countries should have the right of producing nuclear power but Spain agrees with Germany and believes that something should be done about these countries

Germany is in favor of this resolution because it will greatly help ours on global warming. The propositions we make are about changing the fossil based heavy pollutant energy sources to less pollutant ones and nuclear energy is in that group, the only problem is how to store the nuclear waste, so that it wouldn't be a problem in a few years

Countries that have signed the NPT will have IAEA inspections more often, with full reports about how the energy produced is being used. The delegation of France believes that countries should have the opportunity to have nuclear energy, since this production doesn't harm the environment and increases quantity of energy produced. Therefore, the implementation of monthly IAEA inspections will prevent that countries such as Iran to use their nuclear program for weapons, and not energy.

Hope this helps the delegates

Turkey supports your resolution,Turkey has always alleged that a strengthened safeguards system should be universal.And as shown on Article IV of the NPT, States are allowed to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes but must comply with the non-proliferation obligations set out in Articles I and II of the Treaty

South Africa deeply agrees with France's resolution and with the fact that the nucler power has to be strictly controled to impede misuse, for this cause we even abandoned our nuclear program being the world's first nation to give up their nuclear weapons.

South Africa also suggests the formalization of the penalties for any country which goes against the NPT after signing it.

Refering to nuclear waste: The biproduct of the fission reactions will only be a problem if not safely disposed which in most cases is not a problem. A five meter thick concrete wall can easily support all the gama radiation emitted from the decomposal which will cease after a 5000 year period. Furthermore the use of alternate nuclear energy forms can completely resolve the problem of the nuclear waste. One of the alternate forms consists of the fusion of deuterium and tritium which, as waste, will produce helium which is a completely non-radioactive substance.

Therefore the production of nuclear energy can be controlled and made safe thorugh a worldwide consensus upon the topic which will be reached through this resolution.

P.S: The technology for the initiation of a fusion chain already exists but is only not put in practice for too much money has been invested in normal nuclear facilities.

In spit Germany being totaly in favor of this resolution, unless there are going to be good solutions, and even better supporting topics, Germany thinks that this will be easily passed, but very hard to follow through...
It is not an easy thing to discuss, still, much luck (or if you prefere skill)

Und Deutschland ist hier zu helfen
(And Germany is here to help.)

"The Czech Republic has 6 nuclear reactors generating about one third of its electricity. Electricity consumption in the Czech Republic has been growing since 1994 and in 2006, 84.3 billion kWh was generated, 59% from coal, with net exports in 2005 of 13 TWh - 19 TWh to Germany and Austria and import of 11 TWh from Poland. Per capita consumption is about 5500 kWh/yr. Nuclear power provided 24.6 TWh in 2007, 30% of net total."

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf90.html

Nuclear Power ia a big deal to most of European Nations, so Czech Republic hopes all the nations can get to a mutual agreement.

France would like to thank countries for their support with our resolution. In relation to South Africa's statement about nuclear waste, the french delegation would like to state that nuclear waste is in fact an issue that concern many countries. As stated in our resolution, nuclear waste can maintain radioactive for years, proposing a risk to the population. Underground deposits will soon be full, leaving no other alternative for storage of the nuclear waste. Still, these deposits, if not built with appropriate material, can intoxicate the surrounding areas. Therefore, it's important to propose the correct disposal of nuclear solid waste and the reuse of liquid nuclear waste.

Once again, France believes that nuclear energy can be safely produced, helping countries in their production of energy and in the fight against global warming.
Salut fellow delegate!

Yes, maltreated waste can turn to be a serious issue for radioactivity is among the causes of the worse non-treatable pathologies affecting both men and animal masses, but, it is necessary to state that it is completely possible to dispose of this waste or if necessary get rid of it by methods such as accelerated decomposition or sending the waste to space which has been a common practice of the USA in past years.

Furthermore, South Africa restates that the development of clean nuclear energy is possible and among them is Fusion of hydrogen which has been shown attainable with the current technology.

H + N = HE

To better clarify Turkeys postion towards your resolution, Turkey supports it, for being a country that has signed the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapon, made a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and assumed a full member status in the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva, Turkey believes that nations should be able to produce nuclear reactors in a peacefull way as a way for alternative nuclear energy.

As a nation that is on the brink of a energy crisis, Turkey also has plans on starting a nuclear energy program, to provide for the fast growing Turkish population that is expected to increase from 65 million to an 85 million population in 2010. And as stated by the south african delegate, nations oppose nuclear energy for its wasteful material, but there are alot of ways to get rid of this waste in an environmental way, such as stated before, accelerated decomposition or sending waste to space.

The delegation of Syria concurs to the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. In fact, we have a similar resolution, where we would like to ensure the maximized use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. As known, nuclear energy is becoming one of the best renewable sources of energy, which provides the efficient use of electricity with a lower cost, and Syria agrees to the use of such. The delegates of Syria are in favor France’s resolution.

As one of the delegates of Syria has already stated, Syria is in favor of France’s resolution, and has, indeed, a similar one. Nuclear energy is a better alternative source of energy, for it has been proved to aid nations economically and ecologically. It helps a country who does not have financial stability to create petroleum facilities to generate energy with a lower cost. Therefore, the best option that will be economically capable for a country to grow would be uranium, for 10 cubic cm of uranium is equivalent to 600L of petroleum. Nuclear energy also does not release substances that is harming to the atmosphere, for it does not release CO2 or CH4.

France,
the US delegate is curious. Will France be asking countries like Pakistan and India to sign the NPT? Because, they said they would not, unless they are recognized as responsible nuclear powers with the right to possess nuclear weapons, which would be dangerous...
Can France please clarify that?

I would like to know France's position in regards to Iran's nuclear energy program? France has signed two security council resolutions imposing sanctions in Iran and demanding it to halt its uranium enrichment advances. If the delegates are going to deal with nuclear energy and establishing new measures to ensuring the rights to produce it for peaceful means -- then I'm assuming there will be something in relation to Iran.

Turkey believes that if nations are in need of producing nuclear power in a peaceful way, then Turkey insists that this countries sign the NPT first.Its the only way of a country to truely show that their nuclear power is not for deadly purposes.

Turkish delegate,
I'm assuming your statement is directed to Israel, India and Pakistan, since these are the only nations that haven't signed the NPT -- up to date. How is the French delegation going to ensure that they do sign this new protocol, or will they be a part of it at all?

France believes in the use of SAFE nuclear power. In relation to the countries that have not signed the NPT, France will strongly encourage that they do. If this does not happen, these countries will have to change their heavy water reactors to light water reactors and allow monthly IAEA inspections to determine the safe use of their nuclear power. If the country is not up to follow these demands, France will not encourage their use of nuclear program for energy for the risk of having them use it for weapons.

The French delegation believes that Iran's nuclear program is questionable by the world community, and encourages the country to use its nuclear power for energy. The mandatory montlhy IAEA inspections and the creation of the Nuclear Power Protocol that France is proposing will assure this safe use of nuclear energy.

France is simply trying to encourage countries to use nuclear energy as a way to fight global warming, assuring the energy purpose ONLY of all countries. Hope this clarifies France's purpose for its resolution.

Delegate, you must be careful there -- India and Pakistan will not give up their heavy water reactors, and besides, they have already openly stated their possession of nuclear weapons. Afghanistan is curious as to what will they be required to do under France's new protocol of nuclear energy (since their power plants are directed to the production of nuclear arms).

Nonetheless, I have to say that I actually find the French delegate rather hypocritical: how can you say France simply "encourages the country [Iran] to use its nuclear power for energy"? France voted IN FAVOR of resolutions 1696, 1737 and, recently, 1835 imposing sanctions in the country -- meaning it's not merely 'encouraging', but rather condemning a nation that searches for an alternative peaceful energy source for its people.

Delegate of Afghanistan,
When the delegate says that it ENCOURAGES Iran to use its nuclear program for energy means, it is concerned with its greenhouse emissions. As the fourth largest oil producer in the world, Iran has to be recognized as one of the causes for Global Warming. Delegate of Afghanistan, this should be very clear: France does NOT approve the Iranian weapons program and has in fact been in favor of solutions to prevent that it is used unconsciously .France is fully aware of what its position over Iran is. It has in fact signed the Resolution 1696 and could not agree more with this perambulatory clause:

“Noting with serious concern the IAEA Director General’s report of 28 April 2006 (GOV/2006/27) and its findings, including that, after more than three years of Agency efforts to seek clarity about all aspects of Iran’s nuclear program, the existing gaps in knowledge continue to be a matter of concern, and that the IAEA is unable to make progress in its efforts to provide assurances about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran,”

Remember delegate that this resolution in about the SAFE USE OF NUCLEAR POWER, and that it is more concerned with the use of nuclear power for energy whether than the risks one only country might be to the world. France ENCOURAGES any nation to pursue nuclear energy, as long as it has signed the NPT and have complied with the IAEA inspections and all the other mandatory items of such agreement. As Iran has signed the NPT, but have not complied with what it agreed upon, France is concerned with where they can take their nuclear capability. France only encouraged it to use nuclear power as an alternative measure over burning fossil fuels. France wants TRANSPARENCY delegate, therefore it is creating such protocol. In addition to the NPT, this protocol will be the certainty that countries such as Iran can CELARLY show the world what it is up to. France is so not in favor of Iran’s nuclear weapons, that it has agreed over the missile shields in Czech Republic and Poland. France is NOT a hypocrite Afghan delegate, it never was, it never will be. It has stuck to the same position since the beginning and is not known for backing up like some nations are.

Now, the delegate of France is curious, could the delegate of Afghanistan please clear something up? Well, Afghanistan and Iran have been close buddies and Afghanistan has stated in a previous post that “Security Council resolutions 1696 and 1737 were unanimously adopted back in 2006. Afghanistan supports Iran's peaceful energy program,”.
If Afghanistan believes in Iran’s peaceful energy program, then why is it questioning France’s resolution? Isn’t France encouraging the SAFE USE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY just like Afghanistan has stated???
Another question, why didn’t your nation impede Iran to transport Iranian-made weapons, across its border and let it be delivered to the Taliban? Does that show that Afghanistan is concerned with the peaceful purpose of Iran’s nuclear program? France believes that since Afghanistan and Iran are such close partners, one should warn the other that taking actions like this, peace is not promoted.

Thank You.

France

Fellow delegates,

The delegate of India wants to make it clear to all delegates that India will not either sign the NPT nor accept its heavy water reactors to be changed into light ones. The delegate of India is accepting the IAEA safeguards to intervene as frequently as they wish.

Although it refuses to sign the NPT, for this treaty is not fulfilling India's security priorities against our powerful nuclear neighbourg, China, the delegate of India emphasizes India's efforts and willingness along the decades to promote safe nuclear use, such as incredible energy producer.

Here are few examples of India's actions to conform to the principle of safe nuclear use, even without nuclear disarmement that the NPT is asking:

In July 2007 a nuclear cooperation agreement with India and US was finalized, opening the way for India's participation in international commerce in nuclear fuel and equipment and requiring India to put most of the country's nuclear power reactors under IAEA safeguards and close down the Cirus research reactor by 2010.

In September 2008, a clean waiver to the trade embargo was agreed in recognition of the country's impeccable non-proliferation credentials. India has always been scrupulous in ensuring that its weapons material and technology are guarded against commercial or illicit export to other countries.

The delegate of India welcomes the delegate of France's resolution, but as well underscores the need to consider India's nuclear security priorities.


http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf53.html

Dear French delegate,

With the previous post, the Afghan delegate was only trying to establish something here: France does not “encourage” Iran to pursue a safe nuclear energy program simply because it doesn’t believe that Iran is pursuing a safe nuclear energy program. This disbelief is evidenced by the sole fact that France agreed upon past Security Council resolutions imposing military and economic sanctions in the country. These actions will only strain the already fragile relation Ahmadinejad has with the Western community: we have seen how international pressure doesn’t always work. With that being said, allow me to attempt to answer your inquiries:

“If Afghanistan believes in Iran’s peaceful energy program, then why is it questioning France’s resolution?”
Pardon me; I was questioning the French delegate because it wasn’t clear to the Afghan delegate what the protocol would be demanding of Pakistan, India, Israel – and Iran. I don't think it quite does now, but thanks anyway!

“Isn’t France encouraging the SAFE USE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY just like Afghanistan has stated???”
Delegate, really, I was just curious – Afghanistan will remain in favor of any resolution that encourages a safe nuclear energy program AND will remain in against any nation's position of applying sanctions to Iran's nuclear program.

“Another question, why didn’t your nation impede Iran to transport Iranian-made weapons, across its border and let it be delivered to the Taliban?”
There is no such thing; could the delegate please give your sources? Unless the media came up with something new to criticize the Afghan government, I have to say I have no idea where this information came from and I will go with the my truest belief that it is actually false. In Allah’s name, why would Ahmadinejad seek to provide the Taliban insurgent groups with Iranian-made weapons? Maybe France is not quite aware that Iran has donated much financial aid to Afghan infrastructure, it currently provides refuge to about 2 million Afghans, and it almost went to war with the Taliban when back in 1998 they seized Iranian consulate in Mazari Sharif and executed Iranian diplomats. For what stupid cause would Iran be providing a terrorist group it hates with domestic arms? Delegate, check your sources, the armament the Taliban current possesses comes from the black market, smugglers – the same way they equally possess weapons from Russia and Pakistan.

“Does that show that Afghanistan is concerned with the peaceful purpose of Iran’s nuclear program?”
Afghanistan is concerned about Iran’s nuclear peaceful energy program, however, unlike France, Afghanistan only condemns a nation after we have seen sufficient proofs to charge them guilty. Now I question you, delegate, do you have any proof whatsoever that Iran is pursuing a nuclear program for the means of building a nuclear arsenal? If there are proofs, than why weren’t they exposed to the international community yet? What are you waiting for? Hmm… let me guess, because there are none?