Tournament: Northern Iowa | Round:  | Opponent:  | Judge: 

1AC

Inherency

The DoE is giving incentives for two SMR designs for demonstration purposes. Future funding is uncertain and two reactors aren’t enough for commercialization. This risks US global nuclear competitiveness and leadership but also non-uniques their offense.

David Biello April 19, 2012 Small Reactors Make a Bid to Revive Nuclear Power, Scientific American,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=small-reactors-bid-to-revive-nuclear-power-http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=small-reactors-bid-to-revive-nuclear-power, KEL

But the Department of Energy funding may only support two designs. Innovation spurred by
AND
the world in safety, if we’re not building new nuclear power plants."

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s operating licenses aren’t properly scaled for SMR reactor commercialization, which makes licensing too cost prohibitive – reducing the restriction is necessary for commercialization.

Jon Chavez March 11, 2012, Small reactors may be key to nuclear power’s future, Toledo Blade, http://www.toledoblade.com/Energy/2012/03/11/Small-reactors-may-be-key-to-nuclear-power-s-future.html-http://www.toledoblade.com/Energy/2012/03/11/Small-reactors-may-be-key-to-nuclear-power-s-future.html, KEL

But licenses are not cheap. As the system is now, NRC operating licenses
AND
process economically feasible for deregulated utilities like FirstEnergy, Mr. Burnell said.

Plan Text

Plan: The United States Federal Government should substantially increase market-fixed production cost incentives for domestic deployment of small modular nuclear reactors and substantially reduce Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing procedural and cost restrictions for SMR reactors. We reserve the right to clarify.

Advantage One: Proliferation

Global demand for nuclear power is rapidly increasing while faith in the NPT is on the brink.

Steven E. Miller %26 Scott Sagan 2009, Miller is a Fellow of the
AND
power without nuclear proliferation ?" Daedalus 138.4 (Fall), KEL)

The global nuclear order is changing. Concerns about climate change, the volatility of
AND
regime seems to be eroding even as interest in nuclear power is expanding. 

Current global expansion of nuclear power poses a substantial risk for proliferation, nuclear terrorism, and nuclear war.

Robert Socolow %26 Alexander Glaser 2009 Glaser is Assistant Professor at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and in the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at Princeton University: Socolow is Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering and Codirector of the Carbon Mitigation Initiative at Princeton University, "Balancing risks: nuclear energy %26 climate change," Daedalus 138.4 (Fall), KEL

Second, the world is not now safe for a rapid global expansion of nuclear
AND
Nuclear war is a terrible trade for slowing the pace of climate change.

A nuclear terrorist attack escalates to a global nuclear war

Speice 06 – 06 JD Candidate @ College of William and Mary ~[Patrick F. Speice, Jr., "NEGLIGENCE AND NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION: ELIMINATING THE CURRENT LIABILITY BARRIER TO BILATERAL U.S.-RUSSIAN NONPROLIFERATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS," William %26 Mary Law Review, February 2006, 47 Wm and Mary L. Rev. 1427~]

Accordingly, there is a significant and ever-present risk that terrorists could acquire
AND
the United States and escalate to the use of nuclear weapons. 53

US leadership ensures safe nuclear technology and allows us to promote non-proliferation objectives to make the coming global nuclear renaissance safer.

Loudermilk 2011 (Micah, research associate with the Energy %26 Environmental Security Policy program at National Defense University, "Small Nuclear Reactors and US Energy Security: Concepts, Capabilities, and Costs", Journal of Energy Security, 5-31-11, http://www.ensec.org/index.php?view=article%26catid=116%3Acontent0411%26id=314%3Asmall-nuclear-reactors-and-us-energy-security-concepts-capabilities-and-costs%26tmpl=component%26print=1%26page=%26option=com_content%26Itemid=375-http://www.ensec.org/index.php?view=article%26catid=116%3Acontent0411%26id=314%3Asmall-nuclear-reactors-and-us-energy-security-concepts-capabilities-and-costs%26tmpl=component%26print=1%26page=%26option=com_content%26Itemid=375, accessed 8-1-12, RSR)

Reactor safety itself notwithstanding, many argue that the scattering of small reactors around the
AND
standards on nuclear agreements, spent fuel reprocessing, and developing reactor technologies.

Asian nuclear energy leadership facilitates nuclear proliferation in Asia and the Middle East, which is comparatively the greatest and most damaging scenario

Hoagland 11(Jim, foreign policy writer for the Washington Post, foreign correspondent in Nairobi and Middle east, also won a Pulitzer Prize for international reporting, "Dangerous Fallout," The Washington Post, October 07 , 2011, Proquest, ADP)

But developing countries with little nuclear experience and spotty industrial safety records are moving ahead
AND
world, as well as from terror networks intent on acquiring fissionable material.

Nuclear proliferation causes miscalculated global nuclear war due to shorter flight times and lack of second strike capacity. This answers their "deterrence solves" and "proliferation good" arguments.

Cimbala 2008
(Stephen, Political Science Professor at the University of Pennsylvania, March, "Anticipatory Attacks: Nuclear Crisis Stability in Future Asia" Comparative Strategy, Vol 27 No 2, p 113-132, InformaWorld)
The spread of ballistic missiles and other nuclear-capable delivery systems in Asia,
AND
be inaccurate guides to the avoidance of war outside of Europe.19

Advantage Two – Nuclear Leadership

You have no offense - SMRs are inevitable globally – between 40 to 96 of the world’s over 400 nuclear reactors will be SMRs by 2030, although none will be in the US

World Nuclear Association July 2012, Small Nuclear Power Reactors, http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf33.html-http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf33.html, KEL

A 2009 assessment by the IAEA under its Innovative Nuclear Power Reactors %26 Fuel
AND
under construction, in 28 countries, totaling 60.3 GWe capacity.)

A lack of reactor development is eroding US nuclear leadership now. A signal of a credible and strong SMR commercialization program restores our leadership.

Rosner and Goldberg 2011 (Robert (William E. Wrather Distinguished Service Professor in the Departments of Astronomy and Astrophysics and Physics) and Stephen (Special Assistant to the Director at the Argonne National Laboratory) , Energy Policy Institute at Chicago, "Small Modular Reactors – Key to Future Nuclear Power Generation in the U.S.", Technical Paper, Revision 1, November 2011, https://epic.sites.uchicago.edu/sites/epic.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/EPICSMRWhitePaperFinalcopy.pdf-https://epic.sites.uchicago.edu/sites/epic.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/EPICSMRWhitePaperFinalcopy.pdf, accessed 7-31-12, RSR)

As stated earlier, SMRs have the potential to achieve significant greenhouse gas emission reductions
AND
Japan, Korea, Russia, and, now rapidly emerging, China.

SMR production is key to US nuclear tech leadership– it would support the development of the most advanced technologies and US manufacturing

King, et al. 2011 (Marcus (Associate Director of Research at The George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs), LaVar Huntzinger (Center for Naval Analyses) and Thoi Nguyen (Professor at the University of Santa Clara), "Feasibility of Nuclear Power on U.S. Military Installations", CNA, March 2011, RSR)

Finally, a significant appeal of SMRs is their ability to be manufactured substantially within
AND
, spurring domestic job creation and international leadership in key nuclear supply areas. 

SMRs are key to overall tech competitiveness- Maintains US workforce and tech edge

Fleischmann 2011 (Chuck, Representative from the 3^rd District in Tennessee, "Small Modular Reactors Could Help With U.S. Energy Needs", American Physical Society, Vol. 6, No. 2, October 2011, http://www.aps.org/publications/capitolhillquarterly/201110/backpage.cfm, accessed 8-1-12, RSR)

The timely implementation of small reactors could position the United States on the cutting edge
AND
strategic position on the forefront of expanding global technologies in the nuclear arena. 

Technological innovation key to US hegemony. The last five centuries of global hegemons proves our internal link.

Drezner 2001 Daniel Drezner (professor of international politics at The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University) 2001 "State structure, technological leadership and the maintenance of hegemony" http://www.danieldrezner.com/research/tech.pdf
In this decade, proponents of globalization argue that because information and capital are mobile
AND
leading to a period of strife until a new hegemonic power is found. 

Otherwise – status based great power conflict is inevitable – U.S. relative lead key to prevent global conflict

Wohlforth 2009 William C. Wohlforth (a professor of government at Dartmouth College) 2009 "Unipolarity, Status Competition, and Great Power War" Project Muse

Second, I question the dominant view that status quo evaluations are relatively independent of
AND
ways that directly contradict their material interest in security and/or prosperity.

US leadership solves all their impacts by deterring escalation of global hotspots- retrenchment causes international bickering over leadership and prevents cooperation

Brzezinski 2012 Zbigniew K. Brzezinski (CSIS counselor and trustee and cochairs the CSIS Advisory Board. He is also the Robert E. Osgood Professor of American Foreign Policy at the School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, in Washington, D.C. He is cochair of the American Committee for Peace in the Caucasus and a member of the International Advisory Board of the Atlantic Council. He is a former chairman of the American-Ukrainian Advisory Committee. He was a member of the Policy Planning Council of the Department of State from 1966 to 1968; chairman of the Humphrey Foreign Policy Task Force in the 1968 presidential campaign; director of the Trilateral Commission from 1973 to 1976; and principal foreign policy adviser to Jimmy Carter in the 1976 presidential campaign. From 1977 to 1981, Dr. Brzezinski was national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter. In 1981, he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his role in the normalization of U.S.-China relations and for his contributions to the human rights and national security policies of the United States. He was also a member of the President’s Chemical Warfare Commission (1985), the National Security Council–Defense Department Commission on Integrated Long-Term Strategy (1987–1988), and the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (1987–1989). In 1988, he was cochairman of the Bush National Security Advisory Task Force, and in 2004, he was cochairman of a Council on Foreign Relations task force that issued the report Iran: Time for a New Approach. Dr. Brzezinski received a B.A. and M.A. from McGill University (1949, 1950) and Ph.D. from Harvard University (1953). He was a member of the faculties of Columbia University (1960–1989) and Harvard University (1953–1960). Dr. Brzezinski holds honorary degrees from Georgetown University, Williams College, Fordham University, College of the Holy Cross, Alliance College, the Catholic University of Lublin, Warsaw University, and Vilnius University. He is the recipient of numerous honors and awards) February 2012 "After America" http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/01/03/after_america?page=0,0-http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/01/03/after_america?page=0,0

For if America falters, the world is unlikely to be dominated by a single
AND
policy — or start bracing itself for a dangerous slide into global turmoil.

Solvency

Market-fixed production cost incentives for SMRs key to create a self-sustainable domestic industry while encouraging price reduction and future innovation.

Rosner and Goldberg, ’11 (Robert (William E. Wrather Distinguished Service Professor in the Departments of Astronomy and Astrophysics and Physics) and Stephen (Special Assistant to the Director at the Argonne National Laboratory) , Energy Policy Institute at Chicago, "Small Modular Reactors – Key to Future Nuclear Power Generation in the U.S.", Technical Paper, Revision 1, November 2011) RCM

Production Cost Incentive: A production cost incentive is a performance-based incentive.
AND
should be subject to further analysis as higher quality cost estimates become available.

Government funding specifically key – it’s necessary to overcome upfront costs, long timeframes, and uncertain returns.

Rosner and Goldberg 2011 (Robert (William E. Wrather Distinguished Service Professor in the Departments of Astronomy and Astrophysics and Physics) and Stephen (Special Assistant to the Director at the Argonne National Laboratory) , Energy Policy Institute at Chicago, "Small Modular Reactors – Key to Future Nuclear Power Generation in the U.S.", Technical Paper, Revision 1, November 2011) RCM

Assuming that early SMR deployments will carry cost premiums (until the benefits of learning
AND
The various possible management models are described and contrasted further in Appendix E.