We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Sustainable Energy Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Labour Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: August 2106
Description[?]:
| Noting the necessity of low-carbon energy sources; Whereas uranium and fossil fuels are finite sources; This bill shall encourage the development and use of renewable power, such as hydroelectric, geothermal, solar, wind, wave and other sources. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on nuclear power.
Old value:: The government does not take any position on nuclear power.
Current: The government encourages nuclear power (subsidies, tax relief etc).
Proposed: The decision is left up to local governments.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Renewable energy sources (eg. solar power, wind power).
Old value:: The government does not take any position with regards to renewable energy.
Current: Government subsidies are provided for research and generation of energy through renewable sources.
Proposed: Government subsidies are provided for research and generation of energy through renewable sources.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:30:21, September 01, 2005 CET | From | United Labour Party | To | Debating the Sustainable Energy Act |
| Message | Although I'm not sure about the last option. Shouldn't national government regulate something so dangerous? Ultimately, I'd like to see it banned. |
| Date | 14:54:27, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Sustainable Energy Act |
| Message | We are currently divided on the issue of nuclear power. On the one hand, if provinces are willing to take on the risk of a nuclear plant they should be able to. On the other hand, nuclear power produces perhaps the worst pollutants imaginable, radiological waste that takes thousands of years to become safe and, for the duration, remains a public health risk unless constantly properly stored. Given that power is provided by socially owned energy companies, the best course seems to be to leave it to the people of the province the plant will be built in, so while our misigivings remain, we tentatively support allowing local governments to decide whether to develop nuclear power or not. As for subsidizing renewable energy research, we are strongly in favor of such a provision, as will be, I hope, all parties in the Assembly. |
| Date | 16:36:39, September 01, 2005 CET | From |  Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Sustainable Energy Act |
| Message | Our policy is that renewable methods should be our first choice, and the remainder should be implemented through nuclear plants (OOC: anyone here ever read Normal Accidents by Charles Perrow, explains how nuclear power can never be truely safe to operate). This bill seems to be the best opportunity to head in that direction. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 73 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 27 |
| Random fact: Large scale RP planning (such as wars, regional/continental conflicts, economic collapse, etc.) should be planned (as best as it can be) and should have consent of a majority of players involved. |
| Random quote: "The trouble with practical jokes is that very often they get elected." - Will Rogers |