Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Laura Aybar (Colegio Bilingüe New Horizons) vs. Opposition: Athena Matin-aw (University of San Jose-Recoletos)

Judge: Ian Miller (University of Oklahoma)

Resolution: Finals Week: This House Believes that Animal Testing Should be Banned.

  • Laura Aybar
    Laura Aybar

    Athena Matin-aw
    Athena Matin-aw
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at May 19, 2020 02:24:44AM EST by Laura Aybar



    SUB 1:

    11 facts about pollution. (n.d.).

    Wildlife is on the losing end of our addiction to fossil fuels. (n.d.). LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom.

    SUB 2:

    Air quality. (n.d.). Retrieved from

    Jogalekar, A. (2013, April 2). Nuclear power may have saved 1.8 million lives otherwise lost to fossil fuels, may save up to 7 million more. Retrieved from

    Nuclear power and the environment. (2020, January 15). Retrieved from

    Pielke, R. (2020, March 10). Every day 10,000 people die due to air pollution from fossil fuels. Retrieved from

    SUB 3:
    Griffin Bovee. (2009, April 9). Why we should use more nuclear power as an energy source. Retrieved from

    SUB 1:
    Jobs. (n.d.). Retrieved from

    SUB 2:
    Conca, J. (2018, May 25). Atoms for Africa. Retrieved from

    IEA. (2017, October). WEO-2017 special report: Energy access outlook – Analysis. Retrieved from

    Reports, S. (2017, December 19). Nuclear energy - A solution to energy poverty? Retrieved from

    Posted at May 19, 2020 02:38:40PM EST by Athena Matin-aw



    Morse, E. 02/21/13. National Geographic Resource Library. Non-Renewable Energy.

    Arnold, C. February 2014. Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 122. Once Upon a Mine: The Legacy of Uranium on the Navajo Nation.

    Carvalho, F.P. 2007. Environmental Health Risk IV. Environmental health risk from past Uranium mining and milling activities. Pages 107-114.,+WIT+transactions+on+biomedicine+and+health,+Vol+11,+pp+107%E2%80%9314&ots=neZwaU5n3H&sig=VbDl9_dGq8xNZ4u2VK_sDve9YrM&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

    Srivastava R.R., Pathak P., Perween M. (2020) Environmental and Health Impact Due to Uranium Mining. In: Gupta D., Walther C. (eds) Uranium in Plants and the Environment. Radionuclides and Heavy Metals in the Environment. Springer, Cham.

    Froggat, A., Schneider, M. September 2019. World Nuclear Industry Status Report.

    International Renewable Energy Agency. Renewable Energy and Jobs – Annual Review 2017.

    Union of Concerned Scientists. 10/20/17. Benefits of Renewable Energy Use.

    Jin, T., Kim, J. August, 2018. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews Volume 91. What is better for mitigating carbon emissions – Renewable energy or nuclear energy? A panel data analysis. Pages 464-471.

    Lindquist, H. 2017. Renewable Energy Integration (Second Edition). The Journey of Reinventing the European Electricity Landscape (abstract)

    Portland State University. 07/12/2019. Shifts to renewable energy can drive up energy poverty, study finds.

    Posted at May 21, 2020 01:26:18AM EST by Laura Aybar



    Posted at May 21, 2020 12:01:26PM EST by Athena Matin-aw


    Show Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report IPCC Rapid global shift to renewable energies can save millions of lives 2019 Renewable Energy Builds a More Reliable and Resilient Electricity Mix 2017 Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis—Version 13.0 2019 Construction delays make new nuclear power plants costlier than ever 2018 Does Nuclear Power Slow Or Speed Climate Change? 2019 In the era of cheap renewable energy, new nuclear plants don’t add up 2019 Safest Sources of Energy 2020 No power, no problem: Solar panels light up Yolanda houses 2014 Why we need renewable energy to end poverty 2015

    Posted at May 23, 2020 02:19:55AM EST by Laura Aybar


    Because uranium is a radioactive substance health effects have been researched. Scientists have detected no harmful radiation effects of natural levels of uranium.


    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at May 23, 2020 01:11:11PM EST by Ian Miller

    Category Laura Aybar Athena Matin-aw
    Use of evidence: 4.5 4.6
    Delivery skill: 4.9 4.9
    Coherence of arguments: 4.3 4.3
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4.6 4.4
    Identification of key points: 4.2 4.5
    Comments: Great speeches - however I think that you often got bogged down in framework and topicality - instead perhaps spend time explaining your studies more or contesting the uranium mining argument. You had great points about solar and wind power. However, I would try to provide more figures next debate to illustrate the extent to which the technology has advanced. This would make your counterplan more persuasive.

    The decision is for the Opposition: Athena Matin-aw

    Reason for Decision:

    This was a good and very close debate. I ended up voting for the opposition because of the harms of uranium mining that wouldn't be present in a world with other renewables replacing fossil fuels.

    The most important questions in this debate were about poverty and feasibility. The opposition adequately defended the feasibility of scaling up renewables using studies from the World Economic Foundation and other sources while also winning that the areas used in uranium mining would be damaged for generations, causing lasting societal problems.

    The proposition wins that terrorism is non-unique, however they do not win the feasibility question because of the studies mentioned by the opposition and the argument that renewables are getting cheaper and better. The advancements from renewables mentioned by the opposition combat the claims that they would not provide enough energy.

    Lastly, there is also competing claims about the unreliability of nuclear plants in areas that are very warm.

    Because this feasibility question is a wash, I ended up voting for the opposition because of the well impacted out harms of uranium mining.

    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by: