- Position‹3 of 3
- Neither candidate will do enough for the environment
Nuclear waste disposal is a long-term threat to environmental safety.
The argument
Joe Biden supports nuclear power as a form of clean energy, a platform in line with the Democratic Party. He supported the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act and the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act. Donald Trump is relatively ambivalent to nuclear power because of his support for the oil, gas, and coal industries.
Premises
Counter-arguments
Critics reply that the argument's premise assumes nuclear reactors are environmentally harmful, but many climate scientists regard nuclear power as a low-carbon energy source and a useful part of decarbonisation. On that mainstream view, not denouncing nuclear power is a point in a candidate's favour environmentally, not evidence of doing too little. They add that seizing on one shared position ignores the candidates' large differences on climate policy overall — on emissions rules, fossil-fuel support and international agreements — which is where the "neither does enough" claim would have to be argued, not on a stance that is arguably pro-environment.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P3] The premise assumes nuclear reactors are environmentally harmful, but many climate scientists regard nuclear power as low-carbon, so supporting it can count as pro-environment rather than a failure. [Rejecting P1] That Biden backs nuclear as clean energy is, on the mainstream climate view, a point in favour of his environmental record, not evidence he will do too little — so the shared stance does not support the "neither does enough" conclusion.