08. Debate
2026 topic: Human Impact on the Aqueous Environment.
Coordinators: Dr. Patrick DePaolo and Dr. Michael Bonchonsky
The Great Chemistry Debate May 2026
The Issue of Chlorination of our municipal waters
In the modern world, almost all of us take clean water for granted. However, as with so many of our basic resources, providing clean water is not a simple endeavor. Behind every glass, there is a fascinating and complex process, one that keeps people healthy. Elimination of pathogens that impact our environmental health is critical to this end. The best-known and widely used water disinfection method worldwide is chlorination. Chlorination is used for drinking water supplies and as part of the treatment of wastewater. Chlorination adds chlorine compounds to wastewater that produce “free chlorine,” which destroys pathogens by damaging cell membranes, disrupting cellular respiration, and rendering enzymes non-functional. Chlorination remains popular due to its effectiveness, reliability, and cost-efficiency.
There are concerns, however. Although chlorination is a critical public health practice using chlorine to kill germs and prevent waterborne diseases like cholera, under certain circumstances it can create disinfection byproducts (DBPs) like THMs and HAAs that are linked to long-term health risks, including potential cancer and respiratory issues, These concerns have been raising ongoing debates about balancing disinfection benefits with DBP exposure, especially for vulnerable populations, Utilities monitor levels and homeowners use filtration to reduce taste, odor, and potential risks, but questions remain.
The question: Should chlorination of water and wastewater in municipal systems be mitigated, restricted or banned in the US? Consider the following:
Background:
Chlorine has been used for over a century to disinfect drinking water and prevent diseases like cholera. However, it reacts with natural organic matter to form disinfection byproducts (DBPs) like trihalomethanes, some of which are carcinogenic. Alternatives include ozonation and UV treatment among others.
Pro (Phase out chlorine):
Produces carcinogenic DBPs (THMs, HAAs).
Safer alternatives now exist that don’t leave toxic residues.
Reduced chemical transport/storage hazards (chlorine gas leaks are serious risks).
Modern treatment can ensure microbial safety without chlorination.
Con (Keep chlorine use):
Proven, cheap, and reliable disinfectants.
Provides a “residual disinfectant” that protects water during distribution.
Alternatives are expensive and may fail during system outages.
Overall health benefits outweigh the low cancer risk from DBPs.
Chemistry Focus: Oxidation reactions, halogen chemistry, formation of disinfection byproducts.
Part 1 – Conduct general literature research on the issue:
Prepare a five-page essay with citations (Times New Roman font, double-spaced, 12 pt.) The essay must conclude with an advocacy position answering the question of whether municipal systems should transition away from the use of chlorination. Students must also submit two questions, one for a Pro position opponent and one for a Con position opponent, to ask the opposing team on Event Day.
Prepare oral presentations on each side of the debate (YES, We should transition away from the use of chlorination in municipal water and NO, We should continue the safe use of chlorination in municipal systems. Students must be prepared to argue either side on Event Day.
Optional: Prepare ONE slide for each side of the debate (YES, NO) that can be displayed during your oral presentation.
REQUIRED: Submit your essay and the two questions for opposing sides (YES, NO) by May 7th, 2026 (two weeks before Event Day!) for the judges to review beforehand and prepare questions on.
The essay should address:
What is chlorination and disinfection?
After over a century of use, why has chlorination come into question today?
What are the risks associated with chlorination use in municipal systems as weighed against the use of alternatives?
Should a transition aways from the use of chlorination and the adoption of alternatives be initiated.
What are the commercial and economic consequences of such a transition and what are the consequences to environmental health?
Part 2 - Each team:
Will be randomly assigned either the YES or NO position by the judges.
Each team must present their assigned position (YES or NO) on the question in a 3 - 5 minute oral presentation, optionally with the ONE slide they prepared on that position
The Judges will ask each team one question about this initial presentation. Each team will take two minutes to address their question from the Judges.
Each team will ask another team one question (previously submitted by their team) to be answered in one minute, after two minutes of deliberation by the answering team.
Each team must have each member speak at least once during any of the aspects (initial or response to questions asked) of the presentation. The initial presentation can be done by one member or divided up into sections for different team members, not to exceed the total time as above.
The oral presentation and the submitted essay will be judged pursuant to the following rubric (1 to 5 points for each category):
Clarity and organization
Reasoning and creativity
Use of supporting facts
Reference material
Persuasiveness
Note that providing (brief) examples of chlorination alternatives (technical or economic) for disinfection of municipal waters may also be useful