Pro vs. con view
Topic space viewPresident Obama’s climate speech: 10 takeaways
President Barack Obama outlined a wide-ranging climate plan Tuesday that’s centered on greenhouse gas regulations for power plants — while making a surprise mention of the Keystone XL oil pipeline and defending his increasingly embattled nominee for EPA administrator.
Those affected by climate change should get compensation
Developed countries pollute the earth more
Those affected by climate change should get compensation
We all owe the earth a duty of care
Those affected by climate change should get compensation
It will Decrease Pollution
Those affected by climate change should get compensation
COP15 was a disaster.
Acting to 'mitigate' climate change will cost a fortune.
The cost of cutting back fossil fuel use and developing alternatives will be vast. The money is much better spent on preventing hunger and disease in the third world.
we're too late on global climate change
Developing world
we're too late on global climate change
Failure to reach global accord
we're too late on global climate change
450 PPM
we're too late on global climate change
Consequences of increased GHGs
Population control MUST be part of climate change/sustainable policies
The fundamental flaw is that population control is downplaying the real solution: technology and equality, so let’s look at the hypothetical situation about the house that you used earlier. Say you lived in a large house which was heated by an old wood burning stove. It was enough to keep warm but created small amounts of smoke, but it wasn’t in issue then. Eventually, your brother and sister came to live with you in the house. However, the stove did not produce enough heat to warm everyone, so you had another wood burning stove installed. Later, you allow your friend to sleep in the basement because he’s a good guy and helps around the house, even though he’ll need another two stoves. Soon, other family come to live in your house. Now you have an issue, smoke is wafting through the house and irritating everyone’s eyes and the stoves are taking up space. What do you do? Do you kick out your brother and sister, or the other people? One of the inhabitants argues that you should kick out some residents, which would leave them without a home. Many protested this idea. The solution is simple: install heaters. Not only have you saved space by reducing size, they are now more efficient and much more capable of heating up the room, without the smoke. Not only this, but you decide that your friend live upstairs where he saves space and energy and where he can help around the house. Now your residents can stay happy and warm. The solution not only made the house more comfortable, it saved space, and money. Also, the friend was now in a better situation making all the residents equal and able to contribute. That is the power of technology. Now I could address every single contention,that would take time and too much words. Instead, you mention technology in your argument, saying: “Sure we are adaptable enough that we could 1) turn to draining the oceans & using desalination to produce freshwater, we could cut up sea and polar ice and melt it for drinkable water, 2) we can cut down more rainforests, clear more land for farming, develop more tech to farm in deserts and poor soil areas, 3) we can develop massive skyscraper size carbon and pollution scrubbers to create more oxygen and clean air. BUT WHY SPEND BILLIONS and BILLIONS of DOLLARS AND DISRUPT A WORKING SYSTEM (that by doing so will cause more problems and require billions more to try and rectify ) THAT PROVIDES OUR NEEDS NATURALLY AND TECHNICALLY FOR NEAR FREE ?” Exactly! We could use desalination to produce water, we could develop better solutions to conserving and creating fresh water. Technology has already allowed us to do such things, and it would solve the issue of dehydration for so many thirsting populations and in arid regions, creating solution that saves lives without polar ice melt. We could develop more tech to farm in deserts and poor soil areas! Not only could this possibly solve the starvation problem for many people, but it could bring prosperity, economy, tourism, and yes, oxygen that could help the atmosphere! We can create (and are) self-sufficient homes and apartments that use renewable energy and blend with environment. Eventually, we as population would save BILLIONS and BILLIONS of DOLLARS by producing ways for more efficient and bountiful farming methods and cleaner environment and improving the lifestyles of BILLIONS of people. But why do this, when you can introduce an authoritarian way to restrict the right of reproduction and in contrast to the religions of BILLIONS of people, many who would resist any legislation to facilitate a large increase of what they consider murder of a innocent babies(Which I would agree with them and multiple scientific studies as well)? Also, you reciprocate many urges that the world is on the verge of overpopulation and a dying planet, yet, you yourself mention that it is a “working system”? AND, you consider contraception methods such as abortion and birth control pills more natural than advancing the human race into a more energy efficient and thriving society? A race terminating its birth rate (which mostly unsuccessful as I will mention in a later argument) is somehow more natural. by the way, “near free” is extremely misleading. Millions of dollars are spent in advertising, passing, and the execution of the bill, much less one that would control birth rates of BILLIONS of people, ie. the funding to create a executive body to enforce it. Basically, the human population is not what causes pollution. It’s the production of harmful energy and the waste of space that does. The human body obviously emit negligible amounts of pollution, and if we create the technology to create efficient energy it would save money in the long-run, as well as allowing us to create even more ways to help the planet, which provides us more money to advance equality and end poverty and thus lend more minds to advance technology, etc.
US Should Engage More With China Concerning Climate Change
Okay, so I know its been a while but I am finally holding a debate. Ill be con and whoever accepts this is pro. This is a policy debate round so aside from your arguments, please bring up a plan of action. So here is the round structure: Con 1- Definitions Pro 1- Plan Con 2- Refute Plan/ bring up arguments Pro 2- Refute Con/Support plan Con 3- Analyze debate, no new arguments Pro 3- Analyze debate, no new arguments Thank you! I hope to have a great debate!
The US needs to do much more to combat climate change
Go ahead and reread that "you can't just invest" in context.
The US needs to do much more to combat climate change
Interesting point. I will assume it as true for the purpose of argument. Wind and Solar are already cheaper. Well, then the only intervention for the government would be stop subsidizing the oil industry (which I am in fully in favor of). With no subsidies, the oil industry crumbles, wind and solar become dominant, and all using the capital of the private sector rather than the government, and no inefficiency derived therefrom! That would be the simplest and cheapest solution, not to mention it would appeal to both right and left!
The US needs to do much more to combat climate change
Since my opponent gave a short blurb to define the debate, I will too in order to maintain parity. Basically, the fundamental issue is this: "Is drastic government intervention on behalf of the environment worth the cost?" Because solar and wind are expected to be cheaper than fossil fuels by at most 2030 (likely a lot sooner) http://www.businessinsider.com... The question becomes "Is it worth the tremendous cost to slightly reduce greenhouse gas emissions for five to ten years?"
Obama should declair a state of emergency because of climate change
i accept
Obama should declair a state of emergency because of climate change
First off, The President does not have the power to force factories to produce electric cars. The reason why the President had the power to do so in World War II is because America was in a wartime environment. Read the Constitution 2. A Majority of electric power comes from Oil, Coal, and Natural Gas. That is according to the EIA. So your argument falls apart. 3. A recent analysis by the Energy Information Administration estimates that wind-generated electricity from onshore wind turbines costs $97 per megawatt-hour. That"s about 50 percent more than the same amount of electricity generated by natural gas, which the EIA estimates costs $63. Offshore wind is even more expensive, coming in at $243 per megawatt hour. The least-expensive form of solar-generated electricity""the type generated by photovoltaic panels""costs $210, or more than three times as much as the juice produced by burning natural gas. And who will pick up the tab ? The American consumer. 4. Electric cars are a very bad idea. According to a Forbes magazine article, a Nissan Leaf 'costs more than twice as much ($35,430 vs. $17,250) as a comparable Nissan Versa, but it is much less capable. The Leaf accelerates more slowly than a Versa and has only about 25% of the range." Also from the same magazine article, "On Wednesday, Jan. 26 a major snowstorm hit Washington D.C. Ten-mile homeward commutes took four hours. If there had been a million electric cars on American roads at the time, every single one of them in the DC area would have ended up stranded on the side of the road, dead. And, before they ran out of power, their drivers would have been forced to turn off the heat and the headlights in a desperate effort to eek out a few more miles of range." Your turn. Sources. 1.http://www.forbes.com... 2.http://www.eia.gov... 3. http://constitutionus.com...
Resolved: Countries ought work to end climate change/global warming.
I accept, go.
Resolved: Developed Countries have a moral obligation to mitigate the effects of climate change.
I await my opponents arrival
Resolved: Developed Countries have a moral obligation to mitigate the effects of climate change.
I accept this debate! let the games begin!
