Energy/Environment
Develop a long term energy policy to address the current petroleum price increase and future needs Should the national government use its protected land to extract oil and natural gas to help with the energy shortage? Should the government invest in alternative fuels? Should the government limit the use of foreign oil? Should the government force automobiles companies to raise the fuel efficiency of all vehicles? What should the government do about global warming and other environmental protections?
RADICAL, LIBERAL and CONSERVATIVE WERE RECEIVED ON TIME. ULTRA-CON IS LATE.
Radical: Ashwin
Energy conservation and our environment are both issues that have effects on every life. The two problems do not discriminate and completely disregard race, gender, or sexual preference in their heinousness. With that in mind, it is imperative that we stop at nothing to rectify the situation.
In the long term, our nation should strive to create a cleaner, greener, and stronger America by reducing our dependence on foreign oil. The overall effect would be the elimination of billions in subsidies for oil and gas companies. We would then be able to use the savings to provide consumer relief and develop energy alternatives, thus enabling the investment in energy independent technology. The syllogism is clear. Prices will go down when we are no longer dependent on foreign oil. Energy independence will put the United States in a position of power to pursue affordable and efficient energy solutions. With little federal funding, the government can actualize the goals found by the research and every American will benefit financially, improve our security, and help clean our environment, three benefits that everybody can agree on. Essentially, American families should not have to pay the price for a failed national energy policy. If they are putting money into the government, they deserve an energy policy that creates a cleaner and stronger United States, ultimately reducing our dependence on foreign oil. Fortunately, the independence will also create new jobs for American workers. By clearing the pathways to innovation, investing in our workers and infrastructure, and providing American consumers with broader, more responsible choices, we can solve the energy crisis in the United States. On another note, innovation to get alternative fuel sources, which will makes us less dependent on Iraqi oil, which people die over. The environment will benefit, the people will benefit; the only people who won’t benefit are the owners of select large oil companies. It is obvious, therefore, that the government should force car companies to make their cars more efficient. It makes no sense to allow Ford Motors to make a truck that burns so much gas that it triples the effect of global warming.
On the other side of the issue, the environment is becoming increasingly affected. It is our responsibility to protect our extraordinary wealth of natural resources. The health of our families and the strength of our economy depend on our service of the environment. To make the assertion that we must choose between a healthy economy and a healthy environment is completely unfounded. Farming, fishing, tourism, and other industries require a healthy environment. Those industries make up for more than half of our national economy. Moreover, new technologies that protect the environment will create new high-paying jobs. The bottom line is that a cleaner environment means a stronger economy. Far too many Americans live with unhealthy air or water quality. Our government should fight to strengthen the laws that ensure we have clean air to breathe and clean water to drink. The Radical Platform understands that a sensible energy policy is key to a strong economy, our national security, and a clean environment. Our country is, by some accounts, 5 times more wasteful than certain countries that have 5 times the population as ours. The government needs to take a strong stance to regulate in order to stop global warming, it will NOT fix itself, it can only get worse.
Liberal: Sid
Today, many Americans head to their local gas station and complain about having to pay $3 for
a gallon of gasoline. Hesitantly, we fill up our tanks, shelling out an average of $45 for a full tank.
However, $4 or $5 per gallon of gasoline will be a likely reality in the all-to-near future. As the amount
of crude oil on our planet continues to decrease, demand for gasoline will rapidly increase. Geologists
predict that global oil production could peak as early as the 2010, and once it peaks, the fight over
those last bits of remaining oil will begin. Demand will escalate until there is simply no oil left,
initiating the most devastating energy crisis the world has ever faced.
Until then, America continues to import 13,147,000 barrels of oil every day, which translates
into a 511 billion dollar hole burned through citizen’s pockets annually. America’s oil consumption has
increased by over 20% over the last 15 years, and carbon emissions have risen by 25%. Carbon emissions
contribute dramatically to global warming; if we don’t cut back on harmful emissions soon, we may very
possibly ignite an irreversible global catastrophe capable of wiping out over 90% of species on Earth.
The current state of oil dependency is unacceptable. To begin reform as soon as possible,
I am advocating a temporary economic policy known as “cap and trade.” This approach will set a mandatory
cap on carbon emissions that all current carbon culprits must meet by a predetermined date. If an
organization is unable to reduce its pollution to this set level, then it will be able purchase credits
from other organizations that pollute less than the emission cap. This policy will help to achieve
interim pollution reductions at the lowest possible cost to society, and will provide strong motivations
for companies to meet and exceed government-allowed pollution levels.
Under my environment-reform plan, legislation will also be passed to fund research on clean,
renewable, and alternative energy technologies such as hydrogen power, clean coal, nuclear power, and
biofuels. Discovery and implementation of these new technologies in cars and transportation will cut our
dependency on foreign oil and fossil fuels and will dramatically reduce total greenhouse gas emissions,
thus helping to preserve the atmosphere and global ecosystems.
With this plan, we can immediately reduce carbon emissions while searching for long-term
solutions via alternative, sustainable energy. We must work to establish a carbon-neutral society before
it is too late.
Conservative: Viraj
American dependency on fossil fuels cannot be sustained for the next century, but doomsday scenarios claiming that the Earth’s oil reserves are about to run dry run contrary to scientific consensus. According to “most official scenarios, [oil] production will soon begin rising again, peaking … around 2030.” (Justin Fox, “The Curious Capitalist”, Time, 12/3/07). Even after this time “production would not so much peak as plateau.” Consequently, policies that call for dramatic reductions in oil consumption through an immediate shift to greener technologies place a massive strain on our economy with little scientific backing. Instead, we should work to temper our consumption of fossil through regulatory policies that aim to increase the efficiency with which we use our oil. The first step would be to increase the price of our gas tax over time. This creates an incentive for consumers to pursue alternative sources of energy themselves, which means that the government would not be responsible for shifting our oil-based economy to a greener alternative, a conversion process that itself would require significant financial resources. Additionally, we can create a baseline standard for the fuel efficiency of noncommercial cars, which is a major source of our nation’s reliance on gas.
Alternative energy sources, such solar power, are still in developmental stages, and there are significant hurdles that must be overcome before such technologies can be implemented on a large scale. Solar power requires large energy-storage capacities, as seasonal availability and geographic location would require that energy be transported to many parts of the country.
While it is important to minimize pollution and protect the environment from future generations, the idea that the global increase in temperature is caused by human activity has been greatly exaggerated and has minimal scientific basis. Carbon dioxide levels were 10 times higher during the Ice Age than they are right now, a fact that sheds doubt on the “greenhouse theory” that is so often touted by global warming alarmists. The Oregon Petition, signed by 19,000 scientists between 1999 and 2001, argues that greenhouse gasses will not cause a dramatic or harmful change in the Earth’s climate.
Ultra-Con: Petie
Current hiking energy prices have caused the American economy to become stagnant; U.S. is too dependent on foreign imported oil. The Ultra-Con advocates the independence of energy from other nations and the usage of America’s natural resources. Since we are also concerned of the environmental impact of fossil fuels, we encourage the development of alternative energy sources, and a smooth transition from petroleum to inexpensive, renewable energy. We realize that current technology is still unable to produce pragmatic alternative energy, and therefore suggest that oils from our own reservoirs, capped wells, and sources yet untapped to be used, while further development of alternative energy is in progress. The most important step we can take, however, is to eliminate government regulations on the domestic oil industry. In order to have a low impact on the environment, these oil extractions must use efficient technology. There are already existing alternative energies that we can use, and we are determined to use them in order to not quickly drain our oil resources. As an act of protecting domestic oils, we should also impose tariffs on foreign oils.