Obama should declair a state of emergency because of climate change
Debate Rounds (3)
First round is for acceptance only
Even though 98% of scientists agree that climate change is happening and is due to human activity, there are many that put their heads in the sand and pretend it's not true.
Since it will take too much time to convince enough politicians to take this matter seriously enough, and time is not on our side, I think the president should declare a state of emergency because of climate change.
Here why this is a good idea:
1. At the beginning of World War Two, A state of emergency was declared and all the car factories in the country were converted into making tanks overnight. President Obama could do something similar if he declared a state of emergency, by ordering all car factories to manufacture electric cars. Within a year, we can have almost all passenger cars run off electric power.
2. The president can sign an executive order to require all roofs have solar panels installed on them. He can also use federal funds to help home owners borrow money at low interests rates to get the panels installed.
Those two things alone can bring down the carbon footprint significantly. Electric power would be abundant and clean and transportation would also be cheap and clean.
Electric cars have many benefits over gas cars.
Once America takes the lead and shows the world this technology works and is advantageous, other countries will sure follow.
This is probably the only hope for saving the planet from global warming. We don't have time for politics and oil companies will fight electric cars with all their might.
Declaring a state of emergency is the quickest and most efficient way to use existing technology to avoid irreversible damage to our atmosphere that causes climate change.
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."
1. The president has the power in a state of emergency. If it has to be a war, OK let's declare war on god.
2. I guess you missed the part about having a solar panel on every roof.
3. I never mentioned wind. The cost of solar will go down, once it's in mainstream use. Who cares about a "tab", when the whole world is at stake? When we go to war, does anybody ask "who will pick up the tab"?
4. Leaf is a toy. I'm talking about technology used my Tesla Motors (I guess you didn't click on my link).
0-60 in 4 seconds, 300 miles per charge, swappable batteries in case of emergency, etc.
We have the technology to stop global warming. It's crazy not to do it because of a "tab" or denial of the technology.
That's like saying it costs too much to join a gym. I'd rather risk getting a heart attack.
What you pay now to prevent a catastrophe, will be worth 1 million times its weight when it comes to paying for the catastrophe after it happens!
2. The United States Consitution does not allow the President to force homeowners to purchase Solar panels. It should be left up to the individual states. As I told you before, read the Constitution.
3. Who has the money to purchase a Tesla? A Tesla Model S according to its website would cost up to 69,000 dollars. Even with incentives and Tax Credits, 60,000 dollars. So are you going to force a family in poverty to buy one ? A Nissan Leaf would be more cheaper. If it does not stop in the middle of the road.
4 .My opponent asserts that if we spend all this money on solar panels and such, global warming will eventually stop and the economy will prosper. Solyndra was a company that created solar panels. According to Bloomberg Magazine, Solyndra received 535 million dollars in Government loans. Our Taxpayer dollars. Then, Solyndra went bankrupt. All our Taxpayer dollars went down the drain. Those dollars could have been used to improve the economy.
5. How many jobs will be created ? The Keystone Pipeline will bring thousands of Jobs. Solar Panels, not sure.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.