Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Argument: Fossil fuels are the energy source of our present and future.
Pro - Yes, fossil fuels should be the energy Con - No, fossil fuels should not be the energy
source of the present and future. source of the present and future.
COST COST
Claim: Generates thousands of jobs Claim: Fossil fuels have higher consumer
costs
Evidence (include a source): Fossil fuels
generate hundreds of thousands of jobs every year. Evidence (include a source): Gasoline costs
To just abandon the use of fossil fuels now would $3.80 extra per gallon, diesel an additional $4.80
lead to lots of people being jobless which could per gallon, coal an extra 24 cents per kilowatt-hour,
seriously affect the economy all over the world. and natural gas another 11 cents per kilowatt-hour
(conserve-energy-future.com) that we dont see in our fuel or energy bills.
http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/pros-and- (the guardian)
cons-of-fossil-fuels.php https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-
consensus-97-per-cent/2015/mar/18/fossil-fuels-
Reasoning: If people dont have a job, there are-way-more-expensive-than-you-think
would be a lot of poverty. Thus having their salaries
go down in order to sustain a living. A new report from the International Monetary Fund
says global use of fossil fuels costs taxpayers and
consumers $5.3 trillion year.
(pri.org) https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-06-07/imf-
true-cost-fossil-fuels-53-trillion-year
ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT
Claim: The means of controlling pollution from Claim: Carbon dioxide is released into the air
these fuels exists. when fossil fuels are burned.
Claim: Nuclear power plant accidents are far Claim: Public health issues
more devastating than fossil fuel accidents
Evidence (include a source): Fossil fuels are
Evidence (include a source): Even though not at all environment friendly. Burning of fossil
nuclear power plant incidents are less likely to fuels result in pollution and can cause serious
happen, they provoke a huge negative impact. environmental concerns. Pollution-related diseases
Such as Fukushima and Chernobyl, they kill millions of children a year. According to WHO, 7
contaminated and killed a huge amount of people, million premature deaths annually linked to air
and are far worse than minor oil spills or minor pollution.
explosions. (conserve-energy-future.com)
(ucsusa.org) http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear- http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/pros-and-
power/nuclear-power-accidents/history-nuclear- cons-of-fossil-fuels.php
accidents#.WS8w4JArLrc
Reasoning: If we continue to pollute our
Reasoning: Since nuclear power plant accidents environment too much, the air will no longer be
are more devastating than coal, oil and gas able to be safe to breathe in. High levels of air
accidents, fossil fuel accidents are not as bad in pollution can adversely affect your lungs and trigger
health effects as nuclear power. asthma. People who live in areas with a large
amount of traffic are at high risk.
INFRASTRUCTURE INFRASTRUCTURE
Claim: We have an existing grid that is Claim: Once it runs out the grid will have little
originally based off fossil fuels. to nothing to power it. Takes a lot of factors too
make.
Evidence (include a source) Already have
existing fossil fuel grids around the U.S, and also a Evidence (include a source): There needs to
little cheap, already have existing designs. be an ideal location of natural gas power plants,
http://leave-it-in-the-ground.org/fossil-fuel- there needs to be pipelines to transport the
infrastructure/ natural gas, a plant for electrical generation,
water for the electrical generation plant, and
Reasoning: in order to live well in the post- the electrical grid for power distribution.
carbon age, we must put infrastructure in place,
that allows us to meet our needs without burning
fossil fuels. The good news is that much of the Reasoning: The infrastructure is a very hard
infrastructure that would take us past the worst process that takes time and lots of factors that
climate tipping points is still to be built. need to be lined up.
SUSTAINABILITY/LONGEVITY SUSTAINABILITY/LONGEVITY
Claim: Fossil Fuels are very reliable they have Claim: Fossil fuels will run out eventually
been around for a long time and are more reliable
than solar and wind energy. Evidence (include a source): Clearly fossil
fuel reserves are finite, but it's only a matter of
Evidence (include a source): Carbon capture when they run out. Globally, every year we
and storage help reduce greenhouse emissions currently consume the equivalent of over 11 billion
generated by fossil fuels. Have been around since tonnes of oil in fossil fuels. Crude oil reserves are
the industrial revolution, Give guarantee reliable vanishing at the rate of 4 billion tons a year, if we
supply of electricity. (http://www.conserve-energy- carry on at this rate without any increase for our
future.com/advantages_fossilfuels.php) growing population or aspirations, our known oil
deposits will be gone by 2052.
Reasoning: They will hopefully be here for a Well still have gas left, and coal too.
long time and powers a lot of electricity very easily.
If we increase gas production to fill the energy gap
The U.S gets 81% of energy from fossil fossil fuels
left by oil, then those reserves will only give us an
additional eight years, taking us to 2060. But the
rate at which the world consumes fossil fuels is not
standing still, it is increasing as the world's
population increases and as living standards rise in
parts of the world that until recently had consumed
very little energy. Fossil Fuels will therefore run out
earlier.
(ecotricity.co.uk)
https://www.ecotricity.co.uk/our-green-
energy/energy-independence/the-end-of-fossil-
fuels