Global warming speech (600 words) - are we doing enough?

Question

I am doing a english isp speech on global warming - are we doing enough... i need help with this, ive got to tie in 3 work cites sources, im thinking nasa.gov could give me one source with the 5 hottest years ...2005, 1998 etc.. but i dont got anything tie in with...i want to stick with the agw side, thinking it would be alot easier to 'back up' with the time i have... but im thinking of quoting from richard lindzen...in some where..if anyone could help me out be greatly appreciated..

Answer 1

No we need to do this ...............

The Democratic Comprehensive Energy Plan To Lower Gasoline Prices





               This is how we will do it. And this why we will do it.







       This country has so much under used industrial capacity in our Auto Plants, Airplane Plants, Steel Plants and Electronics Plants to make America Energy Independent in 2 to 5 years. We can build enough windmills and solar power and wave generation energy plants to replace 90% of all of the electricity generated by COAL and NATURAL GAS.

For $400 Billion we could build 400,000 windmills and provide electricity for every home in America .



      The Coal and Natural Gas saved by Green Replaceable Elecrrical Generation can now be used to make fuel for cars, trucks, busses, boats and airplanes, and or plastics, chemicals, fertilizers and pharmacuticals.



      We need a comprehensive plan that puts America back to work in endeavors that benefit 99% of America.



                                      Howard Scott Pearlman



                                                   and



                                            Tony Mullen

Answer 2

global warming is not real you guys are retarded

Answer 3

Make the argument tongue-in-cheek, since the so called "experts" insist man must cut back over 50% of his emissions to slow (not prevent) the natural rise in temperature we're currently experiencing.  Argue for the elimination of all electricity and fossil fuels so we can all sweat to death in the heat while sitting around in tee-pees (there would be no jobs or food, so we wouldn't have much else to do).

Answer 4

If I were speaking about g/w, I would have to speak out against some peoples' belief in it.  If my teacher failed me for it, I'd actually feel good for not telling lies to get marks.  There is lots of information on the web as to why it is not happening, and why temperatures are not rising etc.  If you're into it, google 'The Manhattan Project'.

Answer 5

Are we doing enough has to be framed in terms of "What happens if we do too little, or do it too late?"

If there is not a big penalty to waiting to get started, why not wait?

Well, Global warming is not ALL caused by human activity directly. Rising temperature profile means we get less cloud cover and more water vapor in the atmosphere. The global warming we initiate triggers a more powerful process which left to its own will eventually take over and dwarf the global warming we cause.

That is, once the process of reduced cloud cover and increased water vapor become our dominant driver of global warming, we can not stop global warming by merely stopping our emissions. This is called the tipping point for climate change, and we may be at or very close to that tipping point already.

Doing enough? We are doing nothing yet. We continue to increase CO2 atmospheric concentration. Only if we were reducing it could we imagine that we just might avoid passing that tipping point.

Worse, we are still arguing about how to get fuel costs down so that we do not have to cut consumption. This says that we have no political will to do anything at all needed to even slow global warming, let alone stop it. We could be decades away from doing anything significant, and a century away from stabilizing, let alone reducing CO2 levels.

Every year we are seeing greater problems with drought, and we are not even discussing doing sometning about it. Drought is the most powerful driver for increasing CO2 levels. Why? It takes water for a plant to capture and sequester CO2. If we have drought, the plants sit there absorbing no CO2. They will even give off CO2. Yes, we could control CO2 levels by just ensuring all the lands of earth have adequate water, not once every few months or years, but regularly, every day.

We are still sitting on our butts in terms of switching coal fired electrical generation to nuclear. Doing enough? we have not yet thought of it. We need not only replace current electrical use, but allow for home heating and powering vehicles with electricity, and we are doing nothing. ( OK go ahead and build wind power, but we will need 100 times more in the next year than we have installed yet... we are not going to get there with just wind power. At our current rate of deployment it would take a century to even start to cut CO2 emissions.)

If time were not an important consideration, we might pat ourselves on the back.

Answer 6

We all concerned about controlling the Global Food Crisis and global warming. Brazil and USA are one of the leading countries involved in the production of bio fuels. Production of bio fuels is really a very good alternative source of energy because it helps the entire globe control global warming and Reduce the impact of increasing oil prices. However it should be noted that production of bio fuels is at the expense of more people going hungry especially with in poor nations. Bio fuel production has also attracted criticism from environmentalists who say it promotes the clearing of rain forests to grow palm oil for the production of bio fuel. I therefore wonder when Schafer, the head of the U.S. delegation recently said at the UN Food Summit in Rome that "If we focus on bio fuels we are not going to solve the problem." yes Bio fuel production is a positive objective but lets not forget that its causing many other hazards. It may not be the sole contributor towards the Food crisis but lets not forget its one of the "contributors" I therefore think that countries involved in production of Bio fuel need to strike a balance between feeding hungry people and having more alternative cleaner sources of energy. World nation still need to revise their world trade policies which are still contributing to the present Global Food Crisis especially European countries and USA.Thanks to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon who uplifted this issue to world leaders on Tuesday at the UN Food Summit in Rome. Some of the compromises may be hurting but there is no direct solution to the present global food crisis. It is a matter of working together to get the best possible solutions if we are to increase food production to 50% by 2030.