Con-group Presentation Agenda: Opening Statement: It is our groups assertion that economic forces are best suited for

controlling the escalation of global warming and its related problems. We believe that economic powers have the best assets, innovation potential and power to change or prevent the course of global warming .It is also our groups belief that the control of global warming in the public sector is best controlled through economic incentives rather than reform. We have noted that through the advance of technology industries there exists the most potential for innovation and ideas for prevention of global warming. We have noted that the source of global warming is within the field of economics and is therefore controllable within the industry. And, finally, we have noted that the root of global warming is directly related to growth in population and the consumption of the growing population and it therefore related to the economic relationship that world business has with its customer base.

Argument Module - Technology: Technology is perhaps one of the most promising contenders for fixing the global warming problem. Alternative energy, CO2 absorption and other pro-environmental innovations are not only a potential savior to the planetary ecosystem, but also strong emerging markets: [1]

They are also rapidly innovating in their capacity: [2] According to Pinto, module price has been coming down steadily at a rate of about 20% per year. In 1980, the biggest solar fab provided 1 MW per year of production. It took 20 years to get to a 10-MW fab, and it has taken five years to go to a 100-MW fab. And, it should only be a couple more years to get to gigawatt fabs. This innovation in the alternative energy industry could be what weans the world off CO2 emitting coal and natural gas burning sources. It is also through these innovations that we have a means of capturing CO2 emissions that cause Global Warming. Through such ideas as the HAS storage: [3] Researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT) have discovered a new material capable of absorbing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the smokestacks of coal-fired power plants and other generators of greenhouse gases. According to the scientists, the new substance, which is formally known as hyperbranched aluminosilica (HAS), can be produced in a simple and costeffective chemical process. Moreover, the material can be used repeatedly, and when combined with novel heat management techniques, can absorb large quantities of carbon dioxide from coal-burning facilities.

Or through algae sysnthesis: [4] Studies suggest two pounds of CO2 on average is utilized per each pound of algae grown. This can be as low as one pound per pound, and as high as three pounds of CO2 per pound of algae. Either way, the future of greenhouse gas capture is very promising and being developed thanks to green industry innovations. We can see that even without environmental reform that the global economic industry is already progressively tackling the problems of global warming. Sources: [1] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/Re_investment_2007-2017.jpg [2] http://electronicdesign.com/article/power/is-solar-energy-really-ready-to-rumble-19153 [3] http://thefutureofthings.com/news/1183/co2-absorption-made-easier.html [4] http://www.biorefiningmagazine.com/articles/5453/co2-and-algae-projects

Argument Module Agriculture: Argiculture is the highest source of greenhouse gasses outside of energy production: [1]

And is the highest producer of the secondary greenhouse gasses nitrous oxide and methane. Methane is often considered to be the worst of the gasses, as well: [2] Due to its relatively short life time in the atmosphere (9-15 years) and its global warming potency 20 times more effective than carbon dioxide (CO2) in trapping heat in the atmosphere reducing methane emissions should be an effective means to reduce climate warming on a relatively short timescale. This enormous industry faces a much more severe problem than energy, which is constantly growing towards green sources, because it is so much more essential to basic human living conditions. It is also the most threatened industry by global warming, causing something of a catch 22: [3] But it is new for the agriculture industry to think about what farmers should do in a particular location if weather events step outside what was previous normal say if average temperature goes up two degrees centigrade, if rains are delayed until mid-season, or a drought repeatedly occurs during pollination.

Because it is such an essential industry for humanities basic needs it is very unlikely that it can be reformed completely to reduce its sizable emission contribution. This is also a problem very much tied to global population. Because this industry is too essential to regulated by climate mandates we must ask what can industry do about this? Change in feeding process could account for a 25% or more reduction: [4] By developing equations that balance starch, sugar, cellulose, ash, fat and other elements of feed, a Canada-wide team of scientists has given beef producers the tools to lessen the methane gas their cattle produce by as much as 25 per cent Here is the Canadian Agriculture and Agri-Foods chart on food reductions. *5+ Methods of reducing methane emissions from dairy cows and expected timeline Timeline for development Immediate Mitigation practice for the dairy industry Feeding oils and oilseeds Higher grain diets Using legumes rather than grasses Using corn silage or small grain silage rather than grass silage or grass hay Ionophores Herd management to reduce animal numbers Best management practices that increase milk production per cow 5 years Rumen modifiers (yeast, enzymes, directly fed microbials) Plant extracts (tannins, saponins, oils) Animal selection for increased feed conversion efficiency 10 years Vaccines Strategies that alter rumen microbial populations Expected reduction in methane 5 - 20% 5 - 10% 5 - 15% 5 - 10% 5 - 10% 5 - 20% 5 - 20% 5 - 15% 5 - 20% 10 - 20% 10 - 20% 30 - 60%

These calculations account for the industrys possible reduction strategy, which could easily be encouraged through tax incentives and very considerably reduce greenhouse emission as well as maintain the essential industry and possibly creating more income for diet management consulting.

Sources:

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Greenhouse_Gas_by_Sector.png [2] http://www.climatescience.gov/infosheets/highlight1/default.htm [3] http://www.foodandtechconnect.com/site/2012/01/09/agriculture-and-climate-change-cantechnology-help/ [4] http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090507145752.htm [5] http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1305058576718&lang=eng#e

Argument Module - Population: It is a valid proposition to say that nothing poses a threat to humanitys continued existence than its own population growth. Water access alone is more of an immediate threat to human lives than global warming is: [1] According to Nature (2010), about 80% of the world's population (5.6 billion in 2011) live in areas
with threats to water security. The water security is a shared threat to human and nature and it is pandemic. Human water-management strategies can affect detrimentally to wildlife, such as migrating fish. Regions with intensive agriculture and dense population, as the US and Europe, have high threat to water security. The researcher estimate that during 2010-2015, ca US$800 billion will be required to cover the annual global investment in water infrastructure. This growth also translates directly to gas emission per person as the population increases, with modern cities having: [2]

Top-10 cumulative energy-related CO2emitters between 1850-2008[82]

Country

% of world total

Metric tonnes CO2 per person

United States

28.5

1,132.7

China

9.36

85.4

Russian Federation

7.95

677.2

Germany

6.78

998.9

United Kingdom

5.73

1,127.8

Japan

3.88

367

France

2.73

514.9

India

2.52

26.7

Canada

2.17

789.2

Ukraine

2.13

556.4

This is much less in less developed countries, however. Population has been controlled by governments in the past, but it is not generally acceptable as humane treatment of a populace by most. It is our assertion that it is the role of the economic sector to control this rising gas per person emission rate with its technological controls and by engineering reduction strategies for the general population that are available through all social and economic classes. Tax incentives for greener houses, recycling incentives and repayment from public model alternative energy products all give cause for the public populace to reduce their own carbon emmisions [this section needs better reserarching]

Sources: [1] http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100929/full/news.2010.505.html via wikipedia quote [2] http://cait.wri.org/cait.php

Closing Statement: We can see that the industrial innovations and control are more efficient and accessible that governmental reform, and therefor are not only more acceptable policies for the prevention of global warming, but will also be more likely to efficiently eliminate the problem since they are more familiar with the causes/sources of the emissions responsible. Because the economic sector has more power over their own systems and can institute that change internally the only role that ecological reform needs to perform is that of providing tax incentives and allowing these already strong industries of change to grow.