Washington, DC Sustainability / Energy Calendar

Add these events to your calendar, receive email and SMS text reminders:



Write to Info at Global Climate Change Coalition dot com about publicizing your events.

Monday, February 2, 2009

ARE MAJOR REDUCTIONS IN CARBON EMISSIONS WORTH THE MONEY?

In an "Oxford Style Debate" that was not heard in the US because it was aired during the first hour of the NFL Superbowl, Intelligence2 held a debate on January 13 in New York City on the motion "Major reductions in carbon emissions are not worth the money." Intelligence2 is an initiative of the Rosenkranz Foundation, and is being distributed on the Internet, in the US by NPR, and in the UK on BBC World News.

This debate was moderated by correspondent John Donvan. Arguing for the motion was author and attorney Peter Huber, author Bjorn Lomborg, and author and professor Philip Stott. Arguing against the motion was attorney and consultant L. Hunter Lovins, author Oliver Tickell, and advertising executive Adam Werbach.

Though at the end of the debate opposition only narrowly led support for reduced carbon emissions--49% to 48%--opposition was the clear winner, having increased in support from 16% at the beginning. Support for reduced emissions increased only slightly from 42% at the beginning.

Please:
- Send us your Events;
- Subscribe to automatically receive these notices;
- Visit Global Climate Change Coalition.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

It is hard to know how many people changed their minds - so determing the 'winner'. There was a strong partisan group in the audience supporting the motion, cheering on speakers etc, which makes the idea that only 16 percent started off supporting it incredible. I think an group of politically motivated supporters packed the audience and registered at the start that they were against, or neutral, so as to change their minds later and swing the vote their way. This was even recognized by Peter Huber, who spoke for the motion, on Sciam.