Jefferys Affirmative case:
Resolved: Developed countries have a moral obligation to
mitigate the effects of climate change.
Framework:
Aff: The Aff side only haves prove why we have a moral
obligation while the Neg have to prove why not and why it actually
us more than it helps us
Contention 1: Climate change is real and on the brink of
becoming unstoppable if no one acts.
GLOBAL WARMING SIGNIFICANTLY THREATENS COASTLINES-Hansen '12
[James; Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies;
Global Warming Is Humanity's Greatest Challenge; What Is Humanity's
Greatest Challenge?; 2012; Gale Group]
Warming is already "in-the-pipeline", delayed only by the great
inertia of the world ocean, and climate is nearing dangerous
tipping points. Elements of a "perfect storm", a global cataclysm,
are assembled. Climate can reach points such that amplifying
feedbacks spur large rapid changes. Arctic sea ice is a current
example. Global warming initiated sea ice melt, exposing darker
ocean that absorbs more sunlight, melting more ice. As a result,
without any additional greenhouse gases, the Arctic soon will be
ice-free in the summer. More ominous tipping points loom. West
Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets are vulnerable to even small
additional warming. These two-mile-thick behemoths respond slowly
at first, but if disintegration gets well underway it will become
unstoppable. Hundreds of millions of people would become refugees.
No stable shoreline would be reestablished in any time frame that
humanity can conceive.
Contention 2 sub-point A: Developed nations are responsible for
climate change, and have the ability to make a difference.
DEVELOPED NATIONS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MORE CARBON DIOXIDE NOW IN
THE ATMOSPHERE THAN ANY OTHER NATION ON EARTH-McKie '12 [Robin;
Science Editor of the Observer; The World Must Curtail Greenhouse
Emissions Even Faster than Previously Thought; Conserving the
Environment; 2012]
"On a per capita basis, Britain is responsible for more of the
carbon dioxide now in the atmosphere than any other nation on Earth
because it has been burning it from the dawn of the Industrial
Revolution. America comes second and Germany third. The crucial
point is that Britain could make a real difference. That decision
would set an example to the rest of the world."
Contention 2 sub-point B: Humans have a moral obligation to
mitigate the effects of climate change because environmental
destruction is inherently immoral.,
E. Donald Elliot, Professor of Environmental Law and Litigation
at Yale Law School, Northern Kentucky University Law Review, Fall
1992, p. 15-16
Now I think that was a somewhat extreme legislation and I am
glad it did not pass in quite that form, but I think that what was
being expressed there is the notion that there are fundamental,
moral, entitlements to a safe environment. And I think the law as
it actually exists carries over many of those kinds of commitments
in a somewhat more moderate form. It is EPA policy, as expressed in
a ruling about benzene, that the goal of environmental protection
ought to be to guarantee everyone that their risks are no greater
than ten to the minus four, and to get as many people as you can
down to a risk of one in a million. So I think there is the notion
that there is a level of risk that is simply intolerable. In other
words, what I am saying on the moral level is that I see not only a
commitment to environmental protection as a resource or economic
matter, but also as a moral matter for the same reasons that we do
not allow people to sell their own kidneys or sell their children.
We do not think it is appropriate that people should be
involuntarily exposed to risk greater than a certain level. That is
what I mean by the moral dimension.
Contention 3: The developed world has a greater ability to adapt
to climate change than poorer nations that have not benefited from
industrialization. Hundreds of millions of Africans face death
despite contributing almost nothing to the problem.
This Day (Nigeria), December 13, 2011
Although Africa emits only two percent of the worlds total
emissions, it would suffer the effects of the depletion of the
ozone layer most, because the continent lacks the resources to
manage such magnitude and intensity of impending devastations. It
is being estimated that Africa's agriculture would be affected by
26 percent resulting to a loss of 26 billion dollars. This would
affect the food security of a continent that is already suffering
bouts of famine and drought. It is also being estimated that 600
million Africans would go hungry and 200 million would be forced
out of their homes due to flooding, and another 400 million would
be exposed to diseases like malaria and dengue fever.
Based on these reasons above, please vote for the affirmative
side.
