Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
StrungCheese

Whats Really Going On !

Recommended Posts

So forgive me if this has already been addressed but I feel like most of the current topic conversation tends to focus on what "types" of alternative energy should be presented or legalized i.e. legalize hemp production thus legalizing the use of hemp based energy, and etc. But I feel like the heart of the topic would or at least should revolve around what types of incentives the government provides to encourage the use of alternative energy and also its production. I feel under this interpretation a case that extended or made the current incentives permanent would be more topical than geothermal energy production or a case that gave credits to produce wind energy. I could be wrong but I would love to hear what you all think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel like the heart of the topic would or at least should revolve around what types of incentives the government provides to encourage the use of alternative energy and also its production.

 

Bingo! The best cases next year probably won't focus on individual technologies. The winners will be unique incentives policies that are more difficult to link to disads and PIC out of.

 

I've already posted the Montana Environmental Quality Council's list of alternative energy incentives, but here it is again anyway:

 

  • Tax Incentives: Production Tax Credits, Investment Tax Credits, Sales Tax Reductions, Property Tax Reductions, Accelerated Depreciation
  • Direct Cash Incentives: Production Incentives, Investment Incentives (Grants)
  • Low-Cost Capital Programs: Government-Subsidized Loans, Project Loan Guarantees, Project Aggregation
  • Distributed Resource Policies: Standard Contracts for Small Distributed Projects, Net Metering, Line Extension Policies
  • Customer Choice Opportunities: Utility-Supplied Renewable Energy Pricing Options, Alternative Energy Marketing from Retail Electricity Sellers, Aggregated Consumer Purchases, Fuel Source Disclosure Requirement and Certification
  • General Environmental Regulations: Externality Valuation in Resource Planning, Externality Valuation in Environmental Dispatch, Emission Taxes, Emission Caps/Marketable Permits
  • Other Policies: Government Purchases, Site Prospecting, Review, and Permitting, Renewable Portfolio Standard, Auctioned Contracts, Performance-Based Rate-Making

 

That's almost 30 different kinds of incentives. Pick one that sounds interesting, find an article or two, and start a new thread to tell us about it. ;)

 

I feel under this interpretation a case that extended or made the current incentives permanent would be more topical than geothermal energy production or a case that gave credits to produce wind energy. I could be wrong but I would love to hear what you all think.

 

Topicality isn't the problem. So long as the aff gives an incentive for the development of alternative energy, they shouldn't have any T problems.

 

However, tech-specific cases do have other serious strategic problems

a) They can't possibly solve for oil dependency, global warming, or the other giant advantages the aff will want to claim. No one technology will be sufficient.

B) Disads to picking winners (like energy trade-off or biz-con) will be very strong next year.

c) Every energy technology has its specific disadvantages. Ethanol causes food prices to rise, solar panels only work in the daytime, and nuclear power creates nuclear waste.

d) Since there are so many different disads on the topic, and since there are so many solvent technologies, "solvency counterplans" that either pick different technologies or are tech-neutral will find themselves unusually competitive and solvent.

e) By the end of the year, everyone will have a good neg file for the top 30 favorite technologies, and that's about all the good ones there are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bingo! The best cases next year probably won't focus on individual technologies. The winners will be unique incentives policies that are more difficult to link to disads and PIC out of.
Dude. I totally hate you now... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emission taxes would probably garner a pretty sweet mixed-economy (which is part of what has treated us so well over the last three quarter-centuries) advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it would be really abusive but what if u had the plan be to verbally encourage the companies to explore alternative energy solutions with the incentive to do so being self-fulfillment? They wouldn't be able to really garner any link ground and you might be able to gain a link into a critical advantage or something that says solvency has to be achieved in this way to allow for altruistic solvency of sorts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doing a plan that doesn't solve isn't "abusive." It just doesn't solve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...