Sample Speech 2: The USFG should ban coal plants.

Hook: Antiquated, unsustainable, and ill-prepared energy grids plague America. Context: On February 10, three severe winter storms caused Texas’ isolated power grid to go dark for millions of people across the state, causing shortages in food, water, and heat. Evidence: According to a Reuters fact check on February 19, “coal, gas and nuclear [energy], lost nearly twice as much power than renewable energy sources, which contributed to just 13% of the power outages”. Transition: This points out to the fact that the world continues to face consequences of global warming. We must not only update our outdated systems in preparation, but further make sustainable systems to combat climate change. Thesis: Thus, the United States Federal Government should move towards banning coal power plants as coal energy the major contributor to pollution, causing losses to our environment, health, and economy.

This combo of hook/context/evidence draws from current events and helps the audience understand the topic.

Topic sentence: My first argument is that air pollution is directly and disproportionally tied to our health and climate change. Argument 1: To begin (transition), air pollution is tied to social welfare. Reasoning (+evidence): James Conca, environmental scientist and contributor to Forbes, in November 2017, writes that the health effects of environmental pollution are the leading cause of death worldwide each year. Evidence: Subsequently, Jay Apt, the co-director of the Carnegie Melon Electricity Industry Center, in 2017 finds that “a substantial abatement of air pollution would lead to a 10 to 15 percent reduction in deaths and illnesses from cardiovascular disease.” Argument 1b: These health issues are more pressing (transition) as the burden of air pollution are disproportional. Reasoning and evidence: The American Lung Association updated in April 2020 that “Poorer people and some racial and ethnic groups are among those who often face higher exposure to pollutants and who may experience greater responses to such pollution.” Argument 2: Secondly (transition), air pollution is a direct contributor to the wellbeing of our planet. Reasoning and evidence: The Union of Concerned Scientists in November 2017 specifies that “coal accounts for roughly one-quarter of all energy-related carbon emissions” which are directly tied to “consequences of global warming [including] sea level rise, flooding, extreme weather, and species loss.” Conclusion: In total (transition), the effects of pollution chip away at the health of the disadvantaged, our nation, and our planet.

The topic sentence introduces the main arguments of the paragraph: air pollution has consequences on health and the climate.

There are 3 ARE structures, but you may notice that in most, the reasoning is in evidence format or implied.

I pointed out the transitions in this paragraph – they’re to flow the thought from one sentence to the next smoothly.

The conclusion effectively summarizes the main issues.

Topic sentence/Argument: My second argument (transition/roadmap signal) is that coal is responsible for the lion’s share of pollution in comparison to other energy sources, causing aggregate losses to the economy. Reasoning + evidence: Conca, the Forbes environmental scientist, emphasizes that “coal kills over ten times more people than any other energy source per kWh,” accounting for 15,000 Americans each year. Evidence: Further, Apt and colleagues in 2016 further model in a research study that switching all coal to natural gas energy would reduce the major causes of fine particulate pollution, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide, by more than 90 and 60 percent respectively. Reasoning: This change would directly lower national annual health costs by 20 to 50 billion, which could be reinvested into alternative and cleaner energy mixes. Conclusion: Air pollution causing major damage on our social welfare and subsequently losses to the economy is uniquely attributable to coal.

This second paragraph has one main ARE, with multiple pieces of evidence and reasoning.

Topic sentence/Argument: My last argument is that a phasing out of coal plants is feasible and already underway. Evidence: States are already beginning to phase out coal, as the Energy News Network in July 2020 reports that Oregon, New York, Washington, and Hawaii, have already banned coal and are moving towards more sustainable energy mixes. Reasoning: By banning coal plants, the $4 trillion annual loss estimated by Conca can be redirected into building cleaner power sources, which Conca estimates could create 3 trillion kWhs per year split amongst hydroelectric, nuclear, wind, solar, and natural gas plants. Evidence: Further, Emily Grubert, Professor of Environmental Engineering at Georgia Tech, in December 2020, has already laid out a framework for a complete phasing out of all fossil fuel plants by 2035, and hypothesizes that not only will the transition lead to a more just outcome, but will further be smoother than expected. Conclusion: In summation, major benefits of redirecting coal production costs into more sustainable sources of energy, state precedence for coal banning, and existing frameworks for the transition urge a federal ban on coal power plants.

This third paragraph similarly follows the other two in terms of structure.

The first piece of evidence says that it’s possible as states are already planning on it.

The reasoning is also evidenced by Conca, who says we can redirect the losses that coal plants accumulate (health, environment) to the renewable sources.

The last piece of evidence is that there already exists federal plans to begin the phase out.

Summary: In conclusion, the retirement of coal plants is a crucial first step in curbing air pollution and its consequences in the fight for environmental justice. Wrap-up: Recent and increasingly frequent blackouts due to extreme weather conditions across America highlight the devastation of pollution on our environment and subsequently our welfare. Rhetorical device and future directions/call to action: To protect our quality of life, nation’s productivity, and world’s health, we must heed the call to action and begin the phasing out of coal plants to stop environmental pollution.

This summary recaps the main issues that we should curb air pollution and the consequences (loss to life, economy) and environmental justice (air pollution).

The wrap-up brings the speech back into the context of the introduction. We started with talking about the blackouts, and so we end with talking about the blackouts.

Rhetorical device and call to action aim to get the audience to do something – in this case, raise awareness about how coal is bad and perhaps call their representatives.

References

‌American Lung Association “Disparities in the Impact of Air Pollution.” Lung.org, 20 April 2020, www.lung.org/clean-air/outdoors/who-is-at-risk/disparities. Accessed 17 Mar. 2021.

Apt, Jay. “The Other Reason to Shift Away from Coal: Air Pollution That Kills Thousands Every Year.” Scientific American, 7 June 2017, www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-other-reason-to-shift-away-from-coal-air-pollution-that-kills-thousands-every-year/. Accessed 17 Mar. 2021.

“Coal Power Impacts.” Union of Concerned Scientists, 2017, www.ucsusa.org/resources/coal-power-impacts#:~:text=Climate%20change%20is%20coal’s%20most,the%20earth%20above%20normal%20limits.. Accessed 17 Mar. 2021.

Conca, J. “Pollution Kills More People than Anything Else.” Forbes. January 2, 2018.

Energywire. “States Are Banning Coal. Will It Change the Electricity Mix?” Energy News Network, Energy News Network, 21 July 2020, energynews.us/2020/07/21/states-are-banning-coal-will-it-change-the-electricity-mix/. Accessed 17 Mar. 2021.

Lueken, R., Klima, K., Griffin, W. M., & Apt, J. (2016). The climate and health effects of a USA switch from coal to gas electricity generation. Energy, 109, 1160-1166.

Machol, Ben, and Sarah Rizk. "Economic value of US fossil fuel electricity health impacts." Environment international 52 (2013): 75-80.