The group's roundtable discussion topic is to choose a certain technology that can mitigate climate change and discuss why citizen groups should accept , promote or oppose it. Our group has 4 members. I'm the moderator. Dawn and tha are on the supporting side while Jim is on the opposing side.
The specific technology we choose is carbon capture and storage. CO2 capture and storage is a process consisting of seperation of CO2 from industrial and energy-related sources, transport to a storage location and long-term isolation from atmosphere.
The supporting side thinks that citizen groups should accept this technology because of three reasons. First and the most important, this technology is beneficial to the environment. CO2 capture and storage(CCS) is an efficient way to reduce CO2 emission without comprising industrial development. Available evidences suggests that, worldwide, it is likely that there is a technical potentail of at least about 2,000 Gt CO2 of storage capacity in geological formations. Second, this technology does not cost a lot. Many people have the misunderstanding that all those cut-edge environmental protection technologies cost a lot. Actually, this is not the case. CCS requires neither expensive materials nor flue gas compression. Moreover, it does not need a lot of continuous investments. Last, by adopting this technology, firms can show their concerns towards climate change and gain a good reputation from this action.
After supporting side states their points, the opposing side gives his opinion and rebutal. It is true that CCS is useful and will not cost a lot, but why has it not been widely used? Jim says that the supporting side forgets the huge gap between experiment and industrial use. Everyday, there are millions of tons of CO2 emission but the amount people can capture and store is very small. From this point of view, this technology is not good enough to put into practice because it is not effective at all. In addition, the opposing side thinks that this technology won't gain the company a good image. In fact, if the industry wants to show a positive image, they can make many advertisements instead of to do such little things that haven't been proven efficient. In conclusion, the opposing side thinks that this technology is not worthwhile for citizen group to support.
Generally speaking, I think our roundtable discussion is qiute successful. Although we don't have enough time, each of our group members present his or her idea clearly. I think this roundtable discussion is a good practice for our oral English and is quite an experience.
