The demand for energy worldwide is expected to grow over 50 percent by 2030, and most economies are fundamentally fossil-fuel based. International competition for these fossil fuels is growing intense and access to oil especially is often located in places that are geographically hard to reach and geopolitically challenging. The United States federal government needs to articulate a sound and sustainable energy policy that pursues alternative energy resources, so that it has access to available, sustainable, and secure sources that move the country away from its addiction to fossil fuels.

   Affirmative plans would require the use of incentives to promote alternative energy sources, including but not limited to solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, and nuclear power, as well as, biofuels, hydrogen fuels, new technologies, and conservation measures. Negative approaches to the topic would include a number of case specific solvency debates, the problems and impacts of using government incentives, and many different disadvantage scenarios such as foreign policy implications of decreasing oil imports, collapse of economies such as those of the Middle East and Russia, and relations disadvantages, as well as, a good number of disadvantages specific to particular affirmative solutions. Counterplan ground might include states/private industry, as well as, international solutions, and critical argumentation might include capitalism and the environment. Current federal policy tends to support big oil and other fossil fuel companies; ultimately, our very civilization will pay a high price for our lack of oversight and action on the issue of energy.