♪ [Music] ♪ - Hi everyone, welcome to Both Sides of the Story.

I am your host Alan Gionet from CBS 4, thanks for joining us.

This is the first of our four preliminary rounds of our 2021 tournament.

It will feature eight students from eight different high schools, and we have brought back a fan favorite from last season.

We have kept our consolation bracket so you will get a chance to see all of our students debate multiple times this season.

On tonight's show, students from Cherry Creek High School and Eagle Crest High School kick off our new season.

This is a battle of two schools in the Cherry Creek School District.

So let's meet art participants.

First up is Masha Osovskaya, a senior from Cherry Creek High School.

Let's hear her story.

- Hi my name is Masha Osovskaya and I go to Cherry Creek High School and I'm a senior.

Debate just seemed like a really interesting class, I really wanted the opportunity to express what I have to say on a variety of issues and I also wanted to gain public speaking skills because I feel like that is very applicable to basically any field you go into.

The most interesting topics for me are the ones that go beyond the US and you can look at them internationally so for example we had one on West African urbanization or just because I had not been exposed to something like that I learned something new as I was preparing for it.

- Masha is a phenomenal student, a kind compassionate soul who is great at mentoring younger students.

Marsha does an excellent job at staying calm under pressure, and she is able to process multiple arguments.

It really helps her to convey her ideas.

- Outside of school and debate, I dance and play the piano.

I've been doing that for a really long time.

I think for the future I want to go into engineering, specifically bio medical engineering because I find medicine really interesting and biology and I want to make a difference in people's lives by creating new technologies and discovering new things to help make the jobs of doctors easier.

- Awesome.

Next, Lindsay a Junior from Eagle Crest High School.

Let's catch up with Lindsay.

- Life isn't about staying in your comfort zone, realizing that for me allowed me to find so much more happiness in everything I do.

My name is Lindsay [indiscernible] and I go to Eagle Crest High School and I'm currently a junior.

I originally decided to join debate because my mother used to be a debater and has been part of the family ever since.

- Lindsay is a very astute debater.

She listens to other opponents' arguments so carefully and it is through her really strong listening skills that she is able to take apart her opponent's argument really effectively.

- So when I'm not debating, I am a very competitive softball player.

I travel all around the United States for softball, I am a pitcher and it takes up a majority of my time.

I want to go into a career in science.

My sister suffers from a disease called FND, a functional nerve disorder so I really want to become a neurologist and help so many like her.

- And also awesome.

We have two great participants today.

Also joining us today is our special panel of experts who will offer their analysis of the debate today.

They are Dominic Dezzutti host of Colorado Decides, the election debate series produced in conjunction with CBS4 and he is joined today by Marianne Goodland Chief Statehouse Reporter for Colorado Politics.

Not easy judges today.

We are going to have a good one.

It's time to set the ground rules.

Each side will present their case and ask each other questions and have a chance to offer rebuttals as well.

Both students have prepared a pro and a con case for tonight's debate and they will not know which side they defend until we have a coin flip right here in our studio.

When it is finished, we go to our illustrious panel for questions and we find out who they felt offered the best arguments.

So right now, let's get started.

The issue up for debate today is this.

Should the state of Colorado have an electric grid fed by only renewable energy sources by 2050?

Let's have a coin flip right now.

And get ourselves underway, so Masha I'm going to have you make the call on the coin flip, what would you like?

- Heads.

- And heads it is, would you like the affirmative or the negative to get started.

- I will take the affirmative.

- The affirmative.

It means you go first, the floor is yours right now.

For three minutes, go ahead.

- I affirm that the state of Colorado should have an electric grid fed by only renewable energy sources by 2050.

My first content is that renewable energy increases fairness and equity of society.

Renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels, according to Masterson 21, renewable resources were nearly 2/3 cheaper than the cheapest fossil fields.

Additionally, Wheeler 17 says that prices of renewable energy have been dropping over the past decade.

Solar continues getting cheaper every year.

Wind is the cheapest form of energy available to many states including Colorado.

This directly affects Colorado residents.

As in 2019, Roberts finds that the savings net out to 3.3 billion.

That averages out to annual savings of $97 per electricity customer.

This price reduction is critical, as Cook 18 writes that 11% of Colorado residents are energy impoverished.

They pay on average 10 to 15% of their income on energy meaning that switching to renewable energy could reduce the burden for 630,000 Colorado residents.

The positive impacts are tremendous, currently, according to US Department of energy 2018, energy burdens can threaten household ability to pay for energy and force tough choices between paying energy bills and buying food and medicine or other essentials.

Fortunately, affirming this resolution provides solvencies to these issues by decreasing costs.

Moreover, high energy burdens disproportionately affect low income and minority communities.

The US Department of Energy continues, with low income households face an energy burden three times higher than other households.

Furthermore, according to the 2019, minority households experience high energy cost burdens by taking advantage of the low cost renewable energy, Colorado can make energy more affordable and accessible for all of its residents.

My second content global energy creates jobs.

From Wheeler 17, renewable energy is incredibly important when it comes to jobs.

There are more renewable jobs than coal jobs in America.

Nationwide, twice as many Americans work in solar as in coal, and solar is creating jobs at about 12 times the economy.

In total, clean energy employs 62,000 Colorado today, which dwarf the 4600 jobs provided by coal, oil, natural gas generated combined, as well as the roughly 1200 coal mining jobs.

The environmental defense fund 2018 corroborates this.

The clean energy economy remains a big source of jobs with wind and solar jobs outpacing those in coal.

These trends will only be accelerated if Colorado were to alter its power grid.

Additionally, these jobs tend to be higher pay.

[indiscernible] writes in 2019, the fast-growing renewable energy jobs offer higher wages, and the renewable energy industry has become a major US employer.

Renewable jobs can help those affected by the decline of fossil fuel energy as green match 2021, most of the fossil field jobs have been in decline since 2012 when the gas and oil industry reached its peak.

People are looking for new opportunities and along comes renewable energy.

According to [indiscernible] 21, putting people to work in the energy industry will reap more benefits for the US economy than putting people work in any other sector.

Colorado could significantly increase its economic gains through this resolution.

Because renewable energy is in a unique position to increase fairness, equity, and job availability, I urge you to vote affirmative.

- Masha, thank you very much and now, two minutes for questions from Lindsay, Lindsay you may go ahead.

- Alright so you talked about a lot of this topic, it is going to be cheaper, and more resourceful.

However is this only true with 100% full switch to renewable energy?

- Yeah I think we do need to reach that 100% full switch to renewable energy that way we can maximize the decrease cost because as we can see $97 per customer and if we switch to a fully renewable energy source, we would be able to see those benefits.

- So what happens to people who are currently working for those major companies that are in fossil fuels and working with refineries for jobs and rely solely on those jobs for their family?

- Well as I said, renewable energy is growing at 12 times faster than the rest of the economy, and I read that green match card that says that people can be put to work in the renewable industry, that is the industry they should be put in if they want to see these economic gains.

So these people can just be transferred over to that because there are more than enough positions to fill their vacancies.

- So we are talking about a full 100% switch between them and their normal lifestyles and switching them over to new jobs, new places, frontloading, everything, and this is only in Colorado.

So many people will still be in those fossil fuel jobs and so does your impact actually hold, a consideration that is solely Colorado being spoken about?

- Well, I think so because as I said Colorado solar wind energy is the cheapest one of the cheapest energy forms in Colorado, so if anything, is going to be greater than what I see in my impact across the US, and this is happening in 2050, so we do have time to make that transition.

Arch is going to lift up these people from their job and just transfer them over to a totally new field.

This is going to be 30 more years before this happens.

- Thank you and I believe that's all the questions I have.

- Alright Lindsay, that is for questions and cross-examination, but now you get to make your case in the negative as opposed to this concept: should Colorado have an electric grid fed only by renewable energy by the year 2050?

Three minutes, go ahead.

As Coloradans, we value the health and beauty of our state.

We all want to ensure our air quality is good, stewards of our planet.

The best way to do this is with carbon free energy and production.

And we should not narrow our focus exclusively to renewable energy.

While Colorado has many days of sunshine and wind, both solar and wind power are variable energy sources.

They only work when the sun shines and wind blows.

In Colorado, weather is notoriously hard to predict.

While the harmonizing use of the resources provides an excellent source of energy, they are not sufficient to provide Coloradans stable energy 100% of the time.

At best, with current technology, renewable energy can only meet 90% of our average yearly energy needs.

7080% of our hourly energy needs success from meeting our energy goals, we will require extensive investment and substantial technology and improvements in the long term.

Battery storage to ensure that energy availability can flex to meet the hourly energy requirements of a rapidly growing state.

While solar and wind have reduced in price, they are still cost prohibitive.

When longer term storage costs are included.

While renewable energy can help provide a solution for carbon free energy production, it is not without fault, wind is highly variable and the electric grid must cut off wind power on windy low demanding days to avoid blowouts.

Wind Farms are also noisy and dangerous to birds and insects.

Solar farms use extensive amounts of land panels and can insert lead, and cancer-causing cadmium into the environment when it rains.

And panels are toxic to dispose of.

Hydroelectricity from dams cause extensive environmental damages, new technologies like biomass can actually increase the amount of carbon in the air.

Battery storage uses rare elements like lithium and other minerals which are finite.

And the mining of which possess environmental and national security risks other battery technologies like solid-state hydrogen and other technologies are not sufficiently developed for large-scale use.

And may never be.

Meaning our energy needs requires technology innovation, and this innovation could come from renewables like geothermal, but it can also come from advances in nuclear energy, clean hydrogen, or carbon capture while these technologies are not currently economic feasible, they are rapidly advancing and may outplace renewable storage technologies, there is a tremendous risk to creating renewables only monoculture limiting Colorado's future exclusively to renewables is risky and will limit our scientific option since discovery is notoriously unpredictable.

Limiting the scope may limit our ability to meet our goals of being carbon neutral by 2050.

Therefore risking our environments or our health, diversity is a key component of managing risk whether in biology, genetics, or even stock portfolios, the same principle should apply to our energy production and Colorado needs diversity.

As fiduciaries, we need to go to a carbon neutral state and this is best done by diversifying our options not by relying exclusively on renewables, for energy needs by 2050.

- Lindsay thank you very much, that's Lindsay from Eagle Crest High School and now with questions and cross examination for two minutes, here is Masha she is from Cherry Creek High.

Go ahead.

- So you said that we can't currently meet a 100% we can only be like 90% of our demand right now with current technologies, what says we can't innovate new technologies by 2050?

- Nothing is saying we can't, however we cannot limit our focus to solely renewable energies, like I stated, nuclear energy could be a benefactor to going fully carbon free in our environment and helping so many people.

However if we focus on going solely renewable, by 2050, the scope of our scientific discoveries will be limited and will not happen.

- On that point of diversity that you brought up at the end of your case, what if we diversified within renewable resources, like wind and solar energy, do you think that would be enough?

- Like I stated in the beginning, that will not be enough.

We need a backup option no matter what.

By only having 90%, to wind and solar, this is simply not a smart decision for Colorado to make.

- Do you think between wind and solar we will be able to meet our demands, especially with new technology?

- I do not believe we would be able to take 100% of our energy resources without cutting out fossil fuels right now, we would be limiting so much scope in technology and we would be limiting ourselves to better options.

So you also talked about the environmental harms of windmills to birds, and then you brought up nuclear energy.

Would you say that fossil fuels and nuclear energy are so much more harmful than wind and solar?

- I would not.

I would say nuclear energy has a lot of options and capabilities actually being produced to make it so much better, and like I said solar panels are super harmful to the environment.

They release cadmium which does cause cancer and has been proven to cause cancer when it rains.

This is simply not something that we want to pollute.

- Are they more harmful than current fossil fuels though?

- Current fossil fuels are not the issue, I'm saying that we need to produce new options and keep nuclear energy in mind.

And yes, we need to soon eliminate fossil fuels; however, by going 100% nuclear - by going 100% renewable, it is not a smart option never will be.

- With the start of the questions right there, but now Masha you have two minutes for rebuttal go-ahead.

- Okay so I would first like to start out with an overview, remember that this resolution is taking place in 2050.

My opponent brings up this point that 90% of our needs are currently met with current technology.

But remember that we have 30 years to expand that technology so that we can meet hundred percent of Colorado's needs with renewable energy considering we are so far ahead, we are at 90% and that is very much possible.

And experts actually say that in the next couple decades, we'll be able to meet hundred percent of our energy demands with renewable energy.

So with that in mind, this is a very realistic goal to achieve for Colorado.

Then she also talks about how wind is variable, but we can actually store that energy.

Colorado has an abundance of sunshine and abundance of wind as my opponent brings up herself.

We can store the energy for days when we are using less energy and then use that later on and there's technology again being developed.

And with that she brings up the idea that tech innovation is going to be staggered, but if anything, it's actually going to increase because we're going to need new tech to come up with these new technologies to store this power in order to expand it to 100% of meeting our needs.

Additionally, she says that currently there is environmental damage, for example from the CO2 emitted, however that is nothing compared to what fossil fuels are currently doing to our environment and we need to be able to mitigate that with renewable energy.

So all of these birds that are harmed, the CO2 and toxic chemicals, the fossil fuels are so much more dangerous than that.

And then lastly on her point about diversity, we can diversify our energy within renewable energy.

So for example, we can use hydropower, solar power, we could use wind power, all of that works on days that we don't have as much sun, we can switch to another type of power and that allows us to have a reliable system where we can use all of her energy all the time, we can also store it if there's more hydropower for example, we can store that for days when hydropower isn't working as well or if the sun isn't shining, Again Colorado has an abundance of resources that allow us to implement better this resolution and by 2050, we'll have even more technology to better implement this resolution, therefore, I urge you to vote affirmative.

- Masha, thank you very much for wrapping up that portion, and now Lindsay, you have three minutes for your response and closing.

Go ahead.

- All right, so I would like to talk about my opponent's argument.

She talks about thing like storing utilities, however the batteries that we have currently and the batteries that scientists are talking about, still use lithium, which is super harmful to mine and would cause major major impacts on our economy.

No matter what, there are still impacts and what I'm saying is that we cannot go hundred percent.

If we do choose to go hundred percent, I have proven in my case and even scientists say, but it will limit scientific discovery on nuclear energy which is a major point that we need to bring up, nuclear energy is a smart decision for us to go for.

However it is not a renewable energy source based on the fact that it is currently being produced.

We see that nuclear energy will help create fairness and equity, and will be cheaper, costs are declining for it, however once we are fully renewable by 2050, we do not have the scientific discoveries to currently do that.

We are only 90%, that 10% while scientists may say this, we are never 100% sure.

And I personally am not willing to gamble Colorado's future in regards to 100% renewable resources.

We need a backup plan and all of this solar power, and wind, are still harmful and solar panels release cadmium.

This is a major chemical, it causes cancer, and so many people will be impacted by that.

if it rains, it gets into our water system which is not an okay thing to happen.

We see that no matter what, there are still going to be environmental impacts; however, by going 100%, we limit our ability to actually look into further options.

And if we limit our further options, we will not be able to actually win in producing carbon free emissions.

Now, I would like to go down to her bigger source of jobs.

This is simply not fully true.

We see that solar does create jobs, however by 2050, we will not have enough jobs to force everyone from fossil fuels into these jobs and positions.

It is simply not a smart decision to go 100%.

90% by 2050 is our goal right now, and that is what we're working toward, however currently our technologies will not support it, and we need to ensure a stable future for Colorado and we need to ensure a stable future for the children of Colorado.

We need to do this bike only going 90% and working hard on discovering new options and new sources so that we can better our future and better other countries and work towards a better solution.

I urge you to vote for the negation in this case, solely because we need better options than fully renewable resources by 2050.

It is not a smart decision and never will be.

- Lindsay, thank you very much again for this question should the state of Colorado have only an electric grid fed by renewable energy by 2050.

One minute for your closed now, Masha go ahead.

- I would like to start out by addressing some of the points you brought up in my case.

So quickly, on jobs, my opponent says that solar will create enough jobs by 2050, remember that the fossil fuel industry is declining and the solar industry is expanding.

And just know the renewable industry as a whole is expanding, at 12 times the rate of the economy and if anything that is only going to widen.

You're going to have even less jobs in fossil fuels and even more jobs and renewable energy.

So you will be able to transfer those people and they'll be able to have all these higher-paying jobs.

And on fairness and equity, she talks about how it might be cheaper but we could for example go nuclear, nothing is stopping scientists from further developing nuclear energy.

We can still continue to develop that, just Colorado's going to be including renewable energy because that is a much safer alternative and it is also cheaper again.

There is also that thing that the cost of renewable energy is declining, it is going to keep declining because we're going to have more innovation.

Scientists are kind of trying to come up with how to meet a hundred percent of our needs with new technology to reduce the impact and for these reasons I urge you to vote affirmative.

- Masha, Lindsay, thank you very much for a terrific debate.

Now let's go to our panel of experts on both sides of the story.

And get their thoughts on what they saw.

Dominic take it away.

- Masha, Lindsay fantastic debate.

What a wonderful way for us to kick off the season.

You've both done a great job.

But your work is not over, we're going to ask a couple questions before we make a final decision.

Marianne, let's start with your first question for Masha.

- Masha, you talked a lot about fairness and equity, and how renewable energy will be cheaper than fossil fuels.

But I'm not sure that I heard what the argument was for the cheaper side.

You made great points on fairness and equity, but I would like to hear more about that.

- So, there is I have read multiple pieces of evidence, so Masterson 21, the Wheeler 17, that all say Masterson says that two thirds of renewable resources are cheaper than the cheaper fossil fuels, so we can already see that renewable energy is becoming more accessible to citizens and then Roberts 19 specifically links back to how people could save $97 annually on energy so it was as a result would be cheaper for consumers that's why we should implement renewable energy.

- Masha, my follow-up goes to the point of moving jobs around, right now most oil and gas industries in Colorado are in northeastern Colorado.

If we went to peer renewables, a lot of solar is probably going to head to southern Colorado with a lot more space.

Do you think there's going to be a wide and deep impact on Colorado's economy if thousands of people have to move from the northern part of the state to the southern part of the state to be employed?

- I think there could potentially be a negative impact and that's one issue that we would have to address, however we have until 2050, we are not going to take these people one day and move into the other side of the state.

This is a gradual transition and we can teach them the skills they need.

Considering that the renewable energy industry is expanding at 12 times the rate of the rest of the economy, I do think that Colorado is going to benefit more from actually transitioning those people to this field.

- Lindsay, you are not off the hook, with a couple questions for you.

Marianne your question for Lindsay?

- Yes Lindsay hi, you talk a lot about nuclear energy being one of the things that you think Colorado should rely on.

Can you talk about the current state of nuclear energy in Colorado?

- Yes, nuclear energy is currently being researched in Wyoming in particular, and what we are seeing is that scientists are actually being able to discover how to better use nuclear energy and it is currently being able to actually maintain energy stability in towns and cities and it would be a major benefit to Colorado.

We are already looking into nuclear energy and Colorado and I believe that if we solely go to renewable energy, it's not going to be smart and that decision for nuclear energy, it is already being successful and by limiting our scope to renewable energy, our nuclear energy benefits will completely just go away.

We will not have the opportunity to do as much research and focus on that.

- Lindsay, my thought to you was that you brought up a lot of points about the environmental concerns of renewable energy, specifically solar panels.

Should they be used at all, especially considering we are seeing much more of them in neighborhoods if there are so many different cancer-causing risks?

- Well we're seeing that at a small scale, they are a good way to look and search for more sources, however going 100% would not be a smart decision.

A small scale, and what we are currently seeing, is that it's such a small impact currently, that not many people are receiving these impacts.

However if we go 100% we do not even know how bad it could get, we do not want to know.

And that's why we can't go 100%.

- As you can see we have a tough job ahead of us.

Give us a minute or two so we can figure out who won this great debate.

- Our opening debate of the season is a good one, we're going to give our panel a moment to see who they felt won the debate and that'll give me a moment to let you know that this is kicking off a whole new extended season of both sides of the story.

Our 2021 tournament will feature 12 total debates including a full consolation bracket so you will get a chance to see all of our students debate multiple times this fall.

To catch up on any of the episodes, you can go to PBS12.org.

Okay, Dominic, do you have a decision?

- Alan indeed we are ready, again Masha, Lindsay both did a fantastic job with this debate.

A really fantastic way to kick off the 2021 tournament.

But it is our job to pick the winner to move on and Masha, we decided to go with you based on these reasons, one that we felt that your rebuttal refuted your opponents case very effectively, we also felt you provided strong direct answers to questions but you both did a great job.

Masha congratulations we will see you moving on to the winners bracket.

- Masha, thank you very much and congratulations to you, and congratulations to both of you for giving us a wonderful debate tonight.

Both of you ought to be very proud.

Now Lindsay, you're going to want to compete also as well additionally, Masha you will compete with the winner from the debate featuring our next debate, students from Holy Family and Mountain Vista high schools.

And, of course Lindsay don't worry we will see you again in our consolation bracket debates as well.

Well that's all we have time for, for a program tonight.

I want to think they are excellent students for accepting our challenge and participating in our debate.

I also want to thank our steam panel for sharing their thoughts and finally, we want to thank you for tuning in.

It is the support of viewers like you and our sponsors that help to make this show of reality.

You can catch up on past episodes of this program on PBS12.org and you can catch me on CBS for all the latest news and information impacting Colorado as well.

Everybody here at PBS 12, I am Alan Gineot.

Thanks for watching and that is both sides of the story.

♪ [Music] ♪