This is an example case flow page, using a case I ran in 2005 (energy policy year). Note: the negative evidence section is just my suggestion for including tips for possible arguments against a case and is entirely optional.

1AC FlowEdit

I. Definitions: Energy policy, substantially, reduce, dependence

II. Goals/Criteria

A. Long-term energy security

B. Economic security and stability

C. Environmental Stewardship

III. Risks/Harms

1. Devastating oil supply disruptions are more likely than ever

2. High risk of terrorist attacks on oil facilities

3. Dependence on foreign oil causes economic vulnerability and insecurity

4. Gasoline powered vehicles are a leading cause of pollution

IV. Inherency - Free market unable to solve.

V. Plan


1. Require all vehicles converted to hydrogen combusion engines by 2020. Subsidies during transition.

2. Government establish nuclear-powered hydrogen production centers. Privatized in 2020.

3. Require all gas stations to have at least 1 hydrogen fuel pump by 2008.

4. Phase out subsidies after 2020.

Agency - Congress and President

Enforcement - DOE, DOT, etc.

Funding - $1 trillion from cuttting Department of Housing and Urban Development, crop subsidies, pork barrel spending, etc.

VI. Solvency

Reduce US oil consumption by 20%

VII. Advantages

1. Hydrogen is a limitless and renewable energy source, (1st goal met)

2. Increased economic and national security (2nd goal met)

3. Environmentally friendly solution (3rd goal met)

4. Hydrogen safter than gasoline

5. Plan will stimulate economy by keeping money at home.

Negative ArgumentsEdit


  • Nuclear facilities risk terrorist attacks
  • Hydrogen safety
  • Cost of converting to hydrogen
  • Funding disadvantages from cutting DHUD