fbpx
이름 or 단체명

정연우

출신 학교

Avon old farms school

SDGs 그룹

[Group 3] 7. 에너지 8. 일자리와 경제 성장 9. 혁신과 인프라

포럼 주제/소주제

THE RE:100 / “Campaign that could change the world”

초록

In recent years, energy has been a significant topic since our main energy source, fossil fuel, will be depleted in 50 years. Thus, using a renewable energy source that can replace fossil fuel is also getting a lot of attention. I wanted to explain a campaign, RE:100, that instigates companies to use renewable energy sources instead of fossil fuel. Although not all the companies that joined this campaign didn’t reach their goal, replacing 100% of their power in renewable energy, more and more companies are striving to reach their goal. As this campaign gets more widespread and more companies try to participate in this campaign, a better future, in which we don’t have to concern about energy sources, will eventually come.

포럼발표
  • 화연
    화연
    2021년 3월 21일 at 12:16 오전

    I am Hwayeon Ko from the German School Prague. Thank you for your presentation! There is a question that I would like to ask you. What other reasons except high costs for an improved work environment stop companies from participating in this RE:100 campaign?

    • aofgod
      정연우
      2021년 3월 24일 at 10:23 오후

      Hello, thank you so much for your comment!
      By participating in the RE:100 campaign, the companies should utilize renewable energy sources. However, unlike other types of energy sources such as fossil fuels, renewable energy sources have low energy efficiency and can’t create as much energy as fossil fuels or other types of sources.

  • 그레이스
    노지명
    2021년 3월 22일 at 11:55 오후

    Thank you for your presentation! I have a quick question to ask. What are some examples or types of renewable energy sources that companies begin to use instead of fossil fuel?

    • aofgod
      정연우
      2021년 3월 24일 at 10:26 오후

      Hello, thank you so much for your comment!
      Solar, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal, and biomass are the types of renewable energy sources that companies using instead of fossil fuel.

  • 민지은
    민지은
    2021년 3월 24일 at 6:02 오전

    Hi, This is Min Jieun from team TAT. I am impressed with the presentation and the paper about ‘the RE:100’ and with the great explanation, I understood it well. It is an honor for me to have a take with you. I have a few questions about the topic.

    1. Is there a disadvantage or difficulty when using renewable energy sources?

    2. In detail what exactly do the companies take action when they join the RE:100 campaign? Especially what did Google and Apple do?

    3. Can you give me some examples of renewable energy sources?

    Thank you:)

  • 나현
    권나현
    2021년 3월 25일 at 2:17 오후

    안녕하세요 정연우님
    저희는 [Group1]의 ‘늘품’입니다.
    발표영상과 보고서 모두 너무 감명깊게 들었습니다.기업들이 화석 연료 대신 재생 가능 에너지 원을 사용하도록 유도하는 캠페인 RE : 100을 자세히 알수있었던 유익한 시간이였습니다.
    다름이아니라 발표내용과 관련해 여쭈어보고 싶은 내용이 있습니다.

    1.태양광을 설치하기위해서 나무를 자르는 사례가 있는데 이거 대해서는 어떡해 생각하시나요?

    2.지리적인 문제로 재생에너지 조달이 어려운나라에 있는 기업은 어떤 방법이 있을까요?

    여러분들의 소중한 의견 부탁드립니다. 이상 저희는 [GROUP 1]의 ‘늘품’이였습니다.

    Hello, Yeonwoo Jeong.
    We are [Group1]’s ‘늘품’.
    We were so impressed with both the presentation video and the report.It was a useful time to learn more about campaign RE: 100 that encouraged companies to use renewable energy sources instead of fossil fuels.
    There is something I would like to ask you about the presentation.

    1. There’s a case of cutting down trees to install solar. What do you think about this?

    2. What are some ways for companies in countries where renewable energy is difficult to procure due to geographical problems?

    Please give us your opinions. This was “늘품” by [GROUP 1].Thank you .

  • kjp23
    박크리스틴
    2021년 3월 25일 at 3:17 오후

    Hello 연우, I am Kristin from Team STICKs. Thank you for your straightforward presentation!

    First of all, your presentation made it clear that RE:100 was a creative campaign project that made efforts to replace power used by various companies with renewable energies entirely. Afterward, you have highlighted how fossil fuels have been proven to be overused and that it is a PROBLEM that has to be SOLVED (which, in this case, is quite evidently the camping project RE:100). You effectively build the credibility of RE:100 by explaining how famous companies have joined the campaign.

    However, after you state reasons for the campaign project’s coming, you assert regarding the benefits for companies who would potentially join RE:100, and then predict expectations for the future project, listeners like myself are confused. There is impact, maybe even too much, with no backing up of how it could be justified. If a debate were conducted based on no evidence, then your presentation would be excellent. There is a plan, but with no detail or steps.

    Your topic’s connection to SDG number seven was pretty self-explanatory, so I will not concentrate on the problem’s roots that correlate with what the SDGs are trying to resolve and move onto your presentation. Why is it that listeners, by the end of the presentation, feel like the companies joining this are joining the campaigning project to label themselves or somehow create a perception of their companies as environmentally friendly? After all, you say that 1) RE:100 is a solution to the problem of fossil fuels, 2) support your claim with the many companies that have joined, but then 3) say that little to no companies are achieving anything, and conclude by saying that 4) these failing cases can be a hope for the near future… allowing other companies to view this and join? Does this mean that other companies aspiring to join this campaigning project join just because they want to be SEEN as eco-friendly without DOING anything?

    Something parallel to what is recognized of the RE:100 is the Paris Agreement. In the Paris Agreement, there was a goal to create a climate change of lowering temperature changed to become below 1.5 degrees Celsius at the end of the century. Out of around 185 parties that have pledged to the Paris Agreement, an overwhelming majority, three-fourths were either entirely or almost wholly insufficient, proven by researchers who have predicted that by the end of the century, temperature change would rise to 3-4 degrees Celsius. The point is that people NEED more robust policies and regulations to apply technology to reduce emissions, requiring more effort from governments and businesses that would effectively apply its authority, which means that RE:100 could go in an opposite direction of what was desired. The campaign works with many companies, but most companies seem not to be putting in that much effort, suggesting a potential to backfire and make other companies not want to do anything, let alone join the campaign. If there is a goal, something should be done. If it cannot be fully accomplished, it should at least be attempted. Correct me if I am wrong, but both the Paris Agreement and RE:100 seem to have hopes with NOTHING HAPPENING.

    Please take no offense; your presentation was fairly articulate and exciting.

    Anticipating a constructive debate 🙂

  • 신수빈
    신수빈
    2021년 3월 28일 at 1:57 오전

    Hello 정연우,

    I am Suebyn Sin of Group 5. I enjoyed your presentation and essay! I too wrote about the effects companies have on the environment. This was the first time I’d heard of the RE:100 campaign, thank you for enlightening me on the topic. However, I have a few questions regarding your presentation and essay. Firstly, what were the specific types of renewable-energy that this campaign promoted? Secondly, petroleum plays a major part in our economy today and switching to renewable energy completely will most indefinitely cause economic chaos worldwide. Of course, switching to renewable energy is extremely important as fossil fuels are extremely detrimental to our earth and climate, but it will be extremely difficult to do so. What is your opinion on this matter?

    I hope to hear from you soon! I would love to hear your opinions on my questions.

  • 나나미
    나카이 나나미
    2021년 3월 28일 at 9:59 오후

    Hello. We are keonguk student council team 2.
    Thank you for your wonderful presentation.
    What I wonder are two below.
    First, when not every company took part in RE: 100 as you mentioned, how do you think you can solve the problem? Second, what kinds of companies do you want to be actively and voluntarily participate in RE: 100?
    Thank you.

  • 윤별
    윤서하
    2021년 3월 28일 at 11:58 오후

    Hello, I am Seo Ha Yoon in Group 5 and I’d enjoyed watching your presentation and reading your paper. And I would like to ask few questions about your opinion.
    1. How can companies implement campaigns in countries where such things are not possible due to geographical and economic problems?

    2. If there are companies that refuse to follow these campaigns, how would you engage them?

글쓰기