NationStates Jolt Archive

[update]
This is now a proposal, with the following text:
The General Assembly,

AWARE that sufficient hydrogen for cars can not be found in nature,
That hydrogen needs to be made out of other substances,
That this requires energy,
That today most energy originates from fossil fuels,

THEREFORE BELIEVING that use of hydrogen in cars will increase, not decrease pollution,

FURTHERMORE BELIEVING that the UN should not prescribe development of a specific technique,

HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to investigate alternative fuels,

NOTING that as per resolution #39, Alternative Fuels, automobile manufacturers are required "to spend a minimum of 1% of their profits toward alternative fuel research",

BELIEVING this to be apt,

HEREBY REPEALS resolution #18, Hydrogen Powered Cars.

Please support this proposal. (BTW, how do I change the thread title?)
[original post]

Please comment on this draft resolution.

Category: environmental
Resolution name: Repel Resolution #18 Hydrogen Powered Cars
Industry affected: automobile manufacturing

WHEREAS energy is needed to produce hydrogen;
WHEREAS today energy mainly originates from fossil fuels;
WHEREAS using fossil fuels to generate hydrogen is a waste of oil and degenerates the quality of air by pollution from power stations;
WHEREAS resolution #18 deals only with hydrogen, leaving out other alternatives for fossil fuels;
WHEREAS United Nations resolution #39 Alternative Fuels requires automobile manufacturers to spend a minimum of 1% of their profits toward alternative fuel research;
WHEREAS only developing hydrogen powered cars does nothing to further the use of these cars;

The United Nations,

BELIEVING resolution #18 puts an unjust burden on nations not using vehicles, or vehicles which do not use fossil fuels;
BELIEVING the requirement in resolution #39 obsoletes resolution #18;
BELIEVING that the development of hydrogen powered cars does not help the environment;

REPEL resolution #18.

Holy WHEREAS, man!

Love, luck and lollipops,
Sheik Larebil bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

You know, if you just repealed the thing you wouldn't have to repel it.

Or in other words, you need to submit a REPEAL, as opposed to a resolution. (Yes there is a bad spelling joke there but I'm not concerned about that!) As opposed to Sumbit a proposal, you need to go to the UN resolutions throughout history page and look for Resolution #18. Then click on the repeal this resolution link.

The result is that the category will be classified as a repeal.

And now to the repeal argument. Some people don't like the WEREAS method of resolution writing. But I do agree with the repeal argument. Hydrogen is not a fuel ... it is a storage medium at best and might not be the best storage medium at that. The problem is that too many people think hydrogen is a fuel. Hydrogen must be made somehow. The only question is how, and the answer will indicate whether or not there are other methods of storing energy that is superior or not. In any case it is silly for the UN to concentrate on one solution to a general problem.

How about something like this? It hasn't got all the WHEREAS and I think it's clearer.


Because sufficient hydrogen for cars can not be found in nature, hydrogen for large-scale use needs to be made out of other substances, like water. This requires energy, and since today most energy comes from fossile fuels, using hydrogen in cars will actually increase pollution.

The United Nations believe it is necessary to investigate into alternative fuels, including hydrogen, but recognise that hydrogen is not the only and necessarily best solution. As per resolution #39 Alternative Fuels, automobile manufacturers are required "to spend a minimum of 1% of their profits toward alternative fuel research". The UN believe this to be preferable over requiring every nation to develop hydrogen powered cars and therefore declare resolution #18 to be obsolete in favor of #39.

Hereby the United Nations repeal resolution #18 Hydrogen Powered Cars.

How about something like this? It hasn't got all the WHEREAS and I think it's clearer.

That's much better. And I think despite it not following the usual format, very clear, concise, and well-argued. It will have my support.

Former Minister of UN Affairs
Edward Jones

More in the style of the nice verbs with capital letters is this:


The United Nations,

AWARE that because sufficient hydrogen for cars can not be found in nature,
That hydrogen for large-scale use needs to be made out of other substances,
That this requires energy,
That as of today most energy originates from fossile fuels,

BELIEVE that using hydrogen in cars will increase, not decrease pollution,
That the UN should not prescribe development of one single technique,

HOWEVER RECOGNISE that it is necessary to investigate in alternative fuels,

NOTE that as per resolution #39 Alternative Fuels, automobile manufacturers are required "to spend a minimum of 1% of their profits toward alternative fuel research",

BELIEVE this to be apt,

HEREBY REPEAL resolution #18 Hydrogen Powered Cars.

Looking good, you're improving fast :D

There are a few spelling errors in here (fossile for example) so I'd recommend c&p-ing into Word and using the spell checker. Also, at the beginning of each point, the verbs normally have the continuous inflection (ie. RECOGNISING).

That as of today most energy originates from fossile fuels,
This should perhaps read "That today most energy originates from fossil fuels", as I don't think you want to say what you've written above as the meaning is slightly different.

Good stuff though, once this is knocked into shape I'll be happy to support it.

As [NS]New Ixion suggested:


The United Nations,

AWARE that because sufficient hydrogen for cars can not be found in nature,
That hydrogen for large-scale use needs to be made out of other substances,
That this requires energy,
That today most energy originates from fossil fuels,

THEREFORE BELIEVING that use of hydrogen in cars will increase, not decrease pollution,

FURTHERMORE BELIEVING that the UN should not prescribe development of one single technique,

HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to investigate in alternative fuels,

NOTING that as per resolution #39 Alternative Fuels, automobile manufacturers are required "to spend a minimum of 1% of their profits toward alternative fuel research",

BELIEVING this to be apt,

HEREBY REPEAL resolution #18 Hydrogen Powered Cars.

I recommend changing "HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to investigate in alternative fuels" to something like "HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to investigate alternative fuels" or "HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to invest in alternative fuels". That's a very minor caveat, however. Otherwise, this has shaped up well and Altanar will be glad to support it.

I recommend changing "HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to investigate in alternative fuels" to something like "HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to investigate alternative fuels" or "HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to invest in alternative fuels". That's a very minor caveat, however.
You are right there. I changed into "investigate alternative fuels". Also changed single technique to specific technique.

The United Nations,

AWARE that because sufficient hydrogen for cars can not be found in nature,
That hydrogen for large-scale use needs to be made out of other substances,
That this requires energy,
That today most energy originates from fossil fuels,

THEREFORE BELIEVING that use of hydrogen in cars will increase, not decrease pollution,

FURTHERMORE BELIEVING that the UN should not prescribe development of one specific technique,

HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to investigate alternative fuels,

NOTING that as per resolution #39 Alternative Fuels, automobile manufacturers are required "to spend a minimum of 1% of their profits toward alternative fuel research",

BELIEVING this to be apt,

HEREBY REPEAL resolution #18 Hydrogen Powered Cars.

Much better. We really like this. As a matter of proper grammar, however, the final line should begin "HEREBY REPEALS" rather than "HEREBY REPEAL."

The United Nations is a singular term. "The United Nations does this;" "The United Nations says whatever;" "The United Nations repeals the dumb Hydrogen Powered Cars resolution."

Awww...you're removing all the best bits!!

Could we have some more 'Believing' to pep it up a bit? Some extra 'Whereas' just to make it even more unreadable also?

Seriously, glad you've moved away from that horrible writing style.

Excellent. HotRodia has always hated that piece of gator dung masquerading as a resolution. You have my support.

HotRodian UN Representative
Accelerus Dioce

St Jello Biafra;11860207']
The United Nations is a singular term. "The United Nations does this;" "The United Nations says whatever;" "The United Nations repeals the dumb Hydrogen Powered Cars resolution."
In US English maybe, but in British English? The government are, the team are..
When you use a collective noun, it may be followed by either a singular or plural verb, depending on whether you are thinking of the group as a unit, in which case it will be singular, or as a number of individuals, in which case it will be plural[.]
So are/is the United Nations a unit or a number of individuals? I took a look at a random UN resolution (http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/1ce874ab1832a53e852570bb006dfaf6/c758572b78d1cd0085256bcf0077e51a!OpenDocument), and it uses singular forms. The only plural form in the draft I found was the one you mentioned. Please tell me if there are others. New draft:

The General Assembly,

AWARE that because sufficient hydrogen for cars can not be found in nature,
That hydrogen for large-scale use needs to be made out of other substances,
That this requires energy,
That today most energy originates from fossil fuels,

THEREFORE BELIEVING that use of hydrogen in cars will increase, not decrease pollution,

FURTHERMORE BELIEVING that the UN should not prescribe development of one specific technique,

HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to investigate alternative fuels,

NOTING that as per resolution #39 Alternative Fuels, automobile manufacturers are required "to spend a minimum of 1% of their profits toward alternative fuel research",

BELIEVING this to be apt,

HEREBY REPEALS resolution #18 Hydrogen Powered Cars.

Looking back at several of passed resolutions, I find a long precedent of using the singular form. And yes, that was the only plural form in the draft.

Again, I'd like to congratulate you on drafting such a fine repeal so soon after joining up here.

This is now a proposal, with the following text:
The General Assembly,

AWARE that sufficient hydrogen for cars can not be found in nature,
That hydrogen needs to be made out of other substances,
That this requires energy,
That today most energy originates from fossil fuels,

THEREFORE BELIEVING that use of hydrogen in cars will increase, not decrease pollution,

FURTHERMORE BELIEVING that the UN should not prescribe development of a specific technique,

HOWEVER RECOGNISING that it is necessary to investigate alternative fuels,

NOTING that as per resolution #39, Alternative Fuels, automobile manufacturers are required "to spend a minimum of 1% of their profits toward alternative fuel research",

BELIEVING this to be apt,

HEREBY REPEALS resolution #18, Hydrogen Powered Cars.

Please support this proposal.

I've approved it and wish the proposal good luck. One point:
HEREBY REPEALS resolution #18, Hydrogen Powered Cars.
Isn't resolution #18 called "Hydrogen Powered Vehicles"?
Anyway, it's a good proposal and I will vote for it if it reaches quorum.

Given the fact that I have seen far too many repeals pass with far greater mistakes than the simple replacement of "vehicle" with "car," I can find no serious objection to the repeal and were I a delegate I would clearly approve it, but that is not the nature of the democratic process of the Antarctic Oasis, and so I am not and therefore I can't.

Approved.