Assignment Form

Name of student: _________________________

Student no.: __________________________

Group no.: ____________________________

Course: ENGLE210F
English II: Listening and Speaking
Assignment no.: 1

Date of submission: _________________________

Word count: ________________________________

Overall score: ___________________________

Comments:

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

1
Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. 3

2. ANALYSIS ...........................................................................................................4-8
2.1 Structure of argument .......................................................................................... 4
2.1.1 Expressing their opinions.............................................................................. 4
2.1.2 Facts versus Opinions ................................................................................... 4
2.1.3 Basis for supporting the opinions ................................................................. 4
2.2 Verbal skills .......................................................................................................... 5
2.2.1 Active voice .................................................................................................. 5
2.2.1 Adjectives and adverbs ................................................................................. 5
2.2.2 Repetition ...................................................................................................... 5
2.2.4 Transition ...................................................................................................... 5
2.3 Non-verbal skills .................................................................................................. 6
2.3.1 Intonation, stress and tone............................................................................. 6
2.3.2 Other non-verbal skills.................................................................................. 6
2.4 Persuasion ............................................................................................................ 6
2.4.1 Means of persuasion ..................................................................................... 6
2.4.2 Persuasive languages .................................................................................... 7

3. IMPLICATION FOR EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION ............................... 8

3.2 Suggestion of verbal skills ................................................................................... 8
3.3 Recommendation of non-verbal skills ................................................................. 8
3.4 Improvement of persuasion.................................................................................. 8

4. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................... 9

5. REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 10-11

6. APPENDIX ......................................................................................................12-20
6.1 Transcripts .......................................................................................................... 18
6.2 Symbol used ....................................................................................................... 19
6.3 Table for skills used ........................................................................................... 19

2
1. INTRODUCTION
This report would include the analysis of a debate in which people present the
opinions and arguments in an academic context with some skills for discussion and
analysis. The video selected for analysis is from the TED website
https://www.ted.com/talks/stewart_brand_mark_z_jacobson_debate_does_the_world_
need_nuclear_energy#t-105017, which was released in February 2010, and topic is
‘Does the world need nuclear energy?’. TED debate in the form of short, powerful
talks.

Stewart Brand, who is an environmentalist and futurist and a civil and environmental
engineer—Mark Z. Jacobson present the pros and cons of nuclear energy, as the issue
of the energy crisis is ongoing and getting worse, despite many efforts, even the
environmentalists doubt about is nuclear energy a solution to the problem. The format
of the debate is that six minutes’ speech of each and then exchange their stance to
debate, however, this report would not be analyzed the full debate video. Only two
segments of their speech were selected to analysis in this report only, which are from
1:22 to 7:16 for the part of the speech of Stewart, and from 7:15 to 14:03 for the part
of Mark respectively.

3
2. ANALYSIS
2.1 Structure of argument
An argument composed of a group of statements with one or more premises for
supporting their stance and conclusion (University of Pittsburgh
Communications Services Webteam, n.d.). In this debate, the participants,
Stewart and Mark need to express and commenting on opinions and arguments
and persuading other. Some skills were used and would be analyzed below.
2.1.1 Expressing their opinions
A good argument must have clear stance, and true, valid and strong
premises, in order to convince and strongly support the listener to accept
the conclusion (Fayetteville State University, n.d).
In the speech, Stewart expresses the opinions of agreeing the world need
nuclear energy to replace other energy (conclusion) in way of inductive
reasoning, as he started with generalization statement, which is “nuclear
energy is a type of constant, clean and scalable energy rather than wind is
an instant energy” as assumption, and then gives particular examples, less
greengages production and lesser the utilize of footprint comparing other
renewable energy (premise). In contrast, Mark believes nuclear energy
produce more pollutants and unsafe (assumption) so it is not suitable for
the world (conclusion) in way of inductive reasoning. It included nuclear
weapons proliferation are enhanced and more carbon dioxide are released
as premises.
Stewart and Mark both fulfil the the requirement of good argument and
provide good premises and conclusion, therefore, their stances and
supporting reasons are understood clearly.
2.1.2 Fact VS Opinions
In an argument, facts and opinions are used as the supporting reasons and
evidences, however, there are key differences between fact and opinion
(Lakehead University, n.d.). In the debate, both of each mentioned a lot
of figures and statistics to support their statements besides their thinks or
feels. For instance, in line 33 to 36, Stewart showed pie chart to compare
the waste between nuclear and coal, and in line 108 to 118, Mark
mentioned the data of total CO2e of electricity sources, which implied
higher probability of polluted the environment by using nuclear energy.
They tend to use facts to support their arguments as it is more trustworthy
than opinion, so as to increase the convince of their speech.
2.1.3 Basis for supporting opinions
The argument based on the speakers own preferences or want and

4
 expectations are exhibited in their speech in the way of elaboration and
providing examples. For example, in line 71, Stewart expressed his
preferences to use nuclear rather than using lager scale of land to build
solar farm. And Mark used a lots of basis of expectations to support his
figures, such as "If you do a large scale… other big city” as mentioned in
line 159 to 163, supporting that helps to formulate opinions or facts and
sound more convincing and concrete.
2.2 Verbal skills
Verbal skills can express the meaning of usage of words clearly (Educational
Research Information Center, 1970). It is important for showing the confidence
of the speaker and be clear and be concise of their arguments.
2.2.1 Active voice
In persuasive language, it should be action-oriented and active voice is
more preferable as it create an emphatic and convincing effect in debate.
In the debate, Stewart and Mark both used active voice for presenting
idea in terms of persuasive language, only occurs in few sentences to
present in passive voice. It can convey clarity of their arguments and
easier to understand since it is direct, simple and shorter in structure.
Hence, the audiences would more easy to agree with their point.
2.2.2 Adjectives and adverbs
In the speech of Steward and Mark, some adjectives and adverbs are used
to adverbial modification and heighten the statements. For examples,
“worried”, “wonderful”, “typically” and “theoretically” etc. However,
these words were not used a lots times, and some words were repeated,
which mean they are not very rich in adjectives and adverbs to heighten
the effect of their point.
2.2.3 Repetition
Repetition can indicate hesitation, or it can show some specific words or
stages (Open University of Hong Kong, 2020).
In the presentation of Stewart and Mark, the skills of repetition are
appeared once only, which is said by Mark. The use of this repetition is to
stress, emphasize and be attended. Such as, repeating the words “if you
look at the graph...” (line 112 to 113) is added to emphasis that the graph
is showing the important information and arouse the attention of audience
to attract to listen further.
2.2.4 Transition
Transition helps the audience follow the ideas of speaker, connecting the
main points to each other, and link the relationships created in the

5
 information (Saylor Academy, n.d.). There are two type of transitions:
internal and external.
In the speech, external transition was used more frequent than internal.
For example, in line 167, “the next thing is, what about the footprint...”is
to indicate movement from pollution of nuclear to usage of footprint and
to show degree of emphasis. Moreover, transitions can highlight the
important idea to emphasize the information (Open University of Hong
Kong, 2020), such as “this is the choice…choose wind or nuclear...” is
mentioned, which make the audiences rethinking their stances.
2.3 Non-verbal skills
To expressing information more vivid and emphatic, non-verbal communication
can support or even replace verbal communications in many situation (Phutela,
2015).
2.3.1 Intonation, stress and tone
In term of tone, Mark is more forceful and persuasive, he showed his
confident and is more fluctuant than Stewart. Raising the tone can catch
the attention from the audiences, and can highlight some important words
and phases (Turk, 2002). For example, Mark referred “differences are the
opportunity cost of …wind” (line 135 to 136) with stress on the word
“differences” and “opportunity”, so that emphasize the focus of these two
words. Furthermore, intonation and stress was used in transition part, so
that signaling the order of importance of information of contradictory,
summarize and link the relationship between two sentences, such as
“Likewise” in line 67 and “and now...” in line 196 etc.
2.3.2 Other non-verbal skills
Eye contact is important because of showing respect to the audiences and
creating interest and attracting their focus (Damanhouri, 2018). Stewart
and Mark kept the eye contact to gain the attention with their audiences.
However, absenting facial expression or gestures to convey his message
to the audience among Stewart and Mark is insufficient of emphasize the
meaning and difficult for listener understanding information, causing
their speech less powerful and confidence and reduce the motivation of
speech.
2.4 Persuasion
2.4.1 Means of persuasive
In term of using reason to persuade, Mark used appeal to authority and
believed that nuclear energy would have CO2 emissions and more
pollutants produced as his assumption. The evidence provided is a fact

6
 based on a scientific peer-reviewed studies. In the case, the assumption
could be supported and more convincing.
In term of using emotions to motivate, appeal to social fears and
association were used in speech of Stewart and Mark, so that create a
connection with the audiences that makes them receptive to their
messages (Porter, 2014), lead to increase in persuasiveness.
In speech of Mark, he said mentioned that large scale expansion of
nuclear energy would cause a huge destruction of cities (line 159 to162).
It appeals to the social fear of how disadvantages of using nuclear energy
to replace other energy, and it would cause the irreversible change.
In case of associations, speakers tend to use positive symbol or words to
endorse and convince the audiences, such as “Nuclear energy is a term of
constant, clean, scalable energy” (line 29).
2.4.2 Persuasive languages
In the debate, owned language was to increase the persuasiveness of their
arguments. For instance, “now if we go to the area...” (line 186) as
mentioned to persuade the audiences because of creating a sense of
empathy by using "we".
Moreover, Stewart and Mark both used rhetorical question to engage the
audiences. For instance, “Do we need this (nuclear energy)?” (line 166)
can draw attention and emphasize his stances of disagree using nuclear
energy. This question also introduces another idea to shift to the next
point, such as in line 167 and 181.
As mentioned above, a lots statistics and figures was used to convince
people, and it is also a type of concrete language to persuade audiences.
However, giving too many statistical data is not good way to persuade the
audiences, it is hard to follow and focus a large number of figures,
resulting lack of interest in their speech.

7
3. IMPLICATION FOR EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION
From the above analysis of the speech of Stewart and Mark, the explanation and
elaboration of arguments with some premises were performed well and clear, and
the factual figures and statistics supporting their opinions was illustrated.
However, some skills of expressing their speech are needed to improved so as to
be a convincing, attractive and interesting speech.
3.1 Suggestions of verbal skills
Though the use of verbal skills looks intact, adverbs and adjective were still
needed to improve because of repeating words used as mentioned above,
causing less specific and less concrete. Using more different adjectives and
adverbs can help listeners visualize the images of the speaker (Open
University of Hong Kong, 2020), which can be used to heighten the effect and
support their explanations and descriptions. For instance, Stewart can use
synonyms of “wonderful” to replace in order to the diversify his content of
speech and create the interest to listeners.
3.2 Recommendations of non-verbal skills
By comparing, the tone of Steward is quit flat and low, and it is lesser
intonation and stress than Mark, thus it is limited to enrich his speech.
However, they both did not apply the skills of gesture, body language and
facial expression, leading to bored or disinterested in what they are saying
(Mind Tools Content Team, n.d.). Hence, not matter Stewart and Mark need to
perform more facial express and body language, which indicate the intention
to communicate (Frith, 2009), in order to make their speech much more
interesting to listen and use great deal of intonation and use of the voice to
emphasize and signal the point which is being made.
3.3 Improvement of persuasion
Regarding with logical reasoning and emotions, Steward and Mark persuaded
the audience to change their point and contribute the cogent arguments. In the
speech of Mark, several type of appeal to emotion was applied to motivate the
listeners, however, appeal to emotion plays a part in argument, the main point
should back to logical reasoning. Even if the appeal successfully attracts the
emotions of the audience, using facts or expert opinions as logical reasoning is
important (Open University of Hong Kong, 2020). In term of the persuasive
languages, concrete language, owned language and rhetorical questions was
demonstrated in the speech, which can powerful to persuasion, intrigue to
listening and emphasis on a point, but much data and number was used to
provide precise details and explanation by Mark that reduce the clarity of his
speech, and lessen the interesting. Therefore, replacing a huge number of

8
 figures to appeal to authority appropriately is the way to express his
arguments, achieving the effective speech.

4. CONCLUSION
To conclusion, from the above analysis and implications of the speech of Stewart
and Mark, the structure of arguments mostly fulfils to persuasion by supporting
figures, however, verbal skills, non-verbal skills and such persuasive languages
need to strengthen, reaching to use language effectively in speech.

(1941 words)

9
REFERENCES
Damanhouri, M. (2018). The advantages and disadvantages of body language in
Intercultural communication. Khazar Journal of Humanities and Social
Sciences, 21(1), 68–82. doi: 10.5782/2223-2621.2018.21.1.68

Educational Research Information Center (U.S). (1970). Research in Education: Vol

5, 1-12. U.S. DHEW publication.

Fayetteville State University. (n.d.). What is the good argument. Retrieved from
http://faculty.uncfsu.edu/jyoung/what_is_a_good_argument.htm

Frith, C. (2009, December 12). Role of facial expressions in social interactions.

Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2781887/

Lakehead University. (n.d.). Fact vs Opinion Resource. Retrieved from

https://teachingcommons.lakeheadu.ca/fact-vs-opinion-resource

Mind Tools Content Team, Mind Tools Content Team, & Mind Tools Content Team.
(n.d.). Body Language: Picking Up and Understanding Nonverbal Signals.
Retrieved from https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/Body_Language.htm

Open University of Hong Kong. (2020). English for Effective Communication II:
Listening and Speaking. Hong Kong. The Open University of Hong Kong.

Phutela, D. (2015). The importance of non-verbal communication. IUP Journal of Soft

Skills, 9(4), 43.

Porter, J. (2014, July 7). Why you need emotion to persuade. Retrieved from
https://www.jrmyprtr.com/using-emotion-to-persuade/

Saylor Academy-GitHub. (n.d.). Transition. Retrieved from

https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_business-communication-for-success/s16-
06-transitions.html

Tsui, A. B. (1994). English conversation. Oxford University Press.

Turk, C. (2002). Effective speaking: Communicating in speech. Routledge.

10
University of Pittsburgh Communications Services Webteam. (n.d.). Argument:
Claims, Reasons, Evidence. Retrieved from
https://www.comm.pitt.edu/argument-claims-reasons-evidence

11
6. APPENDIX
6.1 Transcript
1:22-7:16
1 Stewart The saying is that with climate, those who know the most… are
2 Brand the most worried /With nuclear, those who know the most are
3 the least worried /A classic example is James Hansen, a NASA
4 climatologist pushing for 350 pasts per million carbon dioxide in
5 the atmosphere. He came out with a wonderful book recently
6 called “Storms of My Grandchildren” //And ↑Hansen is hard
7 over for nuclear power, ↑as are most climatologist who are
8 engaging this issue seriously
9 <Picture>
10 //This is the design situation, a planet that is facing climate
11 change and is now half urban
12 <Pie chart>
13 //Look at the client base for this /Five out of six of us living in
14 the developing world. We are moving to cities. We are moving
15 ↑up in the world. AND we are educating our kids, having fewer
16 kids, basically good news all around /But we move to cities,
17 toward the bright lights, and one of the things that is there we
18 ↑want, besides jobs, is electricity
19 <Picture>
20 //And if isn’t easily gotten, we’ll go ahead and ↑steal it. This is
21 one of the most desired things by poor people all over the world
22 / in the cities and in the countryside
23 <Figure>
24 //Electricity for cities, at its best, is what’s called BBaseload
25 electricityy. That’s where it is on all the time /And so far there
26 are only three major sources of that /coal and gas, hydro-electric,
27 which in most places is maxed-out and NUCLEAR/
28 I would love to have something in the fourth places here, but in
29 terms of CONSTANT, CLEAN, SCALABLE ENERGY /nuclear
30 and wind and the other renewables aren’t there yet because
31 they’re inconstant
32 /Nuclear is and has been for 40 years.
33 <Pie chart>
34 //Now, from an environmental standpoint, the main thing you
35 wants to look at is what happens to the WASTE from nuclear

12
36 and from coal/ tthe two major sources of electricityy
37 <Figure>
38 //If all of your electricity in your lifetime came from nuclear, the
39 waste from that lifetime of electricity would go in a Coke can –a
40 pretty heavy Coke can, about two pounds. But one day oof coall
41 adds up to one hell of a lot of carbon dioxide in a normal one-
42 gigawatt coal-fired plants
43 //Then what happens to the waste?
44 The nuclear waste typically goes ↓into a dry cask storage out
45 back of the parking lot at the reactor site because most places
46 don’t have underground storage yet. It’s just as well, because it
47 can stay where it is. While the carbon dioxide, VAST
48 QUANTITIES of it, gigatons, goes into the atmosphere where
49 we can’t get it back/ ↑yet// and where it is causing the problems
50 that we’re most concerned about
51 <Figure>
52 /So when you add up the greenhouse gases in the lifetime of
53 these various energy sources, nuclear is down there with wing
54 and hydro, below solar and way below, obviously, all the fossil
55 fuels
56 //Wind is wonderful. I love wind. I love ↑being around these /big
57 wing generators/ But one of the things we’re discovering is that
58 wing, like solar, is an actually relatively DILUTE sources of
59 energy. And so it takes a very large footprint on the land, a very
60 large footprint in terms of materials, 5 to 10 times what you’d
61 use for nuclear/ and typically to get one gigawatt of electricity is
62 on the order of 250 square miles of wing farm/ In places like
63 Denmark and Germany, they’ve maxed out on wing already/
64 They’ve run out of good sites. The power lines are getting
65 overload. And you peak out.
66 <Picture>
67 ↑Likewise, with solar, especially here in California, we’re
68 discovering that the 80 solar farm schemes that are going
69 forward want to basically bulldoze 1,000 square miles of
70 southern California desert
71 /Well, as an environmentalist, we would rather that didn’t
72 happen. ↑It’s okay on frapped-out agricultural land/Solar is
73 wonderful on the rooftops/ But out in the landscape, <Picture>

13
74 one gigawatt is on the order of 50 square miles of bulldozed
75 desert
76 /When you add these things ↑up / Saul Griffith did the numbers
77 and figured out ↑what would it take to get 13 clean terawatts of
78 energy/ from wind, solar and biofuels/ and that area would be
79 roughly the size of the United states, an area he refers to as
80 “Renewistan”
81 //A guy who’s added it up all this very well is ↑David Mackay, a
82 physicist in England, and in his wonderful book, “sustainable
83 Energy”, among other things, he says, {I’m not trying to be pro-
84 nuclear, I’m just pro-arithmetic}
85 //In terms of ↑weapons, THE BEST disarmament tool so far is
86 ↑nuclear energy. We have been taking down the Russian
87 warheads, turning it into electricity. Ten percent of American
88 electricity comes from decommissioned warheads/ We haven’t
88 even started the American stockpile.
90 <Picture>
91 I think of MOST INTERSEST to a TED audience would be the
92 new generation of reactors that are very small/ down around 10
93 to 125 megawatts/ This is one from Toshiba. Here’s one the
94 Russians are already building that floats on a barge. And that
95 would be very interesting in the developing world. ↑Typically,
96 these things are put in the ground/ They’re referred to as nuclear
97 batteries and incredibly safe, weapons proliferation-proof and all
98 the rest of it.
99 The government of the world are going to have to decide that
100 coals need to be made expensive, and these will go ↑ahead.
101 AAndd here’s the ↑future.

7:55-14:03
102 Mark So my ↑premise here is that nuclear energy puts out more
103 Jacobson carbon dioxide, puts out more air pollutants, ↑enhances
104 mortality more and takes ↑longer to put up than real ↑renewable
105 energy systems, namely wind, solar, geothermal power, hydro-
106 tidal wave power/ AND it also enhances nuclear weapons
107 proliferation.
108 <Bar chart>

14
109 So let's start just by looking at the CO2 emissions from the life
110 cycle. CO2e emissions are ↑equivalent emissions of all the
111 greenhouse gases and particles that cause warming and
112 converted to ↑CO2/ And if you look, wind and concentrated
113 solar have the lowest CO2 emissions, if you look at the graph/
114 NNuclearr, there are ↑two bars here. One is a low estimate, and
115 one is a high estimate. The ↑low estimate is the nuclear energy
116 industry estimate of nuclear. The ↑high is the AVERAGE of 103
117 scientific, peer-reviewed studies/ And this is just the CO2 from
118 the ↑life cycle
119 /If we look at the DELAYS, it takes between 10 and 19 years to
120 put up a nuclear power plant from planning to operation. This
121 includes about three and a half to six years for a site permit/ and
122 another two and a half to four years for a construction permit
123 and issue, and then four to nine years for actual construction
124 /And in ↑China, right now, they're putting up five gigawatts of
125 ↑nuclear/ AAndd the average, just for the construction time of
126 these, is 7.1 years on top of any planning times
127 <Bar chart>
128 /↑While you're waiting around for your ↑nuclear, you have to
129 run the regular electric power ↑grid, which is mostly coal in the
130 United States and around the world/ And the chart here shows
131 the DIFFERENCES between the emissions from the regular
132 grid, resulting if you use nuclear, or anything else, versus wind,
133 CSP or photovoltaics/ Wind takes about two to five years on
134 average, same as concentrated solar and photovoltaics. So the
135 DIFFERENCES is the OPPORTUNITY cost of using nuclear
136 versus wind, or something else/ So if you add these two
137 together, ↑alone, you can see a separation that nuclear puts out
138 at least nine to 17 times more CO2 equivalent emissions than
139 wind energy. AAndd this doesn't even account for the footprint
140 on the ground.
141 If you look at the air pollution ↑health effects, this is the number
142 of deaths per year in 2020 just from vehicle exhaust/ Let's say
143 we converted all the vehicles in the United States to battery
144 electric vehicles, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles or flex fuel vehicles
145 run on E85/ ↑Right now in the United States, 50 to 100,000
146 people die per year from air pollution, and vehicles are about

15
147 25,000 of those. In 2020, the number will go down to 15,000
148 due to improvements. And so, on the right, you see gasoline
149 emissions, the death rates of 2020. If you go to corn or cellulosic
150 ethanol, you'd actually increase the death rate slightly. If you go
151 to ↑nuclear, you do get a ↑big reduction, but it's ↑not as much as
152 with wind and concentrated solar
153 /NOW if you consider the fact that nuclear weapons
154 proliferation is associated with ↑nuclear energy proliferation,
155 because we know for example, India and ↑Pakistan developed
156 nuclear weapons secretly by enriching uranium in nuclear
157 energy facilities. North Korea did that to some extent. Iran is
158 doing that right now. And Venezuela would be doing it if they
159 started with their nuclear energy facilities. If you do a llarge
160 scalee expansion of nuclear energy across the world, and
161 you…as a result there was just ↑one nuclear bomb created that
162 was used to destroy a city such as Mumbai or some other big
163 city, megacity, <Bar chart> the additional death rates due to this
164 averaged over ↑30 years and then ↑scaled to the population of
165 the U.S. would be this
166 /So, do we need this?
167 /The next thing is, ↑What about the footprint? Stewart
168 mentioned the footprint/ Actually, the footprint on the ground
169 for WIND is by FAR the SMALLEST of any energy source in
170 the world/ That, because the footprint, as you can see, is just the
171 POLE touching the ground/ And you can power the ↑entire U.S.
172 vehicle fleetwith 73,000 to 145,000 five-megawatt wind
173 turbines. That would take between ↑one and three square
174 kilometers of footprint on the ground/ entirely
175 /The spacing is something else. That's the footprint that is
176 always being confused. People confuse footprint with spacing
177 <Picture>
178 /As you can see from these pictures, the spacing between can be
179 used for multiple purposes including agricultural land, range
180 land or open space/ Over the ↑ocean, it's not even land.
181 /Now if we look at nuclear & with £nuclear£, what do we have?
182 /We have ↑facilities around there. You also have a buffer zone
183 that's 17 square kilometers. And you have the uranium mining
184 that you have to deal with.

16
185 <Figure>
186 NOW if we go to the area, lots is worse than nuclear or ↓wind &
187 for example, cellulosic ethanol, to POWER the entire U.S.
188 vehicle fleet, this is how much land you would need. That's
189 cellulosic, second generation biofuels from prairie grass
190 /Here's CORN ethanol. It's smaller. This is based on ranges from
191 data, but if you look at nuclear, it would be the ↑size of Rhode
192 Island to ↑power the U.S. vehicle fleet
193 / For wind, there's a larger area, but much smaller ↓ footprint/
194 And of course, with ↑wind/ you could put it all over the East
195 Coast, offshore theoretically, or you can split it up
196 /AND NOW, if you go back to looking at ↑geothermal, it's even
197 ↑smaller than ↑both, and solar is slightly larger than the nuclear
198 spacing, but it's still pretty small /And this is to power the entire
199 U.S. vehicle fleet/ To ↑power the ↑entire world with 50 percent
200 wind, you would need about one percent of world land
201 /MATCHING the reliability, base load is actually irrelevant. We
202 want to match the hour-by-hour power supply. You can do that
203 by combining renewables.
204 <Figure>
205 This is from real data in California, looking at ↑wind data and
206 ↑solar data/ AND it considers just ↑using existing hydro to
207 match the hour-by-hour power demand/ Here are the world wind
208 resources/ There's 5 to 10 times more wind available worldwide
209 than we need for all the world
210 <Ranking table>
211 /So then here's the final ranking. And one last slide I just want to
212 show.
213 <Picture>
214 This is the choice/ You can either have WIND or NUCLEAR
215 / If you use WIND, you guarantee ice will LAST/
216 NUCLEAR, the time lag alone will allow the Arctic to melt and
217 other places to melt more/ And we can guarantee a clean, blue
218 sky/ or an UNCERTAIN FUTURE WITH NUCLEAR POWER.

17
 6.2 Symbol used
A (Capital letters) loud talking or emphasis
aa lengthening of vowel or consonant sound
/ short pause (less than 1 second)
// long pause (more than 1 second)
{} researcher’s comments
↑ rising intonation
↓ falling intonation
, Continued utterance
. Ended utterance
? Questioning utterance
(( )) Description of non-verbal elements in the speech
… Restart/ rephrase/ correcting a word
<xxx> Showing figure, picture, statistic and chart etc.
Yes (Underlined) doubtful transcription or indecipherable part of the
conversation
£Yes£ indicates smiley voice, or suppressed laughter
& Latched utterance
(Tsui, 1994)

6.3 Table for skills used

Skills/ elements in a Active voice, adverbs, adjective, verbal skills (owned
debate language, rhetorical question and concrete language,),
nonverbal skills (stress and intonation), repetition,
transition, skills of persuasion (appeal to authority, appeal
to social fear and association), figures used
Active voice All line, instead of line 2, 3, 20, 27, 32, 50, 59, 81, 96, 169,
178, 179, 190, 198, 201
Adverbs 5(recently), 8(seriously), 16(basically), 20(easily), 30(yet),
44(typically), 46(yet), 49(yet), 54(obviously), 58(actually&
relatively), 61(typically), 67(especially), 69(basically),
79(roughly), 95(Typically), 97(incredibly), 105(namely),
129(mostly), 150(actually& slightly), 156(secretly),
168(Actually), 174(entirely), 195(theoretically),
197(slightly), 198(pretty), 201(actually)

18
Adjectives 2(worried), 3(worried), 21(desired), 29(CONSTANT,
CLEAN, SCALABLE ENERGY), 56(wonderful),
73(wonderful), 82(wonderful), 92(small), 100(expensive),
169(SMALLEST), 176(confused), 190(smaller),
193(lager& smaller), 215(LAST), 217(clean&
UNCERTAIN)
Owned language 14, 28, 56, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 186, 211
Rhetorical questions 43, 166, 167, 181
Concrete language 13, 60, 87, 92, 93, 119, 121, 123, 124, 126, 133, 138, 163,
172, 183, 208
Stress 15, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 36, 47,49, 85, 91, 101, 106, 114, 116,
119, 131, 135, 139, 153, 159, 169, 171, 186, 196, 201, 218
Intonation 6, 14, 15, 17, 20, 40, 44, 49, 56, 58, 67, 72, 76, 85, 86, 95,
103, 104, 110 115, 116, 118, 137, 141, 151, 171, 174, 180,
191, 192, 193, 197, 199

Repetition 112, 113

Internal transition 6, 15, 17, 20, 25, 35, 49, 59(And), 67(Likewise), 94(And),
106(AND& also), 125(And), 134, 136(So), 139(And),
148(And so), 151(but), 158(And), 160(and), 163(due to),
171(And), 183(And), 191(but), 193(but), 194(And),
198(but& And)
External transition 10(This is the design situation…), 20(And if isn’t easily…),
34(Now, from an…), 38(If all of your electricity…), 85(In
terms of weapons…), 109(So let's start just…), 112(And if
you look…), 119(If we look at the DELAYS…), 128(While
you're waiting …), 130(And the chart here shows…),
136(So if you add these two…), 141(If you look at the air
pollution…), 142(Let's say we converted…), 153(NOW if
you consider the fact…), 159(If you do a large scale
expansion…), 167(The next thing is…), 170(as you can
see…), 178(As you can see from…), 181(Now if we look at
nuclear…), 186(NOW if we go to the area…), 191(if you
look at nuclear…), 196(if you go back to looking at…),
205(This is from real data…), 207(Here are the world wind
resources), 211(So then here's the final ranking), 215(This is
the choice…)
Appeal to authority 3, 4, 5, 6, 76, 116, 117

19
Appeal to social fears 159, 160, 161, 162
Associations 29, 169, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218
Figure, chart, table, 9, 12, 19, 23, 33, 37, 51, 66, 73, 90, 108, 127, 178, 185, 204,
etc. used 213

20