Download Citizen Climate Lesson Plans Grades 9–12

Citizen Climate Lesson Plans
Grades 9–12
Dear Educator:
These lesson plans will help you provide your students with knowledge of the basic concepts of climate change policy and
negotiation. It will allow your students to understand media coverage of climate policy negotiation, in both national and
international arenas. It will also help your students develop skills needed to make their opinions heard.
These lesson plans recognize that many opinions exist about approaches society should take in response to climate
change. This curriculum avoids “advocating” certain positions. Instead, it strives to provide accurate information from
well-respected sources. It presents differing opinions on issues and guides students to form their own conclusions.
The lesson plans are linked to National Standards. Most can be completed in one class period. Each lesson plan provides
all the information you will need to conduct the lesson. The lessons are designed for high school classes, but could be
adopted for use with other age levels. The topics include:
• Carbon cycle: What is the global carbon “budget”? What are “sinks” and what are “sources” What happens when
sinks can’t keep up with rising emissions?
• Target Atmospheric Carbon Levels: Where should society aim? What are the views of different players? What
does the best science say?
• Climate Technologies: What role should technology play in the effort to stabilize climate? Can we meet climate
goals without new technologies?
• Wedge Game: Explore the now ubiquitous concept of the “stabilization wedges” through a game developed by Dr.
Roberta Hotinski as part of the Carbon Mitigation Initiative. Our lesson provides updated information and additional
ideas for discussion.
• Cap and Trade: How does it work? Why is it a favorite policy choice for climate negotiators?
• Carbon Tax: How does it work? What are its advantages and disadvantages when compared with cap and trade?
• Equity in International Negotiations: How do the individual situations of countries influence their ideas of equity?
How do concerns of developed countries differ from those of developing countries?
• Crafting a position statement: What makes a powerful letter? How does one craft a letter? Who are key decision
makers to whom letters can be addressed?
These lesson plans include an appendix on the December 2009 international climate negotiations in Copenhagen. There
are opportunities for students to contribute their voices to the 2009 U.S. youth delegation and to follow multi-media
blogs from youth delegates.
Each lesson can stand on its own. Together, however, they will give your students enough knowledge to understand
media coverage and to craft a well-informed position statement.
If your students need a better background understanding of the basic concepts of global warming, consider using the Will
Steger Foundation’s original six lesson plans,“Global Warming 101.” These standards-linked lesson plans were reviewed
by the Union of Concerned Scientists and by National Geographic Society. They are available for free download at
www.willstegerfoundation.org.
Thank you for your work to educate your students,
Elizabeth K. Andre
Assistant Professor, Northland College
Curriculum Writer for the Will Steger Foundation
Citizen Climate Table of Contents
National Content Standards for Citizen Climate
Lesson Organizer
Lesson One: The Carbon Cycle
Pages 1–3
Pages 5–6
Pages 7–12
Students will be able to explain the global carbon budget, sinks, and sources.
Students will understand what happens when sinks can’t keep up with rising emissions.
Lesson Two: Climate Targets
Pages 13–21
Students will be able to understand different views regarding where society should aim for target global
atmospheric carbon emissions and what the best science says.
Lesson Three: New Technologies
Pages 23–31
Students will understand the various roles technology can/should play in the effort to stabilize climate.
Students will determine whether we can meet climate goals without new technologies.
Lesson Four: Stabilizing Emissions
Pages 33–35
Students will explore the now ubiquitous concept of “stabilization wedges” through a game developed
by Dr. Roberta Hotinski as part of the Carbon Mitigation Initiative. Our lesson provides updated information and additional ideas for discussion.
Lesson Five: Carbon Cap & Trade
Pages 37–42
Students will understand the basics of a cap and trade system. Students will be able to explain and
discuss why it is a favorite policy choice for climate negotiators.
Lesson Six: Carbon Tax
Pages 43–51
Students will understand the basics of a carbon tax system. Students will be able to explain and discuss
its advantages and disadvantages when compared with cap and trade.
Lesson Seven: International Climate Negotiations
Pages 53–64
Students will explore how the individual situations of countries influence their ideas of equity.
Students will be able to explain how the concerns of developed countries differ from those of
developing countries.
Lesson Eight: Writing a Position Statement on Climate Change
Pages 65–67
Students will learn what makes a powerful letter, how to craft one, and who are the key decision
makers to whom letters can be addressed.
Appendix: Expedition Copenhagen
Wedge Game Instructions
Pages 71–72
Pages 73–88
Acknowledgements
June 2009
The Will Steger Foundation (WSF) is dedicated to creating programs that foster
international leadership and cooperation through environmental education
and policy.
Acknowledgements
This resource benefited tremendously from the insights and expertise of external
reviewers. These experts provided feedback and guidance at critical stages in the
development of these lesson plans. While they have screened the documents for
accuracy, neither they nor their organizations necessarily endorse it.
External reviewers:
National Education Association
Lisa Herschberger, scientist, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Kristen Iverson Poppleton, WSF Consultant IDEA Cooperative Youth Program
Manager, Science Museum of Minnesota
Kristin Daniels, WSF Education Consultant and Educator, Hill-Murray School
Marv Mikesh, retired educator and former Education Director for the
International Arctic Project
Teaching cap and trade as musical chairs was adapted with permission from
materials developed by Dr. Holmes Hummel, Congressional Science Fellow and
instructor for the Energy Resources Group at University of California—Berkeley.
Concepts of equity in international negotiations were adapted with permission
from materials developed by Madeline Heyward at the University of Melbourne
in Victoria, Australia.
Dr. Martin A. Apple, president of the Council of Scientific Society Presidents,
provided valuable insights for the development of the lesson on new
technologies and geoengineering.
Curriculum written by Elizabeth K. Andre, Assistant Professor, Northland College
and WSF Education consultant
Graphic design by Michael Diener, http://www.michaeldiener.net.
For additional information on Will Steger Foundation, please visit
www.willstegerfoundation.org.
This resource is intended for educational and informational purposes. References
to specific products, services, companies and policy makers have been included
solely to advance these purposes and do not constitute an endorsement,
sponsorship or recommendation by the Will Steger Foundation.
Unless otherwise credited, all photos © Will Steger Foundation
©2009 Will Steger Foundation
2801 21st Avenue South, Suite 127
Minneapolis, MN 55407
Lesson 5
Lesson 6
•
•
•
•
•
Lesson 8
Lesson 4
•
Lesson 7
Lesson 3
(Please note: This is not a complete listing of all National Education Standards)
Lesson 2
Citizen Climate Curriculum
Lesson 1
National Content Standards for Citizen Climate Lesson Plans
Science
UCP: Unifying Concepts and Processes
Systems, order and organization (K–12)
Evidence, models and explanation (K–12)
Change, constancy and measurement (K–12)
Evolution and equilibrium (K–12)
B: Physical Science
Motions and forces (5–8)
Transfer of energy (5–8)
Chemical reactions (9–12)
Interactions of energy and matter (9–12)
C: Life Science
Structure and function of living systems (5–8)
Regulation and behavior (5–8)
Populations and ecosystems (5–8)
Diversity and adaptations of organisms (5–8)
Biological evolution (9–12)
Interdependence of organisms (9–12)
Matter, energy and the organization of living things (9–12)
Behavior of organisms (9–12)
D: Earth and Space Science
Structure of the Earth System (5–8)
Energy in the Earth System (9–12)
Geochemical cycles (9–12)
Earth’s history (9–12)
F: Science in Personal and Social Perspectives
Populations, resources and environments (5–8)
Risks and benefits (5–8)
Population growth (9–12)
Personal and community health (9–12)
Natural resources (9–12)
•
Environmental quality (9–12)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Natural and human-induced hazards (9–12)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Science and technology in local, national and global challenges (9–12)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Science and technology in society (5–8)
1
Citizen Climate Lesson Plans (cont.)
(Please note: This is not a complete listing of all National Education Standards)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Environmental Education Guidelines for Learning (K–12)
Strand 1: Questioning, Analysis and Interpretation Skills
B. Designing investigations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
C. Collecting information
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
E. Organizing information
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
F. Working with models and simulations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
G. Drawing conclusions and developing explanations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
B. Culture
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
C. Political and economic systems
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
D. Global connections
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
E. Change and conflict
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A. Human/Environment Interactions
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
C. Resources
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
D. Technology
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
E. Environmental Issues
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Strand 2: Knowledge of Environmental Processes and Systems
2.1 Earth as a physical system
A. Processes that shape the Earth
B. Changes in matter
C. Energy
2.2 The Living Environment
A. Organisms, populations, and communities
C. Systems and Connections
2.3 Humans and their Societies
2.4 Environment and Society
Strand 3: Skills for Understanding and Addressing Environmental Issues
3.1 Skills for Analyzing and Investigating Environmental Issues
A. Identifying and investigating issues
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
B. Sorting the consequences of issues
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
C. Identifying and evaluating alternative solutions and courses of action
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
D. Working with flexibility, creativity and openness
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A. Forming and evaluating personal views
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
B. Evaluating the need for citizen action
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
C. Planning and taking action
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
D. Evaluating the results of actions
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
3.2 Decision Making and Citizenship Skills
Strand 4: Personal and Civic Responsibility
2
B. Recognizing citizens’ rights and responsibilities
•
C. Recognizing efficacy
•
D. Accepting personal responsibility
•
Citizen Climate Lesson Plans (cont.)
(Please note: This is not a complete listing of all National Education Standards)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Geography
The World in Spatial Terms
Standard 1: How to use maps and other geographic representations, tools
and technologies
Standard 3: Analyze spatial organization of people, places and environments
Places and Regions
Standard 4: The physical and human characteristics of places
Physical Systems
Standard 7: The physical processes that shape the patterns of Earth’s surface
Standard 8: The characteristics and spatial distribution of ecosystems
Environment and Society
Standard 11: The patterns and networks of economic interdependence on
Earth’s surface
Standard 14: How human actions modify the physical environment
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Standard 15: How physical systems affect human systems
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Standard 16: The meaning, use, distribution and importance of resources
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Strand 3: People, places and environments
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Strand 5: Individuals, groups and institutions
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Strand 6: Power, authority and governance
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Strand 7: Production, distribution and consumption
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Strand 8: Science, technology and society
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Strand 9: Global connections
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Standard 18: To apply geography to interpret the present and plan for
the future
Social Studies
Strand 1: Culture
Strand 10: Civic Ideals and practices
Language Arts (K–12)
Standard 5: Students employ a wide range of strategies as they write and use
different writing process elements appropriately to communicate with different audiences for a variety of purposes.
•
Standard 6: Students apply knowledge of language structure, language
conventions . . . to create, critique, and discuss print and non–print texts.
•
Standard 7: Students conduct research on issues and interests by generating
ideas and questions, and by posing problems. They gather, evaluate and
synthesize data from a variety of sources (e.g., print and non–print texts,
artifacts, people) to communicate their discoveries in ways that suit their
purpose and audience.
•
Standard 11: Students participate as knowledgeable, reflective, creative, and
critical members of a variety of literacy communities.
•
Arts Education
Visual Arts
Standard 2: Acting by assuming roles and interacting in improvisations
Standard 5: Researching by finding information to support classroom
dramatizations
3
Citizen Climate Lesson Organizer
Lesson/Objectives
National Standards
Lesson Materials
THE CARBON CYCLE
45 minutes
• Explore aspects of the global carbon cycle that have
implications for climate policy decisions
• Present knowledge using a creative medium
• Reflect on what can be done to protect and enhance
natural carbon sinks
Science 6.6
Social Studies 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Geography 14, 15, 16
Environmental Education 1, 2.3,
2.4, 3
Reading Passage
Handout
Science 6.6
Social Studies 3, 5, 7, 8, 9
Geography 11, 14, 16
Environmental Education 1, 2.3,
2.4, 3
Handouts 1–5
Climate Targets
45 minutes
• Consider decisions about climate targets as an exercise in
risk management
• Weigh the potential risks and costs of each target
• Decide individually what target each student thinks society
should adopt
NEW TECHNOLOGIES
45 minutes
• Explore differing opinions about the role new technologies
should play in efforts to slow climate change
• Weigh potential strengths and weaknesses of different
proposals
• Make recommendations about which roles for technology
climate policy should encourage
Science 6.6
Social Studies 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Geography 11, 14, 15, 16
Environmental Education 1, 2.3,
2.4, 3
1 copy of Instructions and Wedge
Table per student (print single-sided
to allow use of game board pieces!)
Stabilizing Emissions
45 minutes
• Research different technologies available today that are
capable of significantly reducing carbon emissions
• Make decisions about which strategies to include in a
portfolio of strategies aimed at stabilizing emissions
• Reflect on the scale of effort needed if society were
to become serious about stabilizing atmospheric
concentrations of carbon
carbon CAP AND TRADE
45 minutes
• Create a model of a cap and trade market for
greenhouse gas emissions
• Engage in trading of carbon permits with the goal of
reducing emissions in the most cost-effective ways
• Reflect on strengths and weaknesses of the
cap-and-trade model
Handouts
Science 6.6
Social Studies 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Geography 11, 14, 15, 16
Environmental Education 1, 2.3,
2.4, 3
Science 6.6
Social Studies 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Geography 11, 14, 15, 16
Environmental Education 1, 2.3,
2.4, 3
• 1 Wedge worksheet and 1 game
board with multi-colored wedge
pieces per group, plus scissors for
cutting out game pieces and glue
sticks or tape to secure pieces to
game board
• Optional - overhead
transparencies, posters, or other
materials for group presentations
Game Handouts
CARBON TAX
45 minutes
• Introduce the basics of a carbon tax
• Students will role-play a round table discussion
investigating the possibilities for a carbon tax
• Summarize and reflect on potential strengths and
weaknesses of a carbon tax
Science 6.6
Social Studies 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Geography 11, 14, 15, 16
Environmental Education 1, 2.3, 2.4, 3
Role-Play Handouts
5
Citizen Climate Lesson Organizer, cont.
Lesson/Objectives
National Standards
Lesson Materials
international climate NEGOTIATIONS
45 minutes
• Summarize the different principles of equity in climate
change decision-making
• Predict which types of climate proposals might be most
acceptable to different types of countries
• Reflect on challenges to international climate negotiations,
posed by equity concerns
Social Studies 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Geography 11, 14, 15, 16
Environmental Education 1, 2.3,
2.4, 3
Handouts 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1,
3.2, 3.3, 3.4
Country Group Handouts
POSITION STATEMENT
45 minutes
• Reflect on the previous lessons on climate targets,
policy, and negotiations
• Identify personal positions on issues presented in
each of the lessons
• Choose a decision maker to address their letters to
• Craft a well-supported position statement
• Have the option to mail their letters
6
Science 6.6
Social Studies 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Geography 11, 14, 15, 16
Environmental Education 1, 2.3, 2.4,
3, 4
English Language Arts 5, 6, 7, 11
Addresses of Decision Makers
Handout
Lesson 1: The Carbon Cycle
What are its implications for climate policy?
Question
What aspects of the carbon cycle must be considered in climate policy?
Age Level
High School
Objective
Students will explore aspects of the global carbon cycle that have implications for climate
policy decisions.
Students will present their knowledge using a creative medium.
Students will reflect on what can be done to protect and enhance natural carbon sinks.
Time Needed
At least one 45-minute period
introduction (5 min)
Most people are familiar with the concept of global warming. Most understand
that carbon dioxide and other carbon-containing greenhouse gasses act like a
blanket, trapping heat and raising the average temperature of the planet. Most
people understand that human actions are contributing to increased levels of
greenhouse gasses.
Many people, however, do not understand the global carbon cycle. What is
it and how does it work? Why is it important? How have humans altered it?
How has the planet responded to human-forced changes in the carbon cycle?
What aspects of this are important to understand when making climate policy
decisions?
This activity will give students the opportunity to explore these questions. This
knowledge will lay the foundation for future explorations into climate policy.
Notes to Teachers:
• Some students may have heard
that global warming is “junk science” or
that there is a big debate over whether
or not it is really happening. You can
let them know that there is no debate
about whether or not increased levels of
heat-trapping gasses in the atmosphere
will warm the planet. This is atmospheric
physics. The only uncertainty lies in how
much and how quickly the planet will warm.
Explain and conduct the activity (20 min)
Each student will receive a handout containing the following sections:
• What is the carbon cycle?
• The difference between short-term and long-term cycles
• The planet’s carbon budget
• The “missing sinks”
Students divide into groups of eight. Within the groups:
• Students read the handout, taking turns reading aloud as the other group
members follow along.
• After reading the entire handout, students divide into four pairs within each
group.
–– Each pair takes responsibility for one of the four sections of the handout.
–– Pairs carefully re-read the section.
–– Each pair then discusses the reading, checking for comprehension.
–– Each pair then creates an original visual aid to explain and illustrate the
concepts in the reading.
• Groups of eight reconvene. Pairs present their visual aid to the group,
explaining core concepts.
• Groups of eight present their visual aids to the entire class.
7
Lesson 1: The Carbon Cycle
What are its implications for climate policy?
Ask your students to reflect and share on the following topics (10 min)
• From the perspective of climate policy, what are important differences
between short-term and long-term cycle carbon? Ideas include:
––Burning biofuels releases carbon that was most recently in the short-term
carbon cycle.
––Burning fossil fuels releases carbon that was most recently in the
long-term carbon cycle.
––Energy made from carbon in the short-term carbon cycle does not
contribute additional carbon to the short-term carbon cycle. This contrasts with the burning of fossil fuels which adds carbon to the short-term cycle.
(Note: If fossil energy is used to produce biofuels, the greenhouse gas
savings of biofuels are reduced. If large amounts of fossil energy is used
to produce biofuels, the biofuels may not provide any greenhouse gas
reduction benefits.)
• What are the implications of taking carbon from the long-term cycle and
adding it to the short-term cycle? Ideas include:
––Burning of fossil fuels adds carbon to the short-term cycle more quickly than the short-term cycle can remove it.
• What is the significance of carbon sinks in relation to climate change?
Ideas include:
––Carbon sinks remove carbon from the atmosphere.
––Without carbon sinks, carbon would accumulate in the atmosphere
instead of continuing through the carbon cycle.
––Carbon sinks buffer the accumulation of carbon in the atmosphere from
the burning of fossil fuels.
––Plants and soil store large amounts of carbon which is typically released
when land is tilled for growing crops.
• How could climate policy be designed in a way that would use an
understanding of the carbon cycle to reduce atmospheric concentrations of
greenhouse gasses? Ideas include:
• Policy could encourage the enhancement of natural carbon sinks, for
example by promoting reforestation and better agricultural practices.
• Policy could provide incentives to develop low carbon biofuels using carbon
from the short-term carbon cycle or other renewable energy sources.
• Policy could discourage the burning of fossil fuels and/or promote
development of technologies to minimize the emissions from the burning
of fossil fuels.
Extend the learning (10 min)
Read the following passage to your students:
Chris Field is a scientist and an author of the “State of the Carbon Cycle Report”
released by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program in November 2007. Field
explains how in North America, carbon sinks, such as forests regrowing on
former farmland, may be removing up to half of the carbon North Americans
emit every year from the burning of fossil fuels. These natural sinks sequester
(store) carbon and keep it out of the atmosphere.
8
Lesson 1: The Carbon Cycle
What are its implications for climate policy?
“In effect, we have been getting a huge subsidy from these unmanaged parts
of the carbon cycle,” states Field. The buildup in the atmosphere of greenhouse
gasses has been far less than it would have been if it weren’t for the amount of
carbon uptake by the plants, soils, and oceans.
Field’s report found, however, that the ability of natural carbon sinks to continue
storing carbon may be jeopardized. As the forests mature and as climate
conditions change, the carbon sinks may reach their limit. They may also release
their limit if drought and wildfires become more frequent, as some climate
simulations predict.
It is not just North American forests that are in danger of losing their ability to
absorb carbon. When threatened by drought, trees in the Amazon rainforest die,
releasing massive amounts of carbon. Leeds University professor Oliver Phillips
warns, “For years the Amazon forest has been helping to slow down climate
change. But relying on this subsidy from nature is extremely dangerous. … If
the earth’s carbon sinks slow or go into reverse, as our results show is possible,
carbon dioxide levels will rise even faster.”
One of the other major carbon sinks, the Southern Ocean surrounding
Antarctica, is also weakening. The ocean’s ability to absorb carbon dioxide has
declined by about 15% per decade over the past 25 years and it will be less
efficient in the future.
Co-chair of the Global Carbon Project, Dr. Mike Raupach cautions, “While these
natural C02 sinks are a huge buffer against climate change, which would occur
about twice as fast without them, they cannot be taken for granted.”
Sources:
"Amazon Rainforest Carbon Sink Threatened by Drought." Science Daily. March
9, 2009: <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090305141625.htm>.
"Carbon Sinks Losing the Battle with Rising Emissions." Science Daily. March 16,
2009: <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090317094729.htm>.
"First ever 'State of the Carbon Cycle Report' Finds Trouble."
Science Daily. November 17, 2007: <http://www.sciencedaily.com/
releases/2007/11/071114111141.htm>.
"Southern Ocean Carbon Sink Weakened." Science Daily. May 19, 2007:
<http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070517142558.htm>.
Ask your students to reflect and share thoughts on the following
questions:
• What might be the implications of natural carbon sinks slowing or reversing their uptake of carbon? Ideas include:
––Increasing rates of accumulation of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere.
––Increased rates of global warming.
9
Lesson 1: The Carbon Cycle
What are its implications for climate policy?
• What implications would this possibility have for policy decisions?
Ideas include:
––Policies could encourage enhancement of natural carbon sinks.
––Funding could support continued research into ways to protect and
enhance carbon sinks.
––When setting targets for emission reduction, policy makers could consider
the possibility that carbon uptake may slow.
• What could be done to help increase natural carbon sinks? Ideas include:
––Planting trees
––Slowing deforestation
––Adopting better agricultural practices
––Gaining more knowledge about how to protect and enhance carbon sinks
Homework:
While the thoughts are fresh, each student should keep a journal about opinions
and thoughts raised by the lesson. The journal will serve as the starting point for
each student to craft a position statement. The position statements will cover
topics from each lesson. The more specific details each student includes in his or
her journal, the easier it will be to write a position statement. A recommended
format would be to record several ideas or opinions, each with at least three
supporting statements, based in concepts presented in the lesson.
10
Lesson 1: The Carbon Cycle
What are its implications for climate policy?
Handout
What is the carbon cycle?
Carbon (C) is the basic building block of life (many nonliving things contain
carbon too). Carbon is the fourth most common element in the universe (after
hydrogen, helium and oxygen). Every organism needs carbon for structure,
energy, or both. Humans use carbon for both energy and structure—in fact the
human body is about half carbon (not counting the water).
Carbon atoms are not created or destroyed—they move from one form to
another. The carbon in your body was most recently part of a plant or an animal
that you ate. Before that plant or animal consumed the carbon, it was in the
atmosphere as a molecule of carbon dioxide. You release carbon when you
exhale, or go to the bathroom, or get a haircut. When you die and decompose,
you release all your stored carbon.
On a global scale, carbon moves between the atmosphere, the oceans,
the biosphere (the living organisms on the planet—including you), and the
geosphere (the rocks, sediments and fossil fuels).
Anything that adds carbon to the atmosphere can be called a “source.”
Anything that removes carbon from the atmosphere can be called a “sink.”
The difference between short-term and long-term cycles
Short-term carbon cycles involve carbon that moves through living organisms. It
operates on a time scale of days to thousands of years. Plants use solar energy
to drive the process of photosynthesis where they combine carbon dioxide
from the atmosphere with water to produce sugars and oxygen. Plants and
animals “burn” these sugars to get energy to grow. The process of burning the
sugars releases some carbon back to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide (this is
called respiration). As the organisms grow, they store carbon in their tissues.
When they die, they release their carbon to the soil, to the ocean floor, or the
atmosphere.
The long-term carbon cycle involves carbon stored in rocks and fossils. It
operates on a timescale of millions of years. Rainwater reacts with minerals in
rocks and soils on the earth’s surface, slowly weathering them. The weathered
substances travel through streams and rivers to the ocean where they are
deposited on the ocean floor and eventually form rock. As the ocean floor
spreads and is pushed under the continents, the rock that was the ocean floor
gets pushed deeper and deeper. As it gets deeper into the earth, it heats up,
melts, and can rise back to the surface, releasing CO2.
The long-term carbon cycle also includes fossil fuels. The carbon in fossil fuels
comes from plants and animals that were living long ago. When they died and
were buried, their bodies eventually turned into coal and petroleum.
11
Copy Master - Lesson 1 - Hand-out
Lesson 1: The Carbon Cycle
What are its implications for climate policy?
The planet’s carbon budget
It may be helpful to think of the earth as having a carbon “budget.” As with
financial budgets, the ideal is to have it balanced. For a carbon budget, balanced
would mean that all the carbon produced by sources would be taken up by sinks.
When humans burn fossil fuels, we release carbon into the atmosphere. Humans
also release carbon into the atmosphere when we clear forests for agriculture.
We are currently adding carbon more quickly than the planet’s natural sinks can
remove it. This extra carbon accumulates in the atmosphere (contributing to
global warming).
Let’s run the numbers:
• Sources: Burning fossil fuel releases about 5.5 GtC (gigatons of carbon)
into the atmosphere each year. Deforestation and other land-use changes
relase about 1.6 GtC a year. This totals around 7.1 GtC a year.*
• Sinks: Scientists can measure that approximately 2 GtC diffuses into the
ocean each year.
• The difference between sources and sinks is 5.1 GtC.
So, if you assume that the land absorbs about as much carbon each year as it
releases, you might expect that the amount of carbon in the atmosphere would
increase each year by about 5.1 GtC. It turns out, however, that the amount of
carbon in the atmosphere increases each year by only about 3.2 GtC.
Where, you might ask, is the 1.9 GtC that is unaccounted for? Remember,
carbon is not destroyed—it just moves from one form to another through the
carbon cycle.
The “missing sinks”
Scientists have been trying to figure out where the missing 1.9 GtC goes each
year. Evidence points to the land surface. What, however, could be causing the
land to take up more carbon than it releases each year?
One possible explanation is that forests are regrowing over much of the northern
hemisphere. Over the last century much of the northern hemisphere was heavily
deforested. It is now regrowing. Young, rapidly-growing trees take carbon from
the atmosphere through photosynthesis and store it in their new wood.
Another possible explanation is that climate changes are causing the earth
surface to take up more carbon than it releases. For example, extended
growing seasons, trees growing further north in the Northern Hemisphere,
and higher concentrations of CO2 in the air could be contributing to increased
growth of plants.
Scientists are working to understand where and how this extra carbon is being
taken up by the earth’s surface. A better understanding of these complex
biogeochemical processes can help scientists protect and enhance the ability of
these sinks to continue absorbing carbon.
Source:
"The Carbon Cycle : Feature Articles." NASA Earth Observatory.
<http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/CarbonCycle/printall.php>.
*Note:
12
As of 2009, annual human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide are about 8 GtC,
not 7 GtC. Emissions are projected to continue to rise.
Copy Master - Lesson 1 - Hand-out
Lesson 2: Climate Targets
Where should we aim?
Question
What are the supporting arguments for different target levels for atmospheric
concentrations of carbon dioxide?
Age-Level
High School
Students will consider decisions about climate targets as an exercise in risk management.
Objective
Students will weigh the potential risks and costs of each target.
Each student will decide individually what target he or she thinks society should adopt.
Time Needed
At least one 45-minute period
Introduction (5 min)
Debates abound in the media about which actions (if any) should be taken to
address global warming. The news coverage can lead to confusion—for example
what do scientists know for certain? What beliefs drive policy makers’ and
activists’ opinions about potential courses of action?
New York Times science writer, Andrew Revkin, reflected in his Dot Earth blog,
“Everyone I know who works in conflict resolution . . . says it’s a good example
to start with points of possible accord.” He then outlines points that even “foes
of emission restrictions” can agree upon. They include:
• The planet’s existing energy choices and habits will lead to an enormous
buildup of greenhouse gasses, particularly as large developing countries
industrialize.
• A big buildup of long-lived greenhouse gasses will very likely influence the
climate in a host of ways that could impede the journey toward a stable,
prospering human population later this century.
Source:
Revkin, A. C. "An Update on Climate and Energy Basics" Dot Earth Blog, The
New York Times. Accessed on March 13, 2009. <http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.
com/2009/03/13/back-to-some-basics/>.
If the above points are widely agreed upon, even by “foes of emission
reductions,” what are the points of debate?
• Climate science is quite clear on the fact that increased concentrations of
atmospheric greenhouse gasses will warm the earth. There is no uncertainty
about this.
• There is uncertainty, however, when scientists try to predict precisely how
quickly the earth will warm and how extreme the changes within a certain
time will be.
––To deal with this uncertainty, scientists express their projections in terms
of probabilities of outcomes within certain ranges.
––As scientific knowledge increases, and as time passes and more changes
are observed, scientists update their projections. These projections are still
expressed in terms of probabilities of outcomes within certain ranges.
13
Lesson 2: Climate Targets
Where should we aim?
• Policy makers and activists consider the probabilities associated with the
range of scientific projections in several ways.
––They consider how acceptable or unacceptable each potential outcome
would be.
––They consider the likelihood of each potential scenario.
––They weigh the costs of taking action with the potential consequences of
different climate change scenarios.
––Informed by their personal beliefs, they decide on a course of action.
––Different people have different levels of tolerance for risk.
Frame the issue as an exercise in risk management (5 min)
Deciding on an approach to greenhouse gas emissions is an exercise in risk
management. It is similar to deciding how to manage other risks. An analogy
would be managing flood risk at your home.
For example, assume your family home is built next to a river. You might consider
buying flood insurance. You might figure that the likelihood of your house
flooding is low, but the consequences of it being destroyed by a flood without
you receiving any compensation for it are unacceptable to you. Therefore you
decide the yearly insurance premium is a worthwhile investment to protect
against the worst-case scenario of your house being destroyed by flood.
Now suppose land-use changes upstream are making annual flooding more
likely and more severe. Perhaps farmers are installing drain tiles to more quickly
move rainwater from their fields into the streams. Perhaps developers are filling
in and paving over former wetlands to make parking lots, causing rainwater to
move more quickly to streams.
You might decide that the probability of flooding is now higher and less
acceptable to you. In addition to the flood insurance, you might try several
different approaches to managing the risk. You might work to oppose future
projects that would make the problem worse—for example plans the city might
have to channelize the river, thereby increasing the flow during rain events. You
might also work with a landscaper to build an earth berm around your house to
protect against high water.
If the probability of more frequent and more severe flooding continued to increase,
you might take even more actions to try to manage the risk. You might consult
with a structural engineer about jacking up your house and putting it on stilts.
What if the probability of your home being destroyed by a massive flood
became so high that your insurance company informed you it would no longer
insure your house? Perhaps they have decided that your premium payments do
not justify the risk they must take of paying to replace your house were it to be
destroyed. You would have to decide if your family should move or continue to
live in a place where you might lose everything.
14
What if the authorities announced that a large dam upstream was potentially
unstable. Perhaps they have determined that a flaw in the design produces a
25% probability that the dam might burst within the next 25 years. If it burst,
it would release a wall of water hundreds of feet high that would destroy
everything in its path, including your house and your family if they happened
to be home at that time. You would have to decide if the 25% chance of being
killed by a massive wave of water and debris was acceptable to you.
Lesson 2: Climate Targets
Where should we aim?
What if the authorities further studied the dam and came to the conclusion
that as the dam gets older the chance of it failing gets higher—perhaps they
estimate a 50% chance of failure within 35 years, 85% chance of failure within
45 years, 97% chance of failure within 60 years. Would there reach a point
where you decide you can no longer accept the risk?
Explain and conduct the activity (30 min)
• Students will divide into groups of three. Each group will receive the
following handouts:
––Handout #1: Describing Cncertainty in the IPCC’s 2007 Report
––Handout #2: Findings of the IPCC Report
––Handout #3: Responses to the IPCC Report
• Each group will familiarize themselves with the terms the IPCC uses to
express the relative certainty of different findings.
• Each group will read the findings of the IPCC report and the responses to it.
• Each group will discuss the following questions:
––How acceptable or unacceptable to you are the various potential climate
changes? Why?
––What level of risk of these occurring do you feel justifies what degree of
action? Why?
––What CO2 target would you choose for humanity? Why?
• Each group will then receive Handout #4: More Recent Scientific Findings
and Handout #5: Reactions to Recent Scientific Findings
• Each group will read the handout and discuss the following questions:
––Do the more recent scientific findings influence your opinion about the
target humanity should choose? Why or why not?
––What would be the potential risks or rewards of various targets—350
ppm (or below) or 450 ppm (or higher)?
• Some people argue that any risk of loss of the planet’s life-support systems
is too much. They argue that the only level of greenhouse gas concentration
that we know for sure leads to a stable climate is the 280 ppm of the
pre-industrial era. They advocate targeting a return to those levels.
––Others argue that setting too stringent of goals will make agreement
impossible and will further delay action.
––What target do you think humanity should adopt? Why?
• Each group will share the highlights from their discussions with the rest
of the class.
Homework:
While the thoughts are fresh, each student should add a journal entry about
opinions and thoughts raised by the lesson. The journal will serve as the starting
point for each student to craft a position statement. The position statements
will cover topics from each lesson. The more specific details each student
includes in his or her journal, the easier it will be to write a position statement. A
recommended format would be to record several ideas or opinions, each with at
least three supporting statements, based in concepts presented in the lesson.
15
Lesson 2: Climate Targets
Where should we aim?

HANDOUT #1: DESCRIBING UNCERTAINTY—IPCC’S 2007 REPORT
Where uncertainty is assessed qualitatively, it is characterized as providing a relative sense of the amount and quality and
degree of agreement. This approach employs a series of self-explanatory terms such as:
• High agreement, much evidence
• High agreement, medium evidence
• Medium agreement, medium evidence; etc.
Where uncertainty is assessed quantitatively, using expert judgment of the correctness of underlying data, models or
analyses, then the report uses the following scale to express the chance of a finding being correct:
• Very high confidence, at least 9 out of 10
• High confidence, about 8 out of 10
• Medium confidence, about 5 out of 10
• Low confidence, about 2 out of 10
• Very low confidence, less than 1 out of 10
Where uncertainty in specific outcomes is assessed using expert judgment and statistical analysis of a body of
evidence (e.g., observations or model results), then the following likelihood ranges are used to express the assessed
probability of occurrence:
• Virtually certain, >99%
• Extremely likely, >95%
• Very likely, >90%
• Likely, >66%
• More likely than not, > 50%
• About as likely as not, 33% to 66%
• Unlikely, <33%
• Very unlikely, <10%
• Extremely unlikely, <5%
• Exceptionally unlikely, <1%
Source:
IPCC Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report.

16
Copy Master - Lesson 2- Hand-out
Lesson 2: Climate Targets
Where should we aim?
HANDOUT #2: FINDINGS OF THE IPCC 2007 REPORT
Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, average Northern Hemisphere temperatures during the second half of the
20th century were very likely higher than during any other 50-year period in the last 500 years and likely the highest in at
least the past 1300 years.
Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed
increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations.
Human influences have:
• Very likely contributed to a rise in sea level during the latter half of the 20th century
• Likely contributed to changes in wind patterns, affecting extra-tropical storm tracks and temperature patterns
• Likely increased temperatures of extreme hot nights, cold nights and cold days
• More likely than not increased risk of heat waves, area affected by drought since the 1970s, and frequency of heavy
precipitation events
Continued GHG emissions at or above current rates would cause further warming and induce many changes in the global
climate system during the 21st century that would very likely be larger than those observed during the 20th century, such as:
• Likely an increase in tropical cyclone intensity
• More areas likely affected by drought, potentially leading to crop failures, livestock death, increased risk of wildfire,
water shortages, reduced hydropower generation; with a potential impact upon human migration
• Very an likely increase in heat waves, potentially leading to reduced crop yields in warm regions, danger of wildfire,
water quality problems, increased risk of heat-related deaths
• Very an likely increase in heavy precipitation events, potentially leading to damage to crops, soil erosion, contamination
of surface and groundwater, disruption of settlements, loss of property
• Likely an increased incidence of extreme high sea levels, potentially leading to salinization of water for irrigation and
drinking, costs of costal protection, and/or relocation of costal communities
• Climate change is likely to lead to some irreversible impacts.
––There is medium confidence that approximately 20–30% of species assessed so far are likely to be at increased risk
of extinction if increases in global average warming exceed 1.5–2.5°C (relative to 1980–1999).
––As global average temperature increase exceeds about 3.5°C, model projections suggest significant extinctions
(40–70% of species assessed) around the globe.
There is high agreement and much evidence that all stabilization levels assessed can be achieved by deployment of a
portfolio of technologies that are either currently available or expected to be commercialized in coming decades, assuming
appropriate and effective incentives are in place for their development, acquisition, deployment and diffusion and
addressing related barriers.
CO2 concentration (ppm)
% change in emissions 2000–2050
°C rise in global temp
445 – 490
-85 to -50
2.0 – 2.4
490 – 535
-60 to -30
2.4 – 2.8
535 – 590
-30 to +5
2.8 – 3.2
590 – 710
+10 to +60
3.2 – 4.0
710 – 855
+25 to + 85
4.0 – 4.9
*Climate sensitivity is a key uncertainty for mitigation scenarios for specific temperature levels.
17
Copy Master - Lesson 2- Hand-out
Lesson 2: Climate Targets
Where should we aim?
Determining what constitutes “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” involves value judgments.
Science can support informed decisions on this issue.
Responding to climate change involves a risk management process.
• Impacts of climate change are very likely to impose net annual costs, which will increase over time as global
temperatures increase.
• Aggregate estimates of costs very likely underestimate damage costs because they cannot include many
non-measureable impacts.
• Choices about the scale and timing of greenhouse gas mitigation involve balancing the economic costs of more rapid
emission reductions now against the corresponding medium-term and long-term climate risks of delay.
18
Copy Master - Lesson 2- Hand-out
Lesson 2: Climate Targets
Where should we aim?
HANDOUT #3: RESPONSES TO THE 2007 IPCC REPORT
The European Union defines “dangerous climate change” to be an increase in
global average temperature of 2°C above pre-industrial global temperatures.
Warming above that level crosses “tipping points” and produces “amplifying
feedbacks” that could dramatically increase both the scale and pace of
climate change. The IPCC 2007 report estimates that stabilizing atmospheric
concentrations of CO2 at 450 ppm would give us a 50% chance of avoiding
this. Stabilizing at a lower concentration would increase our chances of avoiding
dangerous climate change.
Jeffrey D. Sachs, head of Columbia University’s Earth Institute, says, “It’s
extremely clear and is very explicit that the cost of inaction will be huge
compared to the cost of action. We can’t afford to wait . . . We need to start
acting now.” Source: Rosenthal, E. "UN Report describes Risks of Inaction on
Climate Change," The New York Times, November 17, 2007.
Bjorn Lomborg, author of Cool it—The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide
to Global Warming and a prominent global warming “delayer” (someone
who does not deny that human-caused global warming is happening, but
does not think society should take immediate action to slow it), says, “Major
reductions in carbon emissions are not worth the money . . . we need to
ease our preoccupation with cutting carbon, and focus much more on fixing
the problems of the here and now.” <http://intelligencesquaredus.org/Event.
aspx?Event=32>
Discuss the following questions (be prepared to share your best insights
with the class):
• How acceptable or unacceptable to you are the various potential climate
changes? Why?
• What level of risk of these occurring do you feel justifies what degree of
action? Why?
• What CO2 target would you choose for humanity? Why?
19
Copy Master - Lesson 2- Hand-out
Lesson 2: Climate Targets
Where should we aim?
HANDOUT #4: MORE RECENT SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS
• Since the publication of the 2007 IPCC report, new climate science is finding changes to be faster and stronger than
even the worst-case scenario predictions of the IPCC’s 2007 summary report.
• New research suggests the earth may be passing tipping points that could lead to rapid and abrupt climate changes,
rather than the gradual changes forecast in the latest IPCC report.
Source:
Tin, T. Climate Change: Faster, Stronger, Sooner: An overview of the climate science published since the UN IPCC Fourth
Assessment Report. World Wildlife Fund. 2008.
James Hansen, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and other scientists released a paper in 2008.
Hansen’s paper cautions:
“If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is
adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current
385 ppm to at most 350 ppm, but likely less than that.”
Hansen’s paper examines “slow” climate feedback processes that are not included in most climate models. Hansen’s
paper agues that climate models that consider only “fast feedbacks” underestimate warming that is “in the pipeline.”
Once these factors are considered, the warming produced by a doubling of atmospheric CO2 (around 550 ppm) is ~6°C,
double the figures in the IPCC report.
Hansen and his co-authors admit that “climate models have many deficiencies in their abilities to simulate climate change.
However, model uncertainties cut both ways: it is at least as likely that models underestimate effects of human-made
GHGs as overestimate them.”
Hansen and his co-authors also warn that climate models do poorly at anticipating possible tipping points that can lead
to rapid, catastrophic changes that are impossible to slow once set in motion. One example of a tipping point would be
the thawing of the Arctic permafrost. The permafrost contains carbon from plants and animals that have died over many
years and not decomposed because they remained frozen. If the ground thawed and the organic matter decomposed, it
would release more than twice the amount of carbon already in the atmosphere. This tipping point could start at levels
of warming as low as ~3°C.
Hansen and his co-authors recommendation:
“We suggest an initial objective of reducing atmospheric CO2 to 350 ppm, with the target to be adjusted as scientific
understanding and empirical evidence of climate effects accumulate. Although a case already could be made that the
eventual target probably needs to be lower, the 350 ppm target is sufficient to qualitatively change the discussion and
drive fundamental changes in energy policy.”
Sources:
Hansen, J., Sato, M., Kharecha, P., Beerling, D., et al. "Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?" 2008.
Edward A. G. Schuur et al. "Vulnerability of Permafrost Carbon to Climate Change: Implications for the Global Carbon
Cycle." BioScience. September 2008 / Vol. 58 No. 8.
20
Copy Master - Lesson 2- Hand-out
Lesson 2: Climate Targets
Where should we aim?
HANDOUT #5: REACTIONS TO RECENT SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS
Joesph Romm, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a nonprofit,
nonpartisan group advocating climate solutions:
“In some sense whether the ultimate target is 350, 400, or 450 doesn’t
matter as much as some people seem to think. You can’t hit any of those
targets without strong and relentless action starting [now]. Further delay
risks catastrophe. Let’s start working now toward stabilizing below 450
ppm, while climate scientists figure out if in fact we need to ultimately get
below 350.” http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/09/stabilize-at-350-ppm-orrisk-ice-free-planet-warn-nasa-yale-sheffield-versailles-boston-et-al/
350.org, a global network of over 200 organizations advocating for a climate
target of 350 ppm:
“Climate science is a rapidly evolving field. A few years ago, climate
campaigners hoped that goals of 450ppm or a 2 degree Celsius rise in
temperature might be 'safe levels' for the world to shoot for. We wish
they were right—it would make the world’s job a lot easier. But, the latest
data and climate models [suggest] that 350 is the upper boundary for a
safe climate. We’re already above 350—which means we’re in the danger
zone right now. That’s why we’re seeing severe climate impacts all over the
world, and why we need to get back to the safe zone as soon as possible.”
http://www.350.org/
Australia’s Garnaut Climate Change Review released its final report on
September 30, 2008. It argued that although lower emission targets would be
better for climate stability, a global agreement at that level would be unlikely
to be achieved. The report suggests a 550 solution would be more likely and
preferable to not having an agreement at all. http://www.garnautreview.org.au/
CA25734E0016A131/pages/garnaut-climate-change-review-final-report
At the international climate negotiations in Pozan, Poland, in December 2008,
49 developing countries announced support for a goal of 350 ppm. This is
more than a quarter of the world’s nations. Al Gore also endorsed the 350
goal.
Discuss the following questions (be prepared to share your best
insights with the class):
• Do the more recent scientific findings influence your opinion about the
target humanity should choose? Why or why not?
• What would be the potential risks or rewards of various targets—350 ppm
(or below) or 450 ppm (or higher)?
• Some people argue any risk of loss of the planet’s life-support systems is too
much. They argue that the only level of greenhouse gas concentration we
know for sure leads to a stable climate is the 280 ppm of the preindustrial
era. They advocate targeting a return to those levels.
––Others argue that setting too stringent of goals will make agreement
impossible and will further delay action.
––What target do you think humanity should adopt? Why?
Copy Master - Lesson 2- Hand-out
21
Lesson 3: New Technologies
Do we need them to meet the climate challenge?
Question
What should be the role for new technologies in slowing climate change?
Age-Level
High School
Students will explore differing opinions about the role new technologies should play in
efforts to slow climate change.
Objective
Students will weigh potential strengths and weaknesses of different proposals.
Students will make recommendations about which roles for technology climate policy
should encourage.
Time Needed
At least one 45-minute period
Provide background information for your students (5 min)
• Every five to seven years, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) releases a summary report on the latest climate science. The report
summarizes the most current knowledge compiled by thousands of scientists
working around the world.
• IPCC summary reports contain a range of different projections for future
climate change scenarios. It is necessary to give a range of projections
because there are enough variables in the models (including one of the
most difficult to predict variables—that of human actions) to make exact
predictions impossible.
• The IPCC published its most recent summary report in 2007. This report
summarized climate research conducted through the end of 2006.
• Since the publication of that report, new climate science is finding climate
changes to be faster and stronger than even the worst-case scenario
predictions of the IPCC’s most recent summary report.
• Although the science is still inconclusive, new research suggests that the earth
may be passing tipping points that could lead to rapid and abrupt climate
changes, rather than the gradual changes forecast in the latest IPCC report.
Source:
Tin, T. Climate Change: Faster, Stronger, Sooner: An overview of the climate
science published since the UN IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. World Wildlife
Fund. 2008.
23
Lesson 3: New Technologies
Do we need them to meet the climate challenge?
Introduce the central question (5 min)
The students will have the opportunity to examine different opinions about the
role technology should play in the effort to slow climate change.
• Given the scale of action needed to slow climate change, some experts
believe we need new technologies to meet the challenge. They propose
massive spending in research and development as well as investment in
education to train a new generation of scientists and engineers.
• Others believe we have all the technologies we need to start dramatically
reducing our emissions. They argue that what we need is willpower to
implement the existing technologies. They fear if we pin our hopes on new
technologies that are yet to be practical, we may end up waiting too long to
take action.
• Others believe that we have already waited too long. They see technology—
in the form of geo-engineering—as our only hope to buy some time while
we figure out how to lower our emissions.
Describe the activity to the students (5 min)
• The students will divide into groups of eight (or a similar group size as needed).
• Each group will receive four distinct handouts, each representing a
different opinion.
• Within the larger group, pairs (or trios) of students will read one handout.
Each pair should:
––Read and understand the handout.
––Identify the most important points made by the position represented in
their handout.
––Think of potential strengths and weaknesses of the position.
––Prepare notes covering the points they plan to share with the larger group.
• Pairs will then take turns presenting the position to the larger group.
• The groups of eight will then discuss the relative merits of each position.
––Each group will make a chart outlining the potential strengths and
weaknesses of each position.
––Each group will decide which different roles for technology should be
encouraged by climate policy. To represent the relative emphasis the
students believe climate policy should place on each option, the students
will decide how to divide $100 of funding among the options.
––Students do not have to choose one approach over another—they may
decide to pursue several or even all of the potential options.
• After groups have completed their charts of strengths and weaknesses and
have divided the $100 of funding, the entire class will reconvene. Each group
will have a few minutes to present their opinions and their funding decisions.
Conduct the activity (20 min)
• As the groups are discussing and debating, circulate among the groups to
answer questions and to monitor each group’s process.
24
Lesson 3: New Technologies
Do we need them to meet the climate challenge?
Reconvene the class (10 min)
• Ask each group to report on their opinions about different roles for technology.
• Ask each group to explain their funding decisions.
Homework:
While the thoughts are fresh, students should write in their journals about opinions
and thoughts raised by the lesson. The journal will serve as the starting point for
each student to craft a position statement. The position statements will cover topics
from each lesson. The more specific details each student includes in his or her
journal, the easier it will be to write a position statement. A recommended format
would be to record several ideas or opinions, each with at least three supporting
statements, based in concepts presented in the lesson.
25
Lesson 3: New Technologies
Do we need them to meet the climate challenge?
POSITION #1: WE NEED FUNDAMENTALLY NEW TECHNOLOGIES
• Read and understand the handout.
• Identify the most important points made by the position represented.
• Think of potential strengths and weaknesses of the position.
• Prepare notes covering the points you plan to share with the larger group.
Some experts believe we will not be able to meet the climate challenge without
fundamentally new technologies. The federal government is already funding
research into new technologies that could help reduce carbon emissions. Research
funded by the Department of Energy includes:
• Carbon sequestration—the capturing and storage of CO2 and other greenhouse
gasses. Options for storage include underground, in terrestrial carbon sinks (like
growing forests), and in the ocean
• Improving efficiency of coal and natural gas power systems
• Developing fuel cells that can generate electricity without burning fossil fuels
• Developing more advanced nuclear power plants (nuclear power plants do not
emit greenhouse gasses)
Nobel Prize-winning physicist Steven Chu, President Obama’s Secretary of Energy,
advocates even more research and development of these and other technologies.
Technologies Chu believes need more research funding include:
––Using solar energy to generate chemical fuel at a low cost
––Altering yeast and bacteria into organisms that produce gasoline and diesel
––Improving techniques for converting switchgrass into fuel
––Using nanotechnology to improve efficiency of solar panels (Chu says solar
technology will need to get five times better)
––Developing better batteries for storing power
Chu argues that this research must be supported by federal dollars. He claims
that private companies are “reluctant to invest in research into transformational
technologies that many not see commercialization for 10 years, even though
such technologies could dramatically change the entire energy landscape.” To fill
this gap, Chu believes that government support of research at universities and
national laboratories is “our only hope to supply the science required to create
transformative energy solutions.”
How much money would be needed for research and development for new
technologies to move quickly to the point they were commercially practical? A
recent report from the Brookings Institution suggests $20 to $30 billion a year. For
comparison, the total current budget for the entire Department of Energy is $25
billion a year. The 2008 federal budget was $3.1 trillion ($3100 billion). Expenditures
on operations in Afghanistan and Iraq from 2001 through February 2008 were
$752 billion.
Sources:
Duderstadt, J., Muro, M., Was, G., Sarzynski, A., et al. Energy Discovery-Innovation
Institutes: A Step toward America’s Energy Sustainability. The Brookings Institution. 2009.
Mufson, S. "Concern for climate change defines new energy department nominee,"
Washington Post. December 12, 2008.
26
Department of Energy. <http://www.energy.gov/sciencetech/climatechange.htm> Accessed
March 9, 2009.
Copy Master - Lesson 3- Hand-out
Lesson 3: New Technologies
Do we need them to meet the climate challenge?
POSITION #2: WE NEED TO FUND EDUCATION AND TRAINING FOR A NEW GENERATION OF SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS
• Read and understand the handout.
• Identify the most important points made by the position represented.
• Think of potential strengths and weaknesses of the position.
• Prepare notes covering the points you plan to share with the larger group.
The Breakthrough Institute, a think tank that aims to accelerate the transition to a clean energy economy and to promote
equitable and sustainable prosperity, has proposed a National Energy Education Act (NEEA). The proposal acknowledges
the challenge of meeting the world’s energy needs in a way that does not accelerate global warming.
The proposal recalls the effort the U.S. government made to boost education in science and technology after the Soviets
launched Sputnik. The 1958 National Defense Education Act (NDEA) provided billions of dollars to inspire and train a new
generation of scientists and engineers. The act was a first step in creating technologies of the Information Age.
Advocates of the NEEA argue that the U.S. needs to be able to develop clean energy technologies to meet global energy
needs without accelerating global warming. To do this, they argue, the U.S. needs a new generation of people working in
STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) fields. The proposed NEEA would have the following goals:
• Improve quality of and access to education in fields related to energy:
––Increase financial aid and loan forgiveness for students in energy-related fields.
––Support the creation of new multidisciplinary courses of study focused on energy.
––Expand energy-related service learning and work-study opportunities.
––Provide improved training and resources for energy-related education in colleges.
• Increase funding for clean energy research and development at universities.
• Support the development of new workforce training programs in clean
energy industries.
––Increase funding for workforce training programs at technical and community colleges and
worker retraining centers.
––Support partnerships with clean energy firms to develop training programs.
• Create “innovation pipelines” to move new products out of research labs and into private sector ventures.
––Support collaboration between government research facilities, universities, and industry to demonstrate new
technologies that will be ready for widespread use in the near future.
––Create “research parks” and other forums to encourage communication and transfer of technology between private
firms and university research labs.
Advocates of the NEEA proposal argue that the investment in the education of a new generation of scientists and
engineers would eventually pay for itself. They argue that these highly-educated people would contribute to the
development of new industries and technologies that will drive the U.S. economy in future decades.
Advocates of the NEEA are concerned that many of the people currently working in STEM fields will be retiring in the near
future. For example, 70% of civilian employees in the Department of Defense with STEM degrees will be eligible to
retire in 2015.
Advocates of the NEEA argue that, for the U.S. to remain competitive in strategic fields, there must be an additional 20
million students with access to higher education by the year 2025. For comparison, there are 17 million students enrolled
in college today.
Source:
Policy Concept Draft: National Energy Education Act. The Breakthrough Institute. October 2008.
27
Copy Master - Lesson 3- Hand-out
Lesson 3: New Technologies
Do we need them to meet the climate challenge?
POSITION #3: WE HAVE ALL THE TECHNOLOGY WE NEED TO START
DRAMATICALLY REDUCING EMISSIONS
• Read and understand the handout.
• Identify the most important points made by the position represented.
• Think of potential strengths and weaknesses of the position.
• Prepare notes covering the points you plan to share with the larger group.
Advocates of this position cite the most recent report from the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It states atmospheric concentrations of carbon
dioxide could be stabilized at levels as low as 400 to 450 ppm using a range of
technologies that are either currently available or are expected to be available in the
coming decades. This position assumes the creation of appropriate and effective
incentives for development and deployment of these technologies.
To meet stabilization goals, existing technologies would need to be employed on
much larger scales than they are today. The technology portfolio needed to achieve
stabilization goals would include:
• Energy Supply: improved efficiency, switching from coal to natural gas, nuclear
power, renewable energy, carbon capture and storage
• Transportation: improved fuel efficiency, hybrid vehicles, biofuels, rail and public
transportation, cycling, walking
• Buildings: improved efficiency, improved insulation, passive and active solar
design, “intelligent” buildings that can maximize conservation and efficiency
• Industry: improved efficiency, heat and power recovery, material recycling,
control of emissions, improved industrial processes
• Agriculture: improved efficiency, improved land management to increase
carbon storage in soils, restoration of degraded lands, improved cultivation
and livestock manure management techniques, improved fertilizer application
techniques, energy crops to replace fossil fuels, improvements of crop yields
• Forestry: afforestation (planting trees where none were before), reforestation,
reduced deforestation, forest management and tree species improvement to
increase carbon storage
• Waste management: landfill methane recovery, burning waste for energy,
composting organic waste, recycling, reducing waste
Advocates of this position worry that an insistence that we need technology
“breakthroughs” to successfully combat global warming could mean we will
end up waiting too long. They argue that because we must dramatically reduce
our greenhouse gas emissions over the next 25 years, we cannot wait for the
development of new technologies.
They examine the history of technology and claim rapid “breakthroughs” are
very rare—instead technology improves slowly. Even when breakthroughs do
happen, they rarely “transform” energy markets. They cite Royal Dutch/Shell, one
of the world’s largest oil companies, reporting that it typically takes 25 years after
commercial energy introduction for a new energy form to gain a 1% share of the
global market.
28
They argue that the gains that have been made in energy efficiency and in clean,
renewable, and alternative energy technologies have been the result of government
mandates, subsidies, and incentives. They argue what is needed are regulations
and policy that will encourage increased deployment and development of the
technologies we already have or will soon have in the near future.
Copy Master - Lesson 3- Hand-out
Lesson 3: New Technologies
Do we need them to meet the climate challenge?
Estimates of the cost of implementing the technologies needed to stabilize the
atmosphere at 550 ppm range from 1% to 5% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
for the entire world. This roughly translates to $550 million to $2.75 billion ($2750
million). Compare this with the 3.3% of global GDP in 2005 spent on insurance.
Advocates argue that this cost would be far cheaper than the alternative—the
collapse of the planet’s vital life-support systems.
Sources:
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. Summary for Policy Makers, 2007.
Joseph Romm, Breaking the technology breakthrough myth. Climate Progress,
Center for American Progress. <http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/09/breakingthe-technology-breakthrough-myth-debunking-shellenberger-nordhaus-again/>
Accessed March 11, 2009
Stern, Nicholas. Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. (Cambridge
University Press: Cambridge, United Kingdom), October 30, 2006.
29
Copy Master - Lesson 3- Hand-out
Lesson 3: New Technologies
Do we need them to meet the climate challenge?
POSITION #4: WE’VE WAITED TOO LONG—WE NEED GEO-ENGINEERING TO BUY TIME
• Read and understand the handout.
• Identify the most important points made by the position represented.
• Think of potential strengths and weaknesses of the position.
• Prepare notes covering the points you plan to share with the larger group.
Advocates of geo-engineering fear humanity is taking action too slowly to avoid
catastrophic climate changes. They suggest that we could use geo-engineering as
a last-chance effort to “buy time” by lowering the temperature on the planet while
we try to figure out ways to lower our emissions. Examples of geo-engineering
proposals include:
• Build huge floating islands in the ocean made from white plastic. The artificial
islands would act like the rapidly disappearing Arctic sea ice. The sea ice reflects
up to 90% of incoming solar radiation back into space and covers the darkcolored ocean (which can absorb up to 90% of incoming radiation).
• Send trillions of two-feet-wide lenses into orbit around the earth. The lenses
would bend sunlight away from earth. Or build 55,000 mirrors in space, each
about 100 km2 in size. Potential drawbacks would be the inability to adjust or
remove the mirrors once they were in place and the potential they would fall
back to earth.
• Use rockets to shoot sulfur particles into the stratosphere. The particles would
block incoming solar radiation and have a similar cooling effect as the ash from
the eruption of a volcano. The sulfur in the atmosphere would have the sideeffect of producing acid rain and of destroying the ozone layer, allowing more
damaging ultraviolet radiation to reach the earth.
• Cover deserts with reflective films to send more incoming radiation back into
space.
• Bioengineer crops to have more reflective leaves.
• Fertilize the ocean with iron to encourage vast blooms of algae that would
capture carbon dioxide. The plants would eventually die and sink to the bottom
of the ocean, bringing their carbon with them. Side-effects might include killing
the remaining ocean ecosystem.
• Wrap entire glaciers in white, insulating sheets.
• Build 134 million pipes floating vertically in the ocean. The pipes would use the
wave-action to pump cold water from deep in the ocean to the surface. The cold
water is more biologically productive and could produce more small animals like
the salp (it poops carbon pellets which sink to the bottom of the ocean). The
colder surface water might also reduce the number and severity of hurricanes,
which gain energy from warm water. A side-effect might be the further
acidification of the ocean, making it impossible for coral reefs, and the life that
depends on them, to survive.
• Use the energy of five thousand, million, million hydrogen bombs to move
Earth’s orbit 1.5 million km further away from the sun.
30
Copy Master - Lesson 3- Hand-out
Lesson 3: New Technologies
Do we need them to meet the climate challenge?
Geoengineering faces challenges and protests. They include:
• Some feel the cost and technical difficulty for some of the proposals makes
them impractical—at least for now.
• Tinkering with complex systems could produce unintended side-effects.
Scientists cannot adequately predict the consequences of making large-scale
alterations to the environment.
• These proposals do not address the underlying cause of climate change
(increasing emissions of greenhouse gasses). They only mask the problem.
• Ethical questions surround whether we can leave future generations a world
that requires tinkering on such a large scale in an attempt to maintain livable
conditions.
• Ethical questions surround whether certain groups of people can make planetaltering decisions for the rest of the world.
• Perhaps even talking about potential “quick fixes” like these will undermine
the political will to work to reduce emissions.
Advocates of geoengineering counter that it would be irresponsible to not
continue research into these options, in case we fail in our efforts to slow
emissions. Nobel Prize winner Paul Crutzen says geo-engineering “is the only
option available to rapidly reduce temperature rises.” Advocates are requesting
“research funding with enough zeros on it to make a dent.”
Advocates of geo-engineering do not know how much funding would be needed,
but it would be tens of billions of dollars. They argue, however, that it would be
far cheaper than the alternative—the collapse of the planet’s vital
life-support systems.
Sources:
Apple, M. Personal communication, March 11, 2009.
Bentley, M. "Guns and Sunshades to Rescue Climate," BBC News. March 2, 2006.
Black, R. "Lovelock Urges Ocean Climate Fix," BBC News. September 26, 2007.
Broad, W. J. "How to Cool A Planet (Maybe)," New York Times. June 27, 2006.
31
Copy Master - Lesson 3- Hand-out
Lesson 4: Stabilizing Emissions
Playing the “Wedge Game”
Question
What type of effort would be required to stabilize atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide
using the technologies we have available now?
Age-Level
High School
Students will research different technologies available today that are capable of
significantly reducing carbon emissions.
Objective
Students will make decisions about which strategies they would include in a portfolio of
strategies aimed at stabilizing emissions.
Students will reflect on the scale of effort needed if society were to become serious about
stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of carbon.
Time Needed
At least two-45 minute periods
Familiarize your students with the idea of stabilization wedges.
Conduct the lesson and play the game as described here:
http://www.princeton.edu/wedges/game_materials/
• The game materials suggest spending two to three class periods.
• The game is based on the 2004 paper by Princeton’s Robert Socolow and
Stephen Pacala.
––At the time that paper was written, annual world emissions were 7 GtC
(gigatons of carbon). Each stabilization wedge represents one GtC, so the
original version of the wedge game asks students to choose 7 wedges to
stabilize emissions.
––As of 2009, annual global emissions are 8 GtC. An updated version
(November 2007) of the wedge game includes 8 wedges.
After playing the wedge game, provide updated information and perspectives
to your students:
• Total annual emissions have increased since this game was designed.
• As mentioned above, the 2004 Socolow and Pacala (S&P) paper was based
Notes to Teachers:
• This lesson involves playing
the “Wedge Game,” a lesson plan
written by Dr. Roberta Hotinski as part
of the Carbon Mitigation Initiative (a
joint project of Princeton University, BP,
and the Ford Motor Company).
The wedge concept is a tool for
conceptualizing the scale of action
needed to stabilize greenhouse gas
emissions. The term “stabilization
wedge” is commonly used in climate
debates and discussions in various arenas.
•
This lesson provides updated
information and perspectives to make
the wedge game an even more relevant
and effective educational tool.
•
on then-current global emissions of 7 GtC a year. 2009 annual emission
levels are 8 GtC (this is why the updated version of the game has 8
wedges rather than 7).
• The 7 stabilization wedges in the original version of the game and the
8 stabilization wedges in the updated version stabilize emissions at
current levels.
• Thus, even if we institute the 8 wedges now, our emission level will still be
higher than if we had instituted 7 wedges in 2004.
33
Lesson 4: Stabilizing Emissions
Playing the “Wedge Game”
• The rate of growth of emissions has increased since the original S&P paper.
––S&P assumed our BAU (business as usual) scenario would continue the
carbon emission growth rate of the past 30 years (1.5% annually). Using
those assumptions, BAU would double to 16 GtC in 50 years.
––Since 2000, however, carbon emissions have been growing at 3% per
year. If this rate continues, emissions would double to 16 GtC in 25 years
instead of 50.
––Thus to stabilize emissions at current levels, each wedge would need to
be implemented in half the time as what is represented in the original S&P
paper (and in the game).
• Since 2004, estimates of risk associated with different target levels of
atmospheric carbon dioxide have changed.
––The scenario examined in the original S&P paper stabilized the climate at
500 ppm carbon dioxide.
• 7 wedges would stabilize the level of emissions for 50 years.
• During that time society would invest in research and development of
new technologies.
• After 2050, global emissions would start to be cut rapidly.
• This would eventually stabilize atmospheric CO2 at 500ppm
––Most scientists now believe concentrations of atmospheric concentrations
of 500 ppm or higher would be likely to create a degree of warming that
would cross various “tipping points” like the melting of the Greenland Ice
Sheet, and would likely cause severe climate changes.
––A growing number of well-respected scientists now believe atmospheric
concentrations of CO2 above 350 ppm could trigger “catastrophic”
climate changes.
• Stabilizing at 450 ppm would require many more wedges.
• To stabilize at 450 ppm, global emissions would need to average around 5
GtC this century. To average 5 GtC, annual emissions would need to be below
4 GtC by mid-century and then approach zero by the end of the century.
• If we had started reducing emissions in 2007, this would require 12 wedges.
• If we wait until 2010 to start serious reductions, global emissions may be
closer to 9 GtC, which would require 14 wedges to stabilize at 450 ppm
• Stabilizing at 350 ppm would require approximately 18 wedges by 2060.
34
Lesson 4: Stabilizing Emissions
Playing the “Wedge Game”
Notes to Teachers:
Reflect and discuss
Potential discussion questions include:
• What type of effort would be required if society were to be serious about
stabilizing atmospheric carbon concentrations?
• As more years pass without beginning serious efforts to reduce emissions,
how does the size of effort required to stabilize at certain levels change?
• Given that society possesses a portfolio of technologies that could reduce
and may stabilize emissions,
––Why do you think serious action has not yet been taken?
––If you believe society should become serious about stabilizing levels of
atmospheric carbon, what can you do to pressure this to happen?
––If you don’t believe society should become serious about stabilizing levels
of atmospheric carbon, what approach do you suggest?
Homework:
While the thoughts are fresh, each student should add a journal entry about
opinions and thoughts raised by the lesson. The journal will serve as the starting
point for each student to craft a position statement. The position statements
will cover topics from each lesson. The more specific details each student
includes in his or her journal, the easier it will be to write a position statement. A
recommended format would be to record several ideas or opinions, each with at
least three supporting statements, based in concepts presented in the lesson.
7 GtC/yr
• The wedges are a valuable
conceptual tool for showing the
immense scale needed for the solution
(although they are more conceptual
than analytically robust in their
derivation). For example, S&P did not
specify the “baseline” of each of their
wedges—meaning no one (including
S&P) knows the amounts of wind or
nuclear power, efficiency, etc. assumed
by the study. This means the wedges
cannot provide an exact figure for how
much each type of technology would
need to be deployed to constitute a
wedge. The wedges, however, provide
a good conceptual feel for the scale of
effort needed and the effect of starting
early rather than waiting.
The wedge game can also help
students conceptualize the need for
a broad array of responses to climate
change. It can help them realize there
is no “silver bullet.” Because the
game is not robust, however, students
should not use the game to determine
the exact composition of a solution
portfolio.
•
If your students become overwhelmed
by the scale of the effort needed to
stabilize emissions, it may be helpful to
remind them that estimates of the cost of
implementing the technologies needed
to stabilize the atmosphere at 550 ppm
range from 1% to 5% of the Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) for the entire
world. Compare this with the 3.3% of
global GDP in 2005 spent on insurance.
•
Source:
2005
2055
Romm, J. Is 450 ppm (or less) Politically
Possible? Part 1. Climate Progress,
Center for American Progress. <http://
climateprogress.org/2008/03/31/
is-450-ppm-carbon-dioxide-politicallypossible-1/>. Accessed on March 15,
2009.
35
Lesson 5: Carbon Cap & Trade
The Musical Chairs Game
Question
How would a cap and trade system work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
Age-Level
High School
Students will create a model of a cap-and-trade market for greenhouse gas emissions.
Objectives
Students will engage in trading of carbon permits with the goal of reducing emissions in
the most cost-effective ways.
Students will reflect on strengths and weaknesses of the cap-and-trade model.
Time Needed
At least one 45-minute period
Materials
Chairs
Ask your students to summarize what they already know about
climate change. (5 min)
The following points should be reiterated:
• Heat trapping gasses (greenhouse gasses) released into the atmosphere as a result of human activities are driving climate change.
• 85% of U. S. energy use comes from burning fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas).
This is the biggest driver of climate change.
• Greenhouse gases such as CO2 are very long-lived in the atmosphere and
their buildup has consequences over the course of centuries.
• Climate change impacts can disrupt the planet’s crucial life-support systems.
• There is a lag between when greenhouse gases are emitted and when the
climate fully responds.
• Leading scientists say we must drastically reduce our emissions to avoid the most catastrophic changes. They say we must start now to achieve
these reductions.
Notes to Teachers:
• The underlying assumption is that
uses of fossil fuels for which people are
willing to pay the most must be the most
valuable.
To minimize climate change most
uses of fossil fuels will have to move
to a different game: the clean energy
economy.
•
For practical reasons, most cap-andtrade proposals require only fossil fuel
suppliers and other large polluters to
play directly. They affect the rest of the
economy as they pass on their costs.
•
Sources:
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Summary for Policy Makers. 2007.
Navigating by the Numbers, World Resources Institute. 2005.
Introduce your students to the concept of cap and trade. (5 min)
Explain to your students that one way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is
through a carbon cap and trade system. This is based on economics. Basically, it
assumes:
• Increasing greenhouse gas emissions have a cost (for example, more severe droughts, floods, storms, disease, rising sea levels, collapsing ecosystems, species extinction).
• The emitters of these gasses, however, currently do not have to pay the cost.
Currently they can dump emissions into the atmosphere for free.
• Therefore, the prices they charge for their products do not reflect the full
cost of the products.
• This results in what economists call a “market failure.”
• Establishing a market price for greenhouse gas pollution can help correct
the market failure.
37
Lesson 5: Carbon Cap & Trade
The Musical Chairs Game
In a cap and trade system:
• The government establishes a cap that limits the total amount of allowed greenhouse gas emissions.
• The government distributes permits for a “right to pollute.” These permits
•
•
are either given or sold to polluters. They then become private property.
The government reduces the number of permits available each year. This
creates demand for a new commodity (carbon permits). This provides an
incentive for those who can reduce emissions most inexpensively to do so.
Polluters who reduce their emissions can sell their permits to other
companies.
Source:
The Economics of Climate Change, Stern Review Report. 2006.
Explain the cap and trade musical chairs game to your students. (5 min)
The object of the game is to reduce total carbon emissions every year in the
most economically efficient way possible. The ultimate goal is to reduce
emissions by at least 80%.
• Students will divide equally into groups representing companies.
• Sitting next to their company members, the students will arrange all the chairs into one large circle. Each company will be allotted a chair for every group member. The chairs represent carbon permits.
• Each company receives a hand-out listing potential options for reducing
emissions and the relative cost associated with each option.
• Every round, one chair will need to be removed from the circle. This
represents the government reducing the cap each year.
• Each company has to decide how and when they can reduce their emissions
and sell off their permits.
• Each company must also keep track of how much money they make selling permits (the price for which they sold the permit minus their cost to reduce the emissions necessary to free up the permit).
Play the cap and trade musical chairs game. (15 min)
• In each round you, the teacher, represent a company that needs to purchase
•
•
•
•
38
•
a carbon permit.
Ask a student to maintain a list of the order in which companies sell permits,
the value of the permits sold, and what action the company took to reduce
their emissions enough to free up the permit.
Start the first round by offering to buy a permit for $5. If no company will
sell, slowly increase your offer in increments of $5.
Round one ends when a company agrees to sell you one of its permits.That
company must state how it reduced emissions to allow them to sell one of
its permits. That company must now give you one of their chairs.
To start the next round, remove the extra chair from the circle. You again represent a company needing to purchase a carbon permit. Start your bidding at the level you bought your permit in the last round. If no company will sell, incrementally increase your offer.
Continue rounds until either time runs out or chairs are reduced to 80% of their starting number.
Lesson 5: Carbon Cap & Trade
The Musical Chairs Game
Ask students to summarize what happened during the game. (5 min)
Ideally in a cap and trade market:
• The total amount of emissions decreases every year.
• Companies that can reduce their emissions most cheaply do so first.
• As the cap tightens each round, fewer permits are available, so the players
with unneeded permits can charge the buyers higher prices.
• The price can go as high as it takes to motivate one of the companies to
give up one of its permits.
• The last players remaining in the game are those who can afford to pay the
most and those who have the least flexibility to reduce emissions.
Ask your students to reflect on strengths and weaknesses of
the cap and trade system as a mechanism for reducing greenhouse
gas emissions. (10 min)
Notes to Teachers:
• The underlying assumption is
that uses of fossil fuels for which people
are willing to pay the most must be the
most valuable.
To minimize climate change most uses
of fossil fuels will have to convert to the
new clean energy economy.
•
For practical reasons, most cap and
trade proposals require only fossil fuel
suppliers and other large polluters to
play directly. They affect the rest of the
economy as they pass on their costs.
•
Potential strengths include:
• It is a market-based solution.
• It puts a cost on greenhouse gas emissions to help correct the market
failure.
• Newly created profit opportunities (from trading carbon permits) can drive
continuous innovation and investment. In contrast to government-mandated
reduction targets, profit-driven reductions can encourage reductions that
go beyond the regulatory standard.
• Although it will increase the cost of carbon-based fuels and consumer
products, it is not a carbon “tax.” This may make it more politically
appealing.
• If the permits were auctioned, the government could return the auction
proceeds to the public to help offset increased energy costs. This could be
done in a progressive manner (benefiting lower-earning households who
spend a greater proportion of their income on energy).
Potential weaknesses include:
• Questions arise about whether or not it is ethical to make a profit from
carbon trading.
• Fossil fuel prices will rise. The cost will be passed on to consumers. It
is likely to impose hardships on low-income households (to correct for
this the government could use revenue from auctioning off the permits
to support “carbon cost rebate” measures to alleviate pressures on lowincome households).
• If there is not an international agreement about cap-and-trade markets and
one country tries to do it by itself, companies in that country may decide it would be cheaper to move to another country that continues to let them emit greenhouse gasses for free. Similarly, products and energy could be
imported from companies already operating in areas not included under the
cap. This is called “leakage.”
• If the cap and trade system became complex like our tax system, it could
be expensive to manage. Complexity could also open opportunities for
loopholes.
39
Lesson 5: Carbon Cap & Trade
The Musical Chairs Game
Notes to Teachers:
• This game is adapted with
permission from “Cap-and-Trade:
An Illustration of Managed Scarcity
using Musical Chairs,” a PowerPoint
presentation by Dr. Holmes Hummel of
the UC-Berkeley Energy Resources Group.
For a more detailed
explanation of the concepts
involved, view the full
presentation at http://www.
holmeshummel.net/ClimatePolicyDesign/
•
The relative costs of abatement
presented in the game handouts are
loosely based on results of the McKinsey
Company’s report “Reducing U.S.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much
at What Cost?” The entire report is
available at http://www.mckinsey.com/
clientservice/ccsi/greenhousegas.asp
•
• Questions arise about how to initially distribute the permits—giving them
•
•
away or selling all or some of them in an auction. Giving some away
could allow companies that receive them to have unfair advantages over
companies that have to purchase them.
Questions arise about whether or not our political institutions can be
reliable enough to manage this massive new market.
Federal climate policy would need to be forthcoming quickly. The
complicated nature of a cap and trade system, however, might slow the
legislative process.
Homework:
While the thoughts are fresh, each student should add a journal entry about
opinions and thoughts raised by the lesson. The journal will serve as the starting
point for each student to craft a position statement. The position statements
will cover topics from each lesson. The more specific details each student
includes in his or her journal, the easier it will be to write a position statement. A
recommended format would be to record several ideas or opinions, each with at
least three supporting statements, based in concepts presented in the lesson.
For comparison with another
potential market-based strategy for
reducing carbon emissions, see the
lesson on Carbon Tax.
•
For more information about designing
a cap and trade system, see the Pew
Trust Climate Change 101: Cap and
Trade at: http://www.pewclimate.org/
docUploads/Cap&Trade.pdf
•
Certain carbon reductions may be
difficult to verify and may not be
permanent. For example, carbon
permits from the Agriculture sector
may not be guaranteed into the distant
future—for example, if there were
a fire, the carbon stored would be
released to the atmosphere. This is an
example of how a cap and trade system
could result in a weakened cap.
•
40
Copy Master - Lesson 5 - Hand-out
Lesson 5: Carbon Cap & Trade
The Musical Chairs Game

OIL COMPANY (pick a name for your company)
• Your company is allotted one carbon pollution permit
(represented by a chair) for each member of your team.
• Your objective is to reduce your company’s carbon emissions in the most economical way possible and to sell the permits you no longer need.
• You decide how and when you should reduce emissions and sell off a permit.
• You must also keep track of how much money you make selling permits (profits = price for which you sell the permit – your cost to reduce the emissions).
• You can use each option only one time.
Options for reducing emissions
Replace some sales of petroleum with cellulosic biofuels
Natural gas and petroleum systems management
Replace some sales of diesel with biodiesel
Cost
$70
$105
$155
CHEMICAL COMPANY (pick a name for your company)
• Your company is allotted one carbon pollution permit (represented by a chair) for each member of your team.
• Your objective is to reduce your company’s carbon emissions in the most economical way possible and to sell the permits you no longer need.
• You decide how and when you should reduce emissions and sell off a permit.
• You must also keep track of how much money you make selling permits (profits=price for which you sell the permit – your cost to reduce the emissions).
• You can use each option only one time.
Options for reducing emissions
Cost
Manage HFCs (hyrdrofluorocarbons,
potent greenhouse gases) in manufacturing $90
POWER COMPANY (pick a name for your company)
• Your company is allotted one carbon pollution permit (represented by a chair) for each member of your team.
• Your objective is to reduce your company’s carbon emissions in the most economical way possible and to sell the permits you no longer need.
• You decide how and when you should reduce emissions and sell off a permit.
• You must also keep track of how much money you make selling permits (profits = price for which you sell the permit – your cost to reduce the emissions).
• You can use each option only one time.
Options for reducing emissions
Replace some energy production from
coal with wind energy
Replace some energy production from
coal with new nuclear plants
Build new coal-fired power plants with
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
Replace some energy production from coal with solar
Retrofit old coal-fired power plants with CCS
Shift from burning coal to burning natural gas,
dispatch of old power plants
Cost
$100
$115
$132
$135
$140
$150
COAL COMPANY (pick a name for your company)
• Your company is allotted one carbon pollution permit (represented by a chair) for each member of your team.
• Your objective is to reduce your company’s carbon emissions in the most economical way possible and to sell the permits you no longer need.
• You decide how and when you should reduce emissions and sell off a permit.
• You must also keep track of how much money you make selling permits (profits = price for which you sell the permit – your cost to reduce the emissions).
• You can use each option only one time.
Options for reducing emissions
Cost
Coal mining methane management
$85

41
Copy Master - Lesson 5 - Hand-out
Lesson 5: Carbon Cap & Trade
The Musical Chairs Game

AGRICULTURE COMPANY
CITY (pick a name for your city)
(pick a name for your company)
• Your company is allotted one carbon pollution permit (represented by a chair) for each member of your team.
• Your objective is to reduce your company’s carbon emissions in the most economical way possible and to sell the permits you no longer need.
• You decide how and when you should reduce emissions and sell off a permit.
• You must also keep track of how much money you make selling permits (profits=price for which you
sell the permit – your cost to reduce the emissions).
• You can use each option only one time.
Options for reducing emissions
Cost
Conservation tillage
Afforestation of pastureland
Winter cover crops
Afforestation of cropland
$75
$103
$115
$130
• Your city is allotted one carbon pollution permit (represented by a chair) for each member of your team.
• Your objective is to reduce your city’s carbon emissions in the most economical way possible and to sell the permits you no longer need.
• You decide how and when you should reduce emissions and sell off a permit.
• You must also keep track of how much money you make selling permits (profits = price for which you sell the permit – your cost to reduce the emissions).
• You can use each option only one time.
Options for reducing emissions
Cost
Reduce the power draw from electronics
Replace incandescent lighting in buildings with LEDs
Make the fleet of cars and trucks fuel efficient
Retrofit old buildings to make them more energy efficient
$2
$5
$7
$55

42
Copy Master - Lesson 5 - Hand-out
Lesson 6: Carbon Tax
A round table discussion
Question
How would a carbon tax work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
Age-Level
High School
Students will be introduced to the basics of a carbon tax.
Objective
Students will role-play a round table discussion investigating the possibilities for a carbon tax.
Students will summarize and reflect on potential strengths and weaknesses of a carbon tax.
Time Needed
At least one 45-minute period
Materials
Small placards and markers
Ask your students to summarize what they already know about
climate change. (2 min)
The following points should be reiterated:
• Heat trapping gasses (greenhouse gasses) released into the atmosphere as a result of human activities are driving climate change.
• Greenhouse gases such as CO2 are very long-lived in the atmosphere and
their build up has consequences over the course of centuries.
• 85% of U. S. energy use comes from burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas).
This is the biggest driver of climate change.
• Climate change impacts can disrupt the planet’s crucial life-support systems.
• There is a lag between when greenhouse gases are emitted and when the
climate fully responds.
• Leading scientists say we must drastically reduce our emissions to avoid the most catastrophic changes. They say we must start now to achieve these
reductions.
Sources:
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Summary for Policy Makers. 2007.
Navigating by the Numbers, World Resources Institute. 2005.
Ask your students to recall the lesson on cap-and-trade. Ask them
to summarize the meaning of what economists call a “market
failure” as it relates to emissions of greenhouse gasses. The
following points should be reiterated: (2 min)
• Increasing greenhouse gas emissions have a cost (for example, more severe droughts, floods, storms, disease, rising sea levels, collapsing ecosystems,
species extinction).
• The emitters of these gasses, however, do not have to pay the cost. Currently they can dump emissions into the atmosphere for free.
• Therefore the prices they charge for their products do not reflect their full cost.
• Economists call this a “market failure.”
• Introducing a cost for carbon emissions can help correct the market failure.
Source:
The Economics of Climate Change, Stern Review Report. 2006.
43
Lesson 6: Carbon Tax
A round table discussion
Introduce your students to the idea of a carbon tax. (5 min)
Similar to a cap and trade system, a carbon tax is a market-based approach to
lowering greenhouse gas emissions and stabilizing global warming. Like a capand-trade system, a carbon tax introduces a cost for carbon emissions.
• A carbon tax taxes the amount of carbon emitted through burning fossil fuels.
––To fairly reflect carbon content, the taxes would be based on BTU’s (British Thermal Units, a measure of energy), instead of on something like weight or volume.
––When burned, each type of fossil fuel emits a specific amount of carbon
per BTU. Different types of coal contain different amounts. Assuming
the emissions are not sequestered and instead are released to the
atmosphere, all kinds of coal emit more carbon per BTU than petroleum.
Petroleum in turn emits more carbon per BTU than natural gas.
––Fuels that are “cleaner” (emit less carbon per BTU) would carry less tax
than more dirty fuels.
• A carbon tax would be phased in gradually. Rates would increase on a
set schedule.
––As prices for “dirty fuels” became more and more expensive, there would be more market pressure to switch from coal to cleaner fossil fuels like natural gas.
––Prices for energy from non-fossil fuels (like wind, solar, and biomass) would become more competitively priced per BTU because they would not be subject to the carbon tax.
––Companies that burn fossil fuels and therefore pay the carbon tax would pass on much of their increased cost to consumers. This would encourage reduced consumption.
Ask your students for their initial thoughts and reactions to the
idea of a carbon tax. (2 min)
Potential responses may include:
• Taxes are already high enough—no politicians will be able to pass more taxes.
• A tax on carbon would be a hardship for low-income people who are already overburdened.
• Just because fossil fuel is more expensive doesn’t necessarily mean people will use less of it—can a carbon tax really lower carbon emissions?
Explain to your students that groups worried about the effects and effectiveness
of a carbon tax have raised those same concerns (and many more). Groups
advocating for a carbon tax, on the other hand, have offered potential solutions
to those concerns.
Introduce the role-playing round table discussion(5 min)
Explain to your students that they will have the opportunity to role-play a round
table discussion about the carbon tax:
44
• You will distribute to groups of students handouts with descriptions of roles.
• Three of the group roles will be advocates of the carbon tax and two will be groups with concerns about the carbon tax.
Lesson 6: Carbon Tax
A round table discussion
• The advocates will include spokespeople who will summarize the strengths of the carbon tax. The advocates will also include groups of experts in certain
aspects of carbon tax policy.
• The handouts will give background information the students will need to read and understand.
• Each group will have a few minutes to decide on their most important points and how to convey them most persuasively.
• Groups should also try to anticipate what about their statements other groups with contrasting views might question.
• Groups should try to strategize a way to respond that will clarify their position and possibly alleviate the other group’s concerns.
• You, the teacher, will act as moderator of the round table. The discussion will begin with the spokespeople for the carbon tax stating their case for a carbon tax.
• The discussion will continue as each group with concerns takes turns expressing their concerns. The appropriate group of experts advocating the
carbon tax will respond.
• The discussion will end once each group has had a chance to state their position or concerns and respond to any concerns or questions raised by other groups.
Role-play round table discussion (20 min)
Distribute role handouts to groups, give groups time to read and plan
statements, facilitate the discussion.
Ask students to summarize and reflect on the potential strengths
and weaknesses of a carbon tax as a way to reduce emissions of
greenhouse gasses. (5 min)
Potential strengths include:
• It is market-based. Market-based solutions can help achieve cost-effective
greenhouse gas emission reductions.
• Putting a cost on carbon emissions helps correct the market failure.
• A carbon tax is more straightforward to implement and to understand than a
cap and trade scheme.
• In contrast to the volatility in price that could come with a cap and trade scheme, with a carbon tax companies know what the price of carbon will be at certain points in the future. This allows them to plan.
• A carbon tax could be “revenue neutral” and could be designed to be progressive (benefiting lower-earning households).
• Potential weaknesses include:
• The term “tax” could make it politically unpopular. This makes it difficult for
the U.S. Congress to pass. Even if it were successfully written into law, there
is a risk it would be revoked or that companies would successfully lobby for
exemptions.
• Increased costs of fossil fuels will be passed on to consumers. Without mechanisms in place to alleviate the burden on low-income families, the tax could cause hardship.
45
Lesson 6: Carbon Tax
A round table discussion
Notes to Teachers:
• Print one handout for each
member of each group—each student
will need his or her own copy to read
and use as reference during the group
statements.
Give each group a placard and a
marker to make their group name clear
to the rest of the class.
•
For more information about
carbon tax proposals, visit the
Carbon Tax Center, a notfor-profit nonpartisan NGO
composed of experts in economics, law,
public policy, and engineering, and
dedicated to promoting a carbon tax
as a method for reducing greenhouse
gasses. http://www.carbontax.org
•
For a comparison of carbon tax
versus cap and trade, visit http://www.
pewclimate.org/DDCF-Briefs/Taxes
•
46
• The lack of a “cap” reduces the certainty of lowering greenhouse gas emissions to a specified target level.
Homework:
While the thoughts are fresh, each student should add a journal entry about
opinions and thoughts raised by the lesson. The journal will serve as the starting
point for each student to craft a position statement. The position statements
will cover topics from each lesson. The more specific details each student
includes in his or her journal, the easier it will be to write a position statement. A
recommended format would be to record several ideas or opinions, each with at
least three supporting statements, based in concepts presented in the lesson.
Lesson 6: Carbon Tax
A round table discussion
# 1 ROLE: CARBON TAX SPOKESPEOPLE (Decide on a name for your group)
Your group will open the round table discussion by summarizing the basics of a carbon tax.
• Read and understand the background information presented below.
• Decide how to introduce the idea of the carbon tax.
• Decide which points are the most important to share.
• Highlight the potential strengths of a carbon tax.
• Speak in a clear and persuasive manner—do not just read off the sheet!
Background information (Source: http://www.carbontax.org):
The burning of fossil fuels releases carbon into the
atmosphere that speeds global warming. To avoid
catastrophic climate changes, leading scientists agree we
must drastically reduce emissions. Currently, however, there
are few market incentives to do this.
The emission of carbon into the atmosphere has a cost.
The cost includes climate-change-related impacts like
more severe droughts, floods, storms, disease, and rising
sea levels. The polluters, however, do not currently have
to pay the cost. This means the price they charge for their
products does not reflect the products’ true cost. This is
what economists call a market failure.
A carbon tax would help correct the market failure by
adding a cost to carbon emissions. A carbon tax would tax
the carbon content of fuels. The tax would be added far
“upstream” in the supply chain—to extractors, processors,
and importers of fossil fuels that will be burned. They
would pass their expenses down the chain to other
businesses and eventually to consumers.
The carbon tax would increase market incentives for carbonreducing measures. These would include increases in energy
efficiency and conservation, renewable energy, and cellulosic
biofuels (as long as they are verified as low carbon).
The taxes would be phased in slowly and would increase
on a set schedule. This set schedule would allow companies
to know how much carbon would cost at different points
in the future. This would help them plan and would assure
them a certain return on investments in cleaner energy. The
set schedule of increases would also remove the volatility in
prices of a cap and trade system.
A carbon tax could be collected through the tax-collecting
systems already in place. In contrast to a cap and trade
system, it would not need a new market to be established
and monitored. The tax system would be much less
complicated than a cap and trade system so it could be
implemented more quickly. The simplicity of it would
also reduce the likelihood of loopholes and preferential
treatment to certain companies or industries.
A carbon tax would be based on the amount of carbon a
certain fossil fuel emits per unit of energy (BTU). In general,
a BTU from coal produces 30% more carbon emissions
than a BTU from oil, and 80% more than a BTU from
natural gas. Thus taxing the carbon per BTU would put a
proportionately higher tax on coal than on oil or gas. This
would encourage burners of fossil fuels to switch from coal
to cleaner fuels like natural gas.
Carbon taxes are already in place in certain areas. Finland
was the first to introduce a carbon tax. Sweden and Great
Britain have also enacted carbon taxes as well as the
Canadian provinces of Quebec and British Columbia and
the U.S. city of Boulder, Colorado.
47
Copy Master - Lesson 6 - Hand-out
Lesson 6: Carbon Tax
A round table discussion
#2 ROLE: ANTI-TAX BUSINESS GROUP (Decide on a name for your group)
After the spokespeople for the carbon tax introduce their proposal, your group will be the first one to have an opportunity
to raise concerns and ask questions.
• Read and understand the background information presented below.
• Decide which points are the most important to share.
• Highlight your most critical concerns about a carbon tax.
• Speak in a clear and persuasive manner—do not just read off the sheet!
Background information (Source: http://www.carbontax.org):
Certain business groups worry about the impact a carbon
tax would have on them. When fuel prices rise many
businesses struggle. They have to either pass their increased
costs on to customers and risk losing competitiveness or
try to absorb the costs into their bottom line. A carbon tax
would further increase fuel prices.
Rising fuel costs could impact rural businesses the hardest.
They have to drive long distances to pick up essentials. Also
their customers have to drive long distances to reach them.
Rising fuel costs would also be a hardship for truckers and
shipping companies. They would have to pass some of their
costs onto consumers. That would raise the prices of goods
that are transported long distances or that contain parts or
that were shipped long distance.
Rising fuel costs would also impact the price of food. The
increase in price would come not only from the transport
of food to markets, but also through the energy used to
produce the food. Corn, for example, is energy-intensive
to harvest and dry. Corn is an ingredient in a large majority
of processed foods. Furthermore animals are fed corn to
fatten them before slaughter, so the cost for meat would
increase as well.
As the price of food and goods increases, the low-income
and middle-class people will be affected the most. As their
budgets become tighter, they will cut back on their spending.
This will impact businesses that rely on consumer spending.
Certain business groups worry that adding a carbon tax
could also make the goods produced in this country less
competitive with goods produced in other countries that
do not have carbon taxes. In the domestic market cheap
imports from countries like India or China will out-compete
American-made products. In foreign markets, U.S. exports
will have a more difficult time competing.
Some opponents of tax increases believe the government
wastes and mismanages the tax revenue it already has. Giving
it more tax revenue would just increase government waste.
Certain business groups worry the challenges presented
to businesses by a carbon tax will further damage the U.S.
economy. It will make recovery from economic recession
more slow and difficult.
48
Copy Master - Lesson 6 - Hand-out
Lesson 6: Carbon Tax
A round table discussion
#3 ROLE: ADVOCATES: EXPERTS ON TAX CONCERNS (Decide on a name for your group)
After the spokespeople for the carbon tax present their proposal, the first group to have a chance to express their
concerns will be a group of anti-tax businesspeople. Once they finish their statements, you will have an opportunity to
address some of their concerns.
• Read and understand the background information below.
• Decide which information would be the most important to share to alleviate potential concerns of anti-tax business
groups.
• Highlight the strengths of the carbon tax.
• Speak in a clear and persuasive manner—do not just read off the sheet!
Background information (Source: http://www.carbontax.org):
Advocates of a carbon tax propose a carbon tax that would
be “revenue neutral.” Revenue neutral means that the
government would not keep the money it collects from
the carbon tax. It would return the vast majority of the
money to the public. The government might keep only a
small amount to invest in programs to help provide energy
efficient technology to low-income and rural people who
would be most negatively affected by rising fuel costs.
One way to make the carbon tax revenue neutral would be
to divide all the tax income equally among every citizen and
return it in a monthly check. This method would favor lowincome and middle-class people. For every gallon of fuel
used by the poorest 20% of Americans, the richest 20%
uses three to four gallons. Because the dividend checks
would be divided equally among all Americans, the poorest
people would receive three to four dollars back for every
dollar of tax they paid.
Another proposal to make the tax revenue neutral would
be to “shift” taxes away from existing taxes. For example
federal payroll taxes or state sales taxes might be reduced
or eventually eliminated.
The amount of carbon tax money refunded to any
particular individual would be independent from the
amount of fossil fuel that individual used. This would
preserve the incentive for each individual to cut back on his
or her fossil fuel usage, because regardless of how much
carbon tax an individual pays, he or she will get the same
amount back.
Advocates of a carbon tax claim the taxes will have a
positive effect on the competitiveness of U.S. goods. Higher
fossil fuel prices will encourage innovation in clean, efficient
technologies that are highly sought-after in world markets.
A U.S. carbon tax would create a level playing field with
our long-term trading partners in the European Union and
in Japan. It would also open the door for India and China
to create a similar tax. Until India and China follow suit, the
U.S. could use “border tax adjustments” to equalize the
prices of imports from countries without a carbon tax.
Advocates of a carbon tax reject the idea that a carbon
tax would damage the U.S. economy and slow its recovery
from the recession. They argue that the real threat to the
economy is catastrophic climate change. They argue that
businesses can manage increases in the cost of fuel as
long as the increases are regular and known in advance.
They argue that what has traditionally upset markets is
not high energy prices, but rather price volatility (wide and
unpredictable swings in price).
A carbon tax would create a strong “market pull” towards
clean energy and energy-efficient technology. This would
eventually remove or reduce the need for the government
to create subsidies for clean technologies or to earmark
spending for mass transit or biofuels or hybrid cars, etc.
49
Copy Master - Lesson 6 - Hand-out
Lesson 6: Carbon Tax
A round table discussion
ROLE #4: COALITION OF ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS (Decide on a name for your group)
After the spokespeople for the carbon tax present their proposal, the first group to have a chance to express their
concerns will be a group of anti-tax businesspeople. After the carbon tax advocates respond to those concerns, your
group will have a chance to express your concerns.
• Read and understand the background information presented below.
• Decide which points are the most important to share.
• Highlight your most critical concerns about a carbon tax.
• Speak in a clear and persuasive manner—do not just read off the sheet!
Background information (Source: http://www.carbontax.org):
Some environmental groups worry that a carbon tax would
be too politically unpopular to pass. This is due in part to
Americans being accustomed to cheap energy prices and to
the anti-tax movement over the past 25 years. They point
to the example of President Clinton’s proposed energy tax
which was defeated.
Some environmental groups highlight the fact that most
major politicians propose a cap and trade rather than a
carbon tax. This includes Obama, who is working on a
nation-wide cap and trade scheme designed to cut carbon
emissions 80% by 2050.
Some environmental groups think the support by industry
and business of a cap and trade system might make it
more likely to pass than a carbon tax. Some of the largest
corporations in the U.S. support cap and trade plans. These
include ConocoPhillips, Deere, Dow Chemical, DuPont, Ford
Motor Company, Johnson & Johnson, and PepsiCo.
Some environmental groups worry that a carbon tax
won’t do enough to cut consumption. They argue that
even though gas prices have risen over the past several
years, people have not significantly changed their driving
behavior. They argue increases in corporate average fuelefficiency (CAFE) standards would be more effective at
lowering consumption.
Some environmental groups think a tax on carbon
emissions is not necessary. They agree that renewable and
alternative sources of energy need to be able to compete
more effectively with fossil fuels. They argue, however,
that this could be accomplished by mandates (for example,
passing a law that 20% of energy production must be from
renewables by the year 2020) or through subsidies (for
example, providing money to help with the construction of
windmills or ethanol plants).
Some groups also argue that instead of passing a carbon
tax, the government could just end subsidies on fossil fuels.
Currently the fossil fuel industry receives tax breaks and
fiscal subsidies of about $25 billion a year. If the government
ended these giveaways, perhaps renewable and alternative
sources of fuel could be more economically competitive.
50
Copy Master - Lesson 6 - Hand-out
Lesson 6: Carbon Tax
A round table discussion
ROLE #5: ADVOCATES: POLICY EXPERTS (Decide on a name for your group)
The final group to present their concerns about the carbon tax will be a coalition of environmental groups. They agree that
carbon emissions must be lowered to slow global warming, but they are not sure that a carbon tax is the best way to do
it. Once they finish their statements, you will have an opportunity to address some of their concerns.
• Read and understand the background information below.
• Decide which information would be the most important to share to alleviate concerns.
• Highlight the strengths of the carbon tax.
• Speak in a clear and persuasive manner—do not just read off the sheet!
Background information (Source: http://www.carbontax.org):
Big business has tended to support cap and trade schemes
over carbon taxes. In January of 2009, however, the chief
executive of ExxonMobil, the world’s largest oil company,
said Exxon could support a carbon tax. He said it was more
transparent, more fair, and more effective than a cap and
trade scheme.
Advocates of a carbon tax argue that Americans’
opposition to the idea of a “tax” could be lessened. This
could happen if proposals were clearly “revenue neutral”
(meaning the government returns all the tax collected to
the people through either monthly checks or reductions in
other taxes). Americans might also reduce their resistance
to a tax if they understood that it could be designed to be
progressive (benefiting lower-income people).
Advocates claim Americans are becoming willing to pay more
for energy to fight global warming. They cite polls like a 2006
New York Times/CBS poll that found significant support for
an increased gasoline tax to reduce global warming.
Advocates claim rising fuel costs would reduce fuel
consumption. They point to the first half of 2008 when gas
prices rose 24% over the previous year. U.S. gasoline usage
fell more than 3% even though economic activity rose
more than 2% during that same period.
Advocates argue that a carbon tax would be even more
effective at reducing fuel consumption than the rise in
prices that happened during the first half of 2008. Over the
last five or six years, gasoline prices fell about as often as
they rose. This let people think prices would eventually go
back down. This makes people less likely to make lifestyle
changes. In contrast, with a carbon tax people would know
energy prices would continue to go up.
Tax advocates argue that standards by themselves are
not enough. They argue that standards are a “blunt
instrument.” For example the corporate average fuelefficiency (CAFE) standards set for auto manufacturers
do not influence consumers’ vehicle usage. Also political
arguments have continued for years over what level the
CAFE standards should set. In fact the fuel-efficiency for
cars and light trucks in U.S. has not changed much since
1987. In addition some car manufacturers choose to pay
penalties rather than comply with the CAFE standards.
Carbon tax advocates argue mandates and subsidies
are also “blunt instruments.” An example of a mandate
would be passing a law that 20% of energy must be from
renewable sources by the year 2020. A subsidy would
mean, for example, providing money for construction
and operation of a wind farm. Tax advocates argue there
have been few examples of energy subsidies or mandates
resulting in substantial amounts of new energy.
Carbon tax advocates agree with other groups who
suggest it would be helpful to remove the $25 billion in
tax breaks and subsidies the government currently gives
the fossil fuel industry. They argue, however, ending these
giveaways would raise prices of fossil fuel only two to three
percent, not enough to reduce consumption enough to
slow global warming.
51
Copy Master - Lesson 6 - Hand-out
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?
Question
How do ideas of climate equity, which differ between and among developed and developing
countries, influence potential approaches to international agreement?
Age-Level
High School
Students will summarize the different principles of equity in climate change decision-making.
Objective
Students will explain how, depending on countries’ differing circumstances, each may have
differing opinions about the equity of certain proposals.
Students will predict which types of climate proposals might be most acceptable to different
types of countries.
Students will reflect on challenges posed by equity concerns to international climate negotiations.
Time Needed
At least one 45-minute period (Depending on the needs and interests of your students, this activity might require two class sessions to complete)
Introduce the idea of equity in climate negotiations. (4 min)
• Ask your students what they know about the Kyoto Protocol, the most
recent effort at international agreements to slow climate change. Specifically
what were the main stumbling blocks to broad agreement? Important
points to reiterate include:
––The Kyoto Protocol was negotiated in 1997, and went into force in 2005
(once the required threshold was reached of the protocol being ratified by
developed nations accounting for at least 55% of global greenhouse gas
emissions).
––The treaty aimed to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to safe levels
using reduction targets that were legally binding for developed nations.
––Developing countries like India and China were not subject to legally
binding targets because their per-capita emissions were still low. They
would be allowed to grow their emissions (hopefully in a relatively clean
and efficient way—aided by technological and financial assistance from
developed countries) to increase the standard of living of their people.
––The United States, the largest per-capita emitter of greenhouse gasses,
refused to ratify the treaty because the treaty did not include binding
targets and timetables for developing nations. The United States feared
that it might lose competitiveness if it had legally binding reduction
targets, but China (by 2007, the world’s largest total [not per-capita]
emitter of greenhouse gasses) did not.
• Explain that questions of equity have been some of the most contentious
issues in efforts at international climate negotiations. Depending on
countries’ differing circumstances, each may have differing opinions about
the equity of certain proposals.
53
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?
Explain the activity (2 min)
• The class will divide into nine groups. Each will receive handouts (one copy
for each group member) explaining one key principle of equity in climate
change decision-making.
• Each group will read and discuss their handouts.
• Each group will then present their equity principle to the entire class.
• The class will then divide into five country-groups. The students should
number-off to most equally distribute through the five groups those with
knowledge about each type of equity. The groups represent different types
of countries:
––Developed with increasing emissions and a carbon-intensive economy
––Developed with stabilizing or decreasing emissions and a
carbon-efficient economy
––Developing
––Developing with rapidly growing emissions
––Oil-producing nations
• You, the teacher, will then present four different proposals for international
agreements to reduce global carbon emissions.
• For each different proposal, the country-groups should discuss whether,
from the perspective of their assigned countries, the proposal seems
equitable. The group should decide what concerns, if any, they have about
the proposal.
• Each group will share their opinion about each proposal.
Conduct the activity
Nine groups discuss and present equity principles (15 min)
As the groups present their principles, display figure 1, a summary of the
different principles.
Drawing on the equity principles just discussed, explain to students:
• Two characteristics of the Kyoto Protocol were main points of contention:
• To meet the equality-sovereignty ideal, each country was assigned an
emissions target as a percentage of its 1990 levels. Developing countries
felt this perpetuated international economic inequalities.
• To meet the responsible-polluter-pays ideal (and address capacity
concerns), developing countries were not assigned legally binding targets.
This made the Kyoto agreement unacceptable to the United States.
Without U.S. participation, it is uncertain that the environmental goals of
Kyoto can be achieved.
• The international community is currently searching for a more effective way
to approach international cooperation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
54
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?
Five country-groups discuss proposed agreements and present
concerns. (20 min)
• Students number off into five country-groups. Give each group a handout
describing their country-group:
––United States (developed country with growing emissions)
––France, Germany, United Kingdom, Denmark (developed countries that
have already made substantive reductions in emissions, or, in the case of
France, had very low emissions to begin with)
––Brazil, South Africa, Mexico (Developing countries)
––China, India (Developing countries with rapidly growing emissions)
––Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela (oil-producing
countries)
• Describe to students the following four proposed approaches to international
negotiation and action on climate. After describing each approach, give each
group a few moments to discuss what their country-group’s concerns might
be about the equity of that proposal. They should also discuss how likely
their country-group might be to support that approach. Ask each group to
share their concerns and opinions with the class.
• APPROACH #1: CONTRACTION AND CONVERGENCE
This is the major proposal based on the principles of egalitarianism (the
idea that all human beings should have an equal share of the atmosphere
and each country’s emissions should be proportional to its population).
Eventually, under a Contraction and Convergence agreement, every person
in the world would be allowed the same emissions as every other person.
The total global allowable emissions would eventually shrink dramatically.
Contraction and Convergence proposals would allow developing nations
to increase their emissions as they develop. For developed countries, it
would require sizable reductions.
What does each of the five country-groups think of this proposal? From
the perspective of each country-group, which aspects seem equitable?
Which seem unfair or unworkable? Why?
Notes to Teachers:
• Typically, developing
countries are in favor of Contraction
and Convergence. Egalitarianism, in the
opinion of developing countries, is often
the most important element of equity.
Contraction and convergence also meets
“polluter pays” aspects of responsibility
concerns, as well as many capacity
concerns of developing countries.
Many developed countries oppose the
idea of Contraction and Convergence.
They argue it does not take into account
current emission levels and the difficulty
of changing existing infrastructure and
economies. They also feel it does not
address equity concerns of comparability
of effort or of linking effort to benefit.
Furthermore, they argue it does not take
into account domestic constraints.
•
OPEC (Organization of Oil Producing
Countries) is typically against Contraction
and Convergence because of its lack of
availability of cost-effective opportunities
to make required reductions.
•
Convergence (universal emissions target per person) achieved by 2050.
Contraction (falling global emissions) completed by 2100.
Carbon from fossil-fuel burning (billion tonnes)
Rest of the world
India
China
US
Rest of the OECD
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1860
1880
1900
1920
1940
1960
1980
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
55
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?
Notes to Teachers:
• While national carbon taxes are
feasible (and in place in several countries,
provinces, and municipalities), agreement
on an international carbon tax is unlikely.
Almost every country has domestic
constraints in the form of vested interests
that would oppose this plan.
An international carbon tax would
also fail to take into consideration
unique national circumstances and
capacity concerns. Developing countries
argue it does not reflect equity concerns
based on levels of responsibility. OPEC
countries argue, because much of their
economy is based on fossil fuels, they
would disproportionately pay the cost.
•
Notes to Teachers:
• Approach #3 encounters
technical and moral difficulties
with questions of how to calculate
responsibilities. Assuming it could
figure out how to assign varying levels
of responsibility, it would satisfy some
principles of equity but not others.
Developing countries tend to feel this
proposal acknowledges their economic
situations and the priority they have to
prioritize basic needs for their populations.
They feel it addresses capacity concerns
because countries that have historically
emitted more tend to be more wealthy
and able to make reductions.
•
Developed countries tend to feel this
proposal is not equitable. It conflicts
with the sovereignty principle, does not
consider nations’ individual circumstances
and their impact on capacity, does not
involve comparable effort, and does not
link effort to benefit.
•
56
• APPROACH #2: INTERNATIONAL CARBON TAX
Recall the lesson on carbon tax. An international carbon tax would work in
much the same way as a national carbon tax would work. There would be
no need to calculate targets or to monitor emissions. Market forces would
create the incentives for countries, companies and individuals to reduce
their emissions.
An international carbon tax would eliminate some of the potential
problems associated with a scenario where individual countries make their
own carbon tax system or choose to not have one at all. Calculations
would be simpler between countries. There would be no need for “border
adjustment fees” for goods coming from countries without carbon taxes.
There would be no “leakage” issues where industries would move to
countries without carbon taxes.
What does each of the five country-groups think of this proposal? From
the perspective of each country-group, which aspects seem equitable?
Which seem unfair or unworkable? Why?
• APPROACH #3: BRAZILIAN PROPOSAL
This is the major proposal based on the equity principles of responsibility.
It embodies the “polluter pays” idea. It proposes calculating each country’s
historic contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. Countries with higher
historical emissions have greater responsibility to make larger reductions.
What does each of the five country-groups think of this proposal? From
the perspective of each country-group, which aspects seem equitable?
Which seem unfair or unworkable? Why?
• APPROACH #4: DYNAMIC TARGETS
This is the major proposal based on equity principles of capacity. It
proposes dynamic or “indexed” targets instead of absolute targets. The
targets would be relative to the expected growth of each country’s GDP
(Gross Domestic Product).
A country with greater growth would be allowed higher emissions. A
country with less growth would be allowed fewer emissions. If a country’s
economic growth was either more or less than projected, the targets
could be adjusted.
The stringency of the target could be different for each country, taking
into account individual circumstances. In this way, even developing
countries could participate.
What does each of the five country-groups think of this proposal? From
the perspective of each country-group, which aspects seem equitable?
Which seem unfair or unworkable? Why?
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?
Summarize (4 min)
Ask your students to summarize the one or two key points they gained from this
exploration into equity issues in international climate negotiations. Key points to
reiterate include:
• Equity issues can be contentious and can stand in the way of agreement.
• Each country’s unique circumstances can influence its opinion about what
proposals are equitable.
• Equity concerns differ between and among developed and developing
countries.
• “Top-down” international agreements would demand compromise—it
would be difficult to create an agreement that would satisfy every party.
• “Bottom-up” approaches (i.e. negotiations outside the formal
international framework, incremental agreements, measures like agreedupon efficiency standards, elimination of climate adverse subsidies,
broadening the market for cleaner technologies, etc.) could work in the
absence of a top-down agreement. Without a coordinated international
approach to climate change, however, there is risk that effective outcomes
may not be reached.
Notes to Teachers:
• Because dynamic targets
would not limit economic growth,
most countries, including the United
States, find them more acceptable
than absolute targets. Dynamic
target proposals satisfy several equity
concerns, including comparability of
effort and concerns about capacity.
Criticisms of this plan focus on the
difficulty of administering the system.
Also, there is uncertainty about whether
it would be environmentally effective.
This is because emissions could increase
where economic growth is high.
•
Source:
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change Negotiations: A Matter
of Perspective." Climate Policy, 7: 518 – 534. 2007.
Extend the learning:
• Who does not “have a seat” at the negotiation table? (Answers may
include other species and future generations of humans.)
• Should the rights of these groups be considered?
• What implications would concern for these groups have for climate
negotiations?
Homework:
While the thoughts are fresh, each student should add a journal entry about
opinions and thoughts raised by the lesson. The journal will serve as the starting
point for each student to craft a position statement. The position statements
will cover topics from each lesson. The more specific details each student
includes in his or her journal, the easier it will be to write a position statement. A
recommended format would be to record several ideas or opinions, each with at
least three supporting statements, based in concepts presented in the lesson.
57
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?
Equality
Egalitarianism: all human beings are entitled to an equal
share of the atmospheric global commons
Sovereignty: all countries have an equal right to the
atmosphere, based on current emissions levels
Comparability: all countries should contribute equal effort
to addressing climate change
Responsibilities
'Polluter pays': a country's responsibility to address
climate change should be linked to its responsibility for
the problem
Benefit: responsibility to address climate change should
be linked to the benefits a country will gain from doing so
Capacity
Economic situation and resource availability:
climate change should be addressed on the basis of
economic and resource capabilities
Basic needs: climate change should be addressed on the
basis that the basic needs of developing countries are of
primary concern
Domestic constraints: capacity to address climate
change should take into account domestic constraints
on action
Opportunities: capacity to address climate change
should take into account relative availability of costeffective opportunities to do so
Figure 1: Key principles of equity in climate change decision-making
Source:
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change Negotiations: A Matter of Perspective." Climate Policy,
7: 518 – 534. 2007.
58
Copy Master - Lesson 7- Hand-out
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?
Handouts: Equity Principles

HANDOUT 1.1: EQUALITY—EGALITARIANISM
HANDOUT 1.2: EQUALITY—SOVEREIGNTY
Read and understand the information below.
Prepare to explain it to the rest of the class.
Speak clearly—do not just read off the sheet!
Read and understand the information below. Prepare to
explain it to the rest of the class. Speak clearly—do not just
read off the sheet!
Summary:
Summary:
This equity principle states that no one owns the
atmosphere, so the right to pollute should be equally
divided among every human. Therefore countries should be
allowed to pollute in proportion to their population. This
concept is easily understood and appeals to common sense
ideas of fairness.
Opinions:
Some developing countries say: This is fair because it allows
us to increase our emissions as we continue to develop and
grow. Right now we emit far less per capita (per person)
than richer nations. They became rich by burning fossil
fuels. Now we will have our turn. We need to increase
our standard of living so we can better deal with the
anticipated impacts of climate change. Some developed
countries say: This is not fair because, while the developing
countries are allowed to greatly increase emissions, we
have to bear large costs to reduce emissions. Also, how
environmentally effective would this plan be, given the
large increases in emissions allowed to the developing
countries?
This equity principle states that all nations have equal
rights to the atmosphere. These rights should be based
on current emission levels. Every nation can now work to
reduce emissions starting from the status quo.
Opinions:
Some developing nations say: This is not fair because it
rewards high emitters and punishes low emitters. Rich
countries gained their wealth and improved the standard
of living in their countries through unrestricted burning of
fossil fuels. We are at the stage of growth where we need
to be allowed to do that as well. This plan would continue
global inequality.
Some developed nations say: This is fair because it
recognizes the way things are—the current levels of
emissions. Our current economy and infrastructure is based
on fossil fuels. We can work to lower our emissions, but
we cannot be expected to approach the per capita (per
person) levels of countries with much smaller and less
carbon-intensive economies.
Source:
Source:
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change
Negotiations: A Matter of Perspective." Climate Policy,
7: 518 – 534. 2007.
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change
Negotiations: A Matter of Perspective." Climate Policy,
7: 518 – 534. 2007.

59
Copy Master - Lesson 7 - Equity Principles Hand-out
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?

HANDOUT 1.3: EQUALITY—COMPARABILITY
HANDOUT 2.1: RESPONSIBILITIES—POLLUTER PAYS
Read and understand the information below. Prepare to
explain it to the rest of the class. Speak clearly—do not just
read off the sheet!
Read and understand the information below. Prepare to
explain it to the rest of the class. Speak clearly—do not just
read off the sheet!
Summary:
Summary:
This equity principle states that, because the atmosphere
is a common resource and climate change is a common
problem, each country should contribute an equal effort to
address climate change.
This equity principle states that each country’s level of
responsibility for addressing the environmental damage
should be determined by how much it contributed to the
cause. Calculating responsibility would consider historic,
current, and future levels. This appeals to peoples’ ideas of
“cleaning up your own mess.”
Opinions:
Some developing countries say: This is not fair—we
should not have to contribute equally. The majority of
the greenhouse gasses put into the atmosphere in the
years since the industrial revolution were put there by
developed nations. These nations are now rich as a result
of their unrestricted burning of fossil fuels. We have put
comparatively little greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere.
Also, we have fewer resources to spend in trying to reduce
our emissions.
Some developed countries say: This is fair because everyone
works equally. Everyone in the world will benefit from
reduced emissions. If certain countries aren’t contributing
to these reductions, they are “free riders.” Besides, how
environmentally effective would it be if we have to reduce
our emissions and others don’t? Carbon-intensive industries
will just move from our countries to developing countries
that don’t have the restrictions.
Source:
Opinions:
Some developing countries say: This is fair because we have
contributed proportionately little to the problem.
Some developed countries say: We agree that the level of
responsibility should be considered in deciding how much
effort each country should contribute. This raises questions,
however. For example, shouldn’t “blame” depend on some
knowledge that harm is being caused? Before the mid-1980s
we didn’t understand about the effects of greenhouse
gasses, so we shouldn’t be punished for our emissions before
then. Also, when other countries import our goods, they
benefit from our carbon-intensive system. Shouldn’t they
bear some of the responsibility for our emissions?
Source:
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change
Negotiations: A Matter of Perspective." Climate Policy,
7: 518 – 534. 2007.
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change
Negotiations: A Matter of Perspective." Climate Policy,
7: 518 – 534. 2007.

60
Copy Master - Lesson 7- Equity Principles Hand-out
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?

HANDOUT 2.2: RESPONSIBILITIES—BENEFIT
HANDOUT 3.1: CAPACITY—ECONOMIC SITUATION AND
Read and understand the information below. Prepare to
explain it to the rest of the class. Speak clearly—do not just
read off the sheet!
RESOURCE AVAILABILITY
Read and understand the information below. Prepare to
explain it to the rest of the class. Speak clearly—do not just
read off the sheet!
Summary:
This equity principle argues that a country’s responsibility
to address climate change should be proportional to the
benefits it will gain from doing so. This model would give
countries a more equal “return” on their “investment.” It
suggests it would be inequitable if a country put in a large
effort but did not get any benefits, or if a country did not
put in much effort, but got large benefits.
Summary:
This equity principle argues that countries with the
greatest capacity to address a problem should contribute
more than countries that are less able. Developed
countries typically have better technologies, institutions,
human capital (skills and knowledge), and more money
than developing countries. Richer, stronger countries
should help poorer countries.
Opinions:
Many countries agree that this principle could be an
important key to any successful agreement. Countries may
be more willing to agree to a plan if they can see that their
effort will produce benefits that are roughly proportional.
This principle must, however, be balanced with other equity
considerations.
Source:
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change
Negotiations: A Matter of Perspective." Climate Policy,
7: 518 – 534. 2007.
Opinions:
Most countries agree that differences in each country’s ability
to contribute should be considered in any climate agreement.
Source:
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change
Negotiations: A Matter of Perspective." Climate Policy,
7: 518 – 534. 2007.

HANDOUT 3.2: CAPACITY—BASIC NEEDS
Read and understand the information below. Prepare to
explain it to the rest of the class. Speak clearly—do not just
read off the sheet!
Summary:
This equity principle states that if a country has yet to
meet the basic needs of its population, this constrains
that country’s capacity to address climate concerns. This
principle states that a population’s basic needs must take
priority over concerns of climate change.
The least developed countries should concentrate on
reducing poverty and meeting basic needs like drinking
water, sanitation, health, and nutrition. Richer countries
should help the weaker countries to develop in a way that
lifts the people out of poverty.
Opinions:
Most countries agree that developing countries should
prioritize eliminating poverty and developing in a
sustainable way. Countries also recognize a link between
sustainable development and climate concerns. Richer
countries generally accept their responsibility to help poorer
countries develop in ways that are energy-efficient and less
carbon-intensive.
Source:
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change
Negotiations: A Matter of Perspective." Climate Policy,
7: 518 – 534. 2007.

61
Copy Master - Lesson 7 - Equity Principles Hand-out
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?

HANDOUT 3.3: CAPACITY—DOMESTIC CONSTRAINTS
HANDOUT 3.4: CAPACITY—OPPORTUNITIES
Read and understand the information below. Prepare to
explain it to the rest of the class. Speak clearly—do not just
read off the sheet!
Read and understand the information below. Prepare to
explain it to the rest of the class. Speak clearly—do not just
read off the sheet!
Summary:
Summary:
Like the other equity principles related to capacity, this
principle recognizes that certain countries are more capable
of addressing climate concerns than others. It recognizes
that one constraint to action might be internal political
conflict about the relative costs and benefits of taking
action to address climate change.
Like the other equity principles related to capacity, this
principle recognizes that certain countries are more capable
of addressing climate concerns than others. It recognizes
that some countries have many more opportunities
available to them to address climate change than do others.
For example, many argue that the primary responsibility of
any government is to act in the best interest of its citizens. If
a group within a country sees the costs of addressing climate
change as large and immediate, but sees the potential
benefits as uncertain, distant in time, and globally dispersed,
it might argue that it is not in the national interest to act.
The conflict produced by this group may constrain what
actions the government of the country can take.
Source:
For example, countries with economies that rely heavily
on the production, processing, transport, or consumption
of fossil fuels argue they should not be required to reduce
emissions to the same extent as other countries. They
argue that countries with diverse economies have more
opportunities to use clean and efficient technologies.
Source:
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change
Negotiations: A Matter of Perspective." Climate Policy,
7: 518 – 534. 2007.
Heyward, M. "Equity and International Climate Change
Negotiations: A Matter of Perspective." Climate Policy,
7: 518 – 534. 2007.

62
Copy Master - Lesson 7- Equity Principles Hand-out
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?
Handouts: Country-groups

COUNTRY GROUP #1:
UNITED STATES
(Developed country with growing emissions)
Background:
• From 1992 to 2007, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions
grew 20%.
• The U.S. has one of the highest per-capita (per person)
emissions in the world.
• Renewable resources (including hydropower) account
for between 7% and 12% of energy used in the U.S.
• Until 2007, the U.S. was also the largest total emitter of
greenhouse gasses (China has since surpassed the U.S.).
• The U.S. imports products manufactured in China,
thereby indirectly contributing to a portion of China’s
greenhouse gas emissions.
• The U.S. is responsible for about 22% of the world’s
emissions of carbon dioxide.
• The U.S. is responsible for a large percentage of
historical emissions.
• The U.S. is one of the wealthiest countries in the world
and has a highly diversified economy.
COUNTRY GROUP #2:
France, Germany, United Kingdom, Denmark
(Developed countries that have already made substantive
reductions in emissions, or, in the case of France, had very
low emissions to begin with)
Background:
• These countries ratified the Kyoto Protocol and have
been making reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
From 1990 to 2004 the countries achieved the following
reductions (including land use changes and forestry):
––United Kingdom: 58% reduction
––Denmark: 22% reduction
––Germany: 18% reduction
––Norway: 18% reduction
• France closed its last coal mine in 2004. It now gets 80%
of its electricity from nuclear power, so it has relatively
low emissions.
• These countries are among some of the world’s most
wealthy and developed countries. They have relatively
diversified economies.
• These countries have per-capita (per person) emissions
that rank substantially lower than the U.S., but rank
significantly higher than most developing countries.
• As developed countries, they are responsible for a
significant amount of historical emissions.

COUNTRY GROUP # 3:
Brazil, South Africa, Mexico
(Developing countries)
Background:
• These countries signed the Kyoto protocol, but were not assigned legally binding emissions targets.
• Their emissions, both per capita (per person) and total, are substantially lower than the United States.
• As developing countries, they are responsible for fewer historical emissions.
• As developing countries, segments of their populations are vulnerable. They therefore have concerns about basic needs
and eliminating poverty.

63
Copy Master - Lesson 7 - Country-Groups Hand-out
Lesson 7: International Climate Negotiations
What would it take to get agreement?

COUNTRY GROUP #4:
China, India
(Developing countries with rapidly growing emissions)
COUNTRY GROUP #5:
Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela
(Oil producing countries)
Background:
Background:
• These countries signed the Kyoto protocol, but were
not assigned legally binding emissions targets.
• Their per-capita emissions are well below those of
developed countries.
• Their economies are growing rapidly and their
greenhouse gas emissions are increasing rapidly as well.
––India’s emissions increased 103% from 1992 to 2007
––China’s emissions increased 150% from 1992 to 2007
––China is now the leading emitter of carbon dioxide.
It is responsible for 24% of the world’s CO2 emissions
(the United States is responsible for 22%)
• As developing countries, they are responsible for fewer
historical emissions.
• As developing countries, segments of their populations
are vulnerable. They therefore have concerns about
basic needs and eliminating poverty.
• These countries signed the Kyoto Protocol, but as
transitional economies, they were not subject to
binding emissions targets.
• Compared to the United States, the emissions of these
countries are relatively small, both per capita (per
person) and total.
• A large percentage of the wealth of these countries
comes from oil production, processing, and export.

64
Copy Master - Lesson 7- Country-Groups Hand-out
Lesson 8: Writing a Position Statement on Climate Change
What actions should decision makers take?
Question
How can/should we as humans respond to Climate Change?
Age-Level
High School
Students will reflect on the previous lessons on climate targets, policy, and negotiations.
Each student will identify personal positions on issues presented in each of the lessons.
Objective
Each student will choose a decision maker to address.
Each student will craft a well-supported position statement.
Students will have the option to mail their letters.
Time Needed
At least one 45-minute period
Preparation:
Before class, find the addresses of decision makers who represent your students.
• The President’s address is:
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500
• U.S. Department of State, 2201 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20520
• The Secretary of State, the nation’s chief diplomat/negotiator (as of
03/2009 this is Hillary Clinton)
• The State Department’s Special Envoy for Climate Change (as of 03/2009
this is Todd Stern)
Senate Foreign Relations committee—addresses climate change and considers
all international treaties. (as of 03/2009, is headed by Senator John Kerry and
Senator Richard Lugar. Check the current leaders at http://foreign.senate.gov/)
U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-6225
• Members of the U.S. Congress can be searched by ZIP code at:
http://www.congress.org/
Notes to Teachers:
• Students participating in this
activity by December 2009 will have
the opportunity to send a copy of their
letter to the U.S. Youth Delegation
attending the international climate
negotiations in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Students can also follow multi-media
blogs and other updates from the youth
delegation. Find information at
www.willstegerfoundation.org.
Frame the activity (5 min)
In a democratic society, our elected representatives have a duty to listen to their
constituents’ opinions. One of the most effective ways to make your opinion
heard is to write a letter. A typed or hand-written letter carries the most weight
with any recipient, more than an email or signing a petition.
• Students in this class have a powerful voice in the issue of climate change.
This is due, in part, to the following reasons:
––After completing the previous lesson plans on climate change science,
policy, and negotiations, you know more about the issue than most people.
––Your knowledge of the issue will allow you to write a well-informed and
persuasive letter.
––You are young, and climate mitigation decisions being made right now will
affect the rest of your life.
65
Lesson 8: Writing a Position Statement on Climate Change
What actions should decision makers take?
––You are close to the age when you will be able to vote (if you cannot
already). Decision makers know the millennial youth are developing
a strong voice and are becoming involved in civic life more than the
generations before them.
In international climate negotiations, your voice can make a difference at many
different locations in the government. For example:
• The President sets the general course.
• The State Department and its Special Envoy for Climate Change take a
leadership role in the negotiations.
• The Senate Foreign Relations Committee reviews any potential treaties.
• Congress must ratify any treaties before they become law.
Explain the activity (5 min)
Students will:
• Review their journals from the previous lessons.
• Read the handout: Crafting a Position Statement
• Identify the issues and ideas about which they feel most strongly.
• Decide on an appropriate recipient for the letter.
• Craft a draft letter.
• Divide into groups of three.
––Each group member takes a turn reading his or her letter to the other two.
––The other two group members provide feedback on the structure of the
letter and give ideas for making it more powerful (This is a time to critique
the structure and strength of the letter, not the opinions expressed in
it—each person is entitled to his or her own opinion).
• Each student will incorporate feedback and produce a final draft of the letter.
• Students will turn in the letters to the teacher to receive credit for the
assignment and to receive feedback on the structure and strength of the
letters (the opinions expressed are not the subject of grading—each student
is entitled to his or her own opinion).
• The following class period, students can choose to address their letters and
mail them.
Conduct the activity (30 min)
66
Lesson 8: Writing a Position Statement on Climate Change
What actions should decision makers take?
HANDOUT: CRAFTING A POSITION STATEMENT
How should decision makers approach the issue of climate change? This is your
chance to weigh in. Decide whom you would like to address.
The following tips will help you write a powerful letter to a decision maker:
• Keep it short. Limit your letter to one page and one issue.
• Identify yourself and the issue. In the first paragraph of your letter state who
you are and what issue you are writing about.
• Focus on your main points. Choose the three strongest points to support
your argument and develop them clearly. Too much information can distract
from your position.
• Make it personal. Tell your decision maker why the issue matters to you and
how it affects you, your family, and your community. Make a connection to
the elected official. Did you vote for him or her? Did you contribute to the
campaign?
• Ask for a reply. Include your name and address on both your letter and
envelope. Trust your voice. Be polite and take a firm position in your letter.
Be confident in your understanding of the issue and remember that the
official may know less than you. Thank elected officials when they make a
decision the way you want.
Source:
The World Wildlife Fund. <http://passport.panda.org/about/toolkit.
cfm?uNC=84676604#3>.
Your position can be based on personal opinion, but it must be supported with
specific evidence and examples. Use at least three pieces of supporting evidence
for each point. This indicates you have a good understanding of the topic. It also
makes a case for why your position is valid.
Before starting to write, review your journal. Decide on a focus for your letter.
Pick your top three points. Make an outline of your letter. Decide which three
supporting statements you will use for each.
While giving your group members feedback on their letters, focus on how they
can make their letter stronger (for example, by better organization, stronger
examples, fewer run-on sentences, including more of a personal connection, etc.).
This is not a time to criticize your classmates’ opinions. Every person is entitled to
his or her own opinions about how society should respond to climate change.
67
Copy Master - Lesson 5- Hand-out
Appendix
Copenhagen 2009
December 7 – December 18, 2009 Copenhagen, Denmark will host the United Nations Climate Change Conference. This
is the fifteenth “Conference of the Parties” of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The meeting
is often referred to as COP15.
COP15 has been called the most important meeting since the end of World War II. This is due, in part, to the
following reasons:
• The 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) increased the certainty that quick and
aggressive action is needed to address the challenge of climate change.
• COP15 represents the last chance to design an international agreement that can be approved and ratified in time for it
to come into force when the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012.
• The world has changed in the years since the Kyoto Protocol was negotiated (1997) and the world needs a new
agreement. For example, China has replaced the U.S. as the leading emitter of greenhouse gasses. Also, there is
growing awareness that oil is a finite resource that cannot meet the energy demands of a growing world population.
• The United States has pledged to once again take a leadership role in climate negotiations.
• The agenda of the COP15 includes the following topics:
• Targets and actions
• Low-carbon development and adaptation
• Building an effective global carbon market
The sessions at COP15 are open to the governments of participating countries. Governments can participate and
negotiate. All countries are organized in regional groups:
• G-77: a group of 130 mainly poor countries. In many UN contexts they behave as a group, but they are still able to
speak as individual countries in a range of contexts.
• Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS): a group of 43 countries that are all small island states or countries with large
low-lying areas in danger of flooding from rising sea levels.
• Least developed countries: a group of 49 countries
• European Union: the 27 countries in the European Union (The EU itself sends representatives in addition to the
individual member countries).
• Umbrella group: a loosely composed group of developed countries outside the EU. The group is typically composed of
Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Russia, Ukraine and the USA.
• Environmental Integrity Group (EIG): Mexico, South Korea and Switzerland.
71
Copenhagen 2009 (cont.)
Other organizations, besides governments, can observe the sessions. These organizations include United Nations bodies
and related organizations including:
• WMO (World Meteorological Organization)
• UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme)
• IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)
• World Bank
• GEF (Global Environment Facility)
• Civil society organizations
There will be many other people converging on the city of Copenhagen during the meetings. This includes members of the
media and also activists. Organizers are expecting more than 8000 people to travel to Copenhagen during the meeting.
The Will Steger Foundation (WSF) will lead a delegation of youth from the upper Midwest. Students are encouraged to
send their position statements to the youth delegation as well as to the decision makers of their choice. Students can
follow multi-media blogs from the WSF youth delegation at www.globalwarming101.com.
For further information about COP15, visit the following sites:
• http://en.cop15.dk/ is the official website of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. In
addition to information about the conference itself, the site includes current news and select blogs. It also contains
features on consequences of climate change, 10 energy myths, results of previous Conventions of the Parties, and the
essentials of the Copenhagen negotiations.
• The Guardian, a publication from the United Kingdom, has a site dedicated to the Copenhagen negotiations: http://
www.guardian.co.uk/environment/copenhagen. It features current news about the negotiations as well as select blogs
• Youth Climate dot org a shared online platform for members of the international youth climate movement. It features
a number of contributing websites and blogs, a twitter feed, and a video feed. It has a section dedicated to the
Copenhagen negotiations. On this site members of the International Youth Delegation will post updates: http://
youthclimate.org/category/copenhagen-2009/
• The International Youth Climate Movement also has a facebook page. It features links, videos, photos, and comments.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/International-Youth-Climate-Movement/16332293630#/pages/International-YouthClimate-Movement/16332293630?v=wall&viewas=573169600
• Sustain US is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization of young people advocating sustainable development and youth
empowerment. They also send youth delegations to the conferences of the parties. Their website features blogs and a
wiki as well as numerous opportunities for youth involvement. http://sustainus.org/
72
!
!
!
!
"#$%&'&($#&)*!+,-.,/0!
1!2)*3,4#!5!6$7,!
N<+")-M$C)>#-+'$a)+%*&\%$$$
b'&+$<,6'+#6$^'*<'-3$GLLc
!
!"#$2$8%)*!9&#&.$#&)*!:*&#&$#&;,$%&$'$()%*+$,-)(#.+$)/$0-%*.#+)*$
1*%2#-&%+34$504$'*6$7)-6$8)+)-$9):,'*3$+)$/%*6$&);<+%)*&$+)$+"#$
=-##*")<&#$='&$,-)>;#:?$$!)$#:,"'&%@#$+"#$*##6$/)-$#'-;3$'.+%)*4$
9)AB%-#.+)-&$C)>#-+$D).);)E$'*6$D+#,"#*$0'.';'$.-#'+#6$+"#$.)*.#,+$
)/$&+'>%;%@'+%)*$E#6=#&$F$GH$>%;;%)*$+)*$IE#6=#&J$+"'+$*##6$+)$>#$.<+$
)<+$)/$,-#6%.+#6$/<+<-#$.'->)*$#:%&&%)*&$%*$+"#$*#K+$HL$3#'-&$+)$'2)%6$
'$6)<>;%*=$)/$'+:)&,"#-%.$.'->)*$6%)K%6#$)2#-$,-#A%*6<&+-%';$;#2#;&?$
$
!"#$/);;)E%*=$,'=#&$.)*+'%*M$
•! N*$%*+-)6<.+%)*$+)$+"#$.'->)*$'*6$.;%:'+#$,-)>;#:$'*6$+"#$&+'>%;%@'+%)*$E#6=#$.)*.#,+$O,,?$PAQR$
•! B#&.-%,+%)*&$)/$.<--#*+;3$'2'%;'>;#$:%+%='+%)*$+));&$+"'+$"'2#$+"#$.','.%+3$+)$-#6<.#$/<+<-#$#:%&&%)*&$>3$'+$;#'&+$)*#$
E#6=#$O,,?$SATR$
•! 8'+#-%';&$'*6$%*&+-<.+%)*&$/)-$.'--3%*=$)<+$+"#$ID+'>%;%@'+%)*$U#6=#&$V':#4J$'*$'.+%2%+3$+"'+$6-%2#&$"):#$+"#$&.';#$)/$
+"#$.'->)*$:%+%='+%)*$."';;#*=#$'*6$+"#$+-'6#)//&$%*2);2#6$%*$,;'**%*=$.;%:'+#$,);%.3$O,,?$WAPXR$
$
7)-$:)-#$%*/)-:'+%)*$'>)<+$98Y4$.)*+'.+$
!
!
!
!
!
!
2$8%)*!9&#&.$#&)*!:*&#&$#&;,!
0-%*.#+)*$Z*2%-)*:#*+';$Y*&+%+<+#$
0-%*.#+)*$1*%2#-&%+3$
0-%*.#+)*4$]^$LTHSS$
1DN$
2)%.#M$OXLWRGHTAQTQG$
/'KM$$$$OXLWRGHTFXTPT$
$
D)B!3$*!-)@*')$-!$!E8,,!B4F#)F-$#,!3)4G!)E!#=&/!.B&-,!$*-!
;&,@!$--&#&)*$'!8,/)B83,/!$#!)B8!@,-.,!@,%/&#,0!
!
=##40??@@@A48&*3,#)*A,-B?C37&?8,/)B83,/?/#$%@,-.,A=#7!
!
U#$"),#$+)$-#2%&#$+"#&#$:'+#-%';&$E%+"$3)<-$%*,<+_$$Y/$3)<$"'2#$`<#&A
+%)*&$)-$/##6>'.\4$,;#'&#$.)*+'.+$B-?$C)>#-+'$a)+%*&\%4$9)*&<;+'*+$+)$
98Y4$'+$=)#&*/H&I=)#7$&'A3)7?$
=##40??@@@A48&*3,#)*A,-B?C37&!
!
!
!
<=,!2$8%)*!$*-!2'&7$#,!>8)%',7!!
$
Z2%6#*.#$.)*+%*<#&$+)$'..<:<;'+#$+"'+$.'->)*$6%)K%6#4$)-$9[G4$/-):$/)&&%;$/<#;$><-*%*=$%&$.'<&%*=$6'*=#-)<&$%*+#-/#-#*.#$
%*$+"#$.;%:'+#?$Y*.;<6%*=$GLLX4$&%K$)/$+"#$&#2#*$E'-:#&+$3#'-&$)*$-#.)-6$"'2#$)..<--#6$&%*.#$GLLP$'*6$+"#$+#*$E'-:#&+$
3#'-&$"'2#$)..<--#6$&%*.#$PWWH?$$!-),%.';$=;'.%#-&$E%+"$%.#$+")<&'*6&$'*6$+#*&$)/$+")<&'*6&$3#'-&$);6$'-#$6%&',,#'-%*=4$
)//#-%*=$=-',"%.$-#><++';$+)$.;'%:&$+"'+$+"#$-#.#*+$E'-:%*=$%&$,'-+$)/$'$*'+<-';$.3.;#?$$8)6#;&$,-#6%.+$+"'+4$E%+")<+$'.+%)*$
+)$.<->$+"#$=-)E+"$)/$=-##*")<&#$='&#&$%*$+"#$'+:)&,"#-#4$E#$-%&\$+-%==#-%*=$.'+'&+-),"#$AA$.#&&'+%)*$)/$+"#$6):%*'*+$
,'++#-*$)/$).#'*$.%-.<;'+%)*4$;)&&$)/$+"#$U#&+$N*+'-.+%.$%.#$&"##+4$)-$'$&#2#-';A/);6$%*.-#'&#$%*$.'+#=)-3A/%2#$"<--%.'*#&?$
$
9[G$'*6$&):#$)+"#-$='&#&$%*$+"#$'+:)&,"#-#$."'*=#$+"#$.;%:'+#$>3$;#++%*=$&<*;%="+$,'&&$+"-)<="$+"#$'+:)&,"#-#$'*6$
E'-:$+"#$,;'*#+4$><+$"%*6#-%*=$+"#$#&.',#$)/$"#'+$+)$)<+#-$&,'.#$O'$,"#*):#*)*$,),<;'-;3$\*)E*$'&$I+"#$=-##*")<&#$
#//#.+JR?$$53$><-*%*=$/)&&%;$/<#;&4$E"%."$'-#$.):,)&#6$:'%*;3$)/$"36-)=#*$'*6$.'->)*4$E#$'66$9[G$+)$+"#$'+:)&,"#-#?$$$
$
$
$
N$&&"#'N01#
!"#$%&'(")*$&(+,*-"#'#$./''#0(12$.,0(&30*$&4,/($!""#$%&&%'(#)'(*$
!0,%"%K
,5$.&'4,0$&*$6789$&0:$.,+4/*(3,0$,5$5,**31$5/#1*$./''#0(12$&::*$
&4,/($+#$%&&%'(#)'(*#',#-./$'($#;#'2$2#&'<$=5$>#$("30?$,5$("#$
F
!"#$%&'()(
-"##"$%'
&(+,*-"#'#$&*$&$4&("(/49$("#*#$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$&'#$13?#$>&(#'$
)$%&'K$'"%
A -"##"$%')$%&'+2212'
.,+30@$,/($,5$("#$(&-$(,$5311$("#$(/4$AB3@/'#$CD<$!"#$,.#&0$&0:$1&0:$
1P1,8'81+,
43,*-"#'#$&.($&*$(>,$:'&30*$5,'$("3*$4&("(/4$E$.&'4,0$.&0$4#$(&?#0$
=>>
,/($,5$("#$&(+,*-"#'#$42$4#30@$:3**,1;#:$30$("#$*/'5&.#$,.#&0$,'$
-"##"$%')$%&'*+,-$%
4#30@$(&?#0$/-$42$@',>30@$5,'#*(*<$$F,>#;#'9$("#*#$(>,$G:'&30*H$
,012$(&?#$,/($&4,/($"&15$("#$.&'4,0$>#$#+3($(,$("#$&(+,*-"#'#$
#;#'2$2#&'<$$!"#$'#+&30:#'$&../+/1&(#*$30$("#$&(+,*-"#'#$E$
5*1+%
L+%2'!"$&BM1,1'D%1)G
./''#0(12$&($&$'&(#$,5$',/@"12$I$43113,0$(,0*$-#'$2#&'$E$*,$("#$1#;#1$
6 O ? J H -"##"$%')$%&'K$'$0)
,5$.&'4,0$30$("#$(/4$3*$'3*30@<$
$
E%:3/4#0F#!"#$&(+,*-"#'#$&*$&$4&("(/49$>3("$./''#0($
!"#$5,**31$5/#1$(&-$>&*$G,-#0#:H$>3("$("#$=0:/*('3&1$J#;,1/(3,0<$$$$
&00/&1$30-/(*$&0:$,/(-/(*$,5$.&'4,0<$$!"#$1#;#1$30$("#$
=0$-'#K30:/*('3&1$(3+#*9$("#$&(+,*-"#'#$.,0(&30#:$,012$&4,/($LMM$
(/4$3*$'3*30@$42$&4,/($I$43113,0$(,0*$-#'$2#&'<$
43113,0$(,0*$,5$.&'4,09$8MM$43113,0$(,0*$1#**$("&0$(,:&2$AB3@/'#$8D<$$
N*$&0$311/*('&(3,0$,5$("#$3+-,'(&0.#$,5$678$(,$("#$%&'(")*$.13+&(#9$
3.#$.,'#$'#.,':*$*",>$("&($-&*($&(+,*-"#'3.$.&'4,0$."&0@#*$,5$&$
!"#$%&'()(
*3+31&'$,':#'$"&;#$+#&0($("#$:355#'#0.#$4#(>##0$=.#$N@#*$&0:$
("#$>&'+#'$.,0:3(3,0*$,5$("#$-&*($CM9MMM$2#&'*<$
?6>> DEF>G
./$0-#123 456
$
=>> DH=>G
7$2+8
74*#';&(3,0*$30:3.&(#$("&($("#$.&'4,0$&1'#&:2$&::#:$(,$("#$&(K
9,1:;%20&),"+#
@>> D6=EG
A>> D?I>G
<#+*"+#
+,*-"#'#$"&*$'&3*#:$("#$@1,4&1$&;#'&@#$(#+-#'&(/'#$42$&',/0:$
!"##"$%&'$(')$%&'$('*+,-$%
-"##"$%&'$(' * BBC +
CO$B&"'#0"#3($*30.#$("#$CP("$.#0(/'29$&0:$&1+,*($#;#'2$2#&'$("#$
)$%&'*+,-$%
5,**31$5/#1$(&-$3*$,-#0#:$>3:#'<$$N0$&;#'&@#$,5$+&02$5,'#.&*(*$
-'#:3.(*$("&($>#)11$4#$&::30@$01#$%&&%'(#)'(*$,5$.&'4,0$-#'$2#&'$
E%:3/4#GF#Y&*(9$-'#*#0(9$&0:$-,(#0(3&1$5/(/'#$1#;#1*$,5$
.&'4,0$30$("#$&(+,*-"#'#!30$(>,$/03(*<$8<C$43113,0*$,5$
(,$("#$G4&("(/4H$30$QM$2#&'*9$(>3.#$(,:&2)*$'&(#9$/01#**$&.(3,0$3*$
(,0*$,5$.&'4,0$Z$C$-&'($-#'$+3113,0$A--+D<$
(&?#0$(,$.,0(',1$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*<$$=5$>#$5,11,>$("3*$-&("9$("#$
&+,/0($,5$.&'4,0$30$("#$&(+,*-"#'#$>311$'#&."$C8MM$43113,0$(,0*$K
K$2'3$&4#%)*#5/46%(23*)/%.&#7.&34$E$>#11$4#5,'#$("#$#0:$,5$("3*$.#0(/'29$.(2#8%&&#-'()%(34#)'#%(-/4.*4$30(,$("#$5/K
(/'#<$$N*$&$'#*/1(9$("#$%&'(")*$(#+-#'&(/'#$3*$#R-#.(#:$(,$'3*#$&($&$'&(#$/0-'#.#:#0(#:$30$("#$1&*($CM9MMM$2#&'*<$9'8#-.(#
84#:4)#',,#);%*#5.);<#
$
=(#>()/'23-)%'(#)'#?).$%&%@.)%'(#A42:4*#
$
!"#$G*(&4313S&(3,0$>#:@#*H$.,0.#-($3*$&$*3+-1#$(,,1$5,'$.,0;#2K
30@$("#$#+3**3,0*$./(*$("&($.&0$4#$+&:#$(,$&;,3:$:'&+&(3.$.13K
+&(#$."&0@#<$
T#$.,0*3:#'$(>,$5/(/'#*$K$.&&'8%(:#4B%**%'(*#)'#2'3$&4#
74/*3*#C445%(:#4B%**%'(*$.)#-3//4()#&474&*#5,'$("#$
0#R($QM$2#&'*$AB3@/'#$UD<$$!"#$#+3**3,0*K:,/4130@$-&("$
A41&.?$:,((#:$130#D$5&11*$30$("#$+3::1#$,5$("#$53#1:$,5$+,*($
#*(3+&(#*$,5$5/(/'#$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*<$$!"#$.13+4$&--',R3K
+&(#12$#R(#0:*$("#$.13+4$5,'$("#$-&*($QM$2#&'*9$:/'30@$
>"3."$("#$>,'1:)*$#.,0,+2$@'#>$+/."$5&*(#'$("&0$3(*$.&'K
4,0$#+3**3,0*<$%+3**3,0*$.,/1:$4#$"3@"#'$,'$1,>#'$30$QM$
2#&'*9$4/($("3*$-&("$3*$&$'#&*,0&41#$'#5#'#0.#$*.#0&'3,<$
D;4#4B%**%'(*62'3$&%(:#5.);#%*#5/42%-)42#)'#&4.2#)'#
*%:(%,%-.()#:&'$.&#8./B%(:$42$("#$#0:$,5$("3*$.#0(/'2<$
!"3*$>&'+30@$3*$#R-#.(#:$4#$&..,+-&03#:$42$:#.'#&*#:$
.',-$23#1:*9$30.'#&*#:$("'#&(*$(,$"/+&0$"#&1("9$&0:$+,'#$
5'#V/#0($#R('#+#$>#&("#'$#;#0(*<$$!"#$-1&0#($.,/1:$&1*,$
5&.#$'3*30@$*#&K1#;#1$5',+$+#1(30@$,5$("#$T#*($N0(&'.(3.$
=.#$W"##($&0:$X'##01&0:$@1&.3#'*$&0:$:#*(&4313S&(3,0$,5$
("#$,.#&0)*$("#'+,"&130#$.3'./1&(3,0$("&($"#1-*$'#:3*('34K
/(#$("#$-1&0#()*$"#&($&0:$>&'+$T#*(#'0$%/',-#<#
!
! "
!"##"$%'$('7$%&'$('
4+,-$%'RC"))12'
B1,'S1+,
?A
%
"$
"&&
RC
)M
B+
K'
#"%
$0
&:2
7$Q+,2''
7,"B#"%K
456
%,-./0/1-,/234
"5/-3607
!
F
'/8,25/9-0
7:/88/238
N#+)'B+)M
TP$"2'
/$0-#"%K
456
>
?IEE
6>>E
6>EE
E%:3/4#HF##!>,$-,**341#$#+3**3,0*$*.#0&'3,*$:#530#$("#$$
G*(&4313S&(3,0$('3&0@1#<H$
>(#-'()/.*)I#84#-.(#5/474()#.#2'3$&%(:#',#JK G #%,#84#-.(#C445#4B%**%'(*#,&.)#,'/#);4#(4L)#M"#N4./*I#
("#0$>,'?$(,$'#:/.#$#+3**3,0*$30$("#$*#.,0:$"&15$,5$("#$.#0(/'2$AB3@/'#$U9$,'&0@#$130#D<$$!"3*$-&("$3*$-'#:3.(#:$
(,$?##-$&(+,*-"#'3.$.&'4,0$/0:#'$C8MM$43113,0$(,0*$A>"3."$.,''#*-,0:*$(,$&4,/($Q[M$-&'(*$-#'$+3113,0$A--+DD9$
&11,>30@$/*$(,$*?3'($("#$>,'*($-'#:3.(#:$.,0*#V/#0.#*$,5$.13+&(#$."&0@#<$$
O445%(:#4B%**%'(*#,&.)#8%&&#/4P3%/4#-3))%(:#5/'Q4-)42#-./$'(#'3)53)#$N#.$'3)#+#$%&&%'(#)'(*#54/#N4./#
42$8MQQ9$?##-30@$&$(,(&1$,5$\C[Q$43113,0$(,0*$,5$.&'4,0$5',+$#0(#'30@$("#$&(+,*-"#'#$A*##$2#11,>$('3&0@1#$30$
B3@/'#$UD<$!"3*$.&'4,0$*&;30@*$3*$>"&($>#$.&11$("#$R*).$%&%@.)%'(#)/%.(:&4FS###$
!"#$.,0;#0(3,0&1$>3*:,+$"&*$4##0$("&($,012$'#;,1/(3,0&'2$
0#>$(#."0,1,@3#*$13?#$0/.1#&'$5/*3,0$.,/1:$#0&41#$*/."$
1&'@#$#+3**3,0*$./(*<$$!"#'#$3*$0,$'#&*,09$",>#;#'9$>"2$
,0#$(,,1$*",/1:$"&;#$(,$*,1;#$("#$>",1#$-',41#+<$$6]=$*#($
,/($(,$V/&0(352$("#$3+-&.($("&($.,/1:$4#$+&:#$42$.#
5'/),'&%'#',#4L%*)%(:#)4-;('&':%4*$:#-1,2#:$,0$&$+&*K
*3;#$*.&1#<$$
?A
F'Q12K1&
"$
"&&
RC
:
%&
+)M
'B
%K
-#"
0
2$
U)+-"#"V+)"$%
7,"+%K#1
-574377;7;4,24
.</0;4,=74
8,-./0/1-,/234
,5/-3607
?'Q12K1
!,$+&?#$("#$-',41#+$+,'#$('&.(&41#9$>#$:3;3:#:$("#$
->2/;844444444444444
?'-"##"$%')$%&'2?4
*(&4313S&(3,0$('3&0@1#$30(,#*474(#R842:4*FS$AB3@/'#$ID$N$
F
9-5.2347:/88/2384
N#+)'B+)M
@754A7-54.A4BCDD
>#:@#$'#-'#*#0(*$&$.&'4,0K./((30@$*('&(#@2$("&($"&*$("#$
6>>E
6>EE
-,(#0(3&1$(,$@',>$5',+$S#',$(,:&2$(,$&;,3:30@$C$43113,0$(,0*$
,5$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$-#'$2#&'$42$8MQQ9$,'$,0#K*#;#0("$,5$
E%:3/4#1F##!"#$*#;#0$G>#:@#*H$,5$("#$*(&4313S&(3,0$('3&0@1#<
("#$*(&4313S&(3,0$('3&0@1#<$!"#$>#:@#*$.&0$'#-'#*#0($>&2*$
,5$#3("#'$+&?30@$#0#'@2$>3("$0,$,'$'#:/.#:$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$A13?#$0/.1#&'$,'$>30:K-',:/.#:$#1#.('3.3(2D9$,'$
*(,'30@$.&'4,0$:3,R3:#$(,$-'#;#0($3($5',+$4/31:30@$/-$&*$'&-3:12$30$("#$&(+,*-"#'#$A#3("#'$("',/@"$/0:#'@',/0:$
*(,'&@#$,'$43,*(,'&@#D<$
?'.Q12K13
O445%(:#4B%**%'(*#,&.)#8%&&#/4P3%/4#);4#8'/&2T*#*'-%4)%4*#)'#R,%&&#%(S#);4#*474(#842:4*#',#);4#*).$%&%6
@.)%'(#)/%.(:&4F$$=0$6]=)*$&0&12*3*9$.)#&4.*)#0M#*)/.)4:%4*#./4#.7.%&.$&4#('8#("&(9$>3("$*.&130@$/-9$.,/1:$
#&."$(&?#$.&'#$,5$&($1#&*($,0#$>#:@#$,5$#+3**3,0*$'#:/.(3,0<$$^,$,0#$*('&(#@2$.&0$(&?#$.&'#$,5$("#$>",1#$('3&0K
@1#$KK$0#>$*('&(#@3#*$>311$4#$0##:#:$(,$&::'#**$4,("$5/#1$&0:$#1#.('3.3(2$0##:*9$&0:$*,+#$>#:@#$*('&(#@3#*$
.,+-#(#$>3("$,("#'*$(,$'#-1&.#$#+3**3,0*$5',+$("#$*&+#$*,/'.#$KK$4/($("#'#$3*$&1'#&:2$&$+,'#$("&0$&:#V/&(#$
-,'(5,13,$,5$(,,1*$&;&31&41#$(,$.,0(',1$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$5,'$("#$0#R($QM$2#&'*<$
$$$
A42:4#?)/.)4:%4*#J3//4()&N#=7.%&.$&4##
$
!"#$5,11,>30@$-&@#*$.,0(&30$:#*.'3-(3,0*$,5$CQ$*('&(#@3#*$&1'#&:2$&;&31&41#$("&($.,/1:$4#$*.&1#:$/-$,;#'$("#$0#R($QM$2#&'*$
(,$'#:/.#$@1,4&1$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$42$C$43113,0$(,0*$-#'$2#&'9$,'$'(4#842:4F#!"#2$&'#$@',/-#:$30(,$5,/'$+&_,'$.,1,'K
.,:#:$.&(#@,'3#*`$
$
V,,%-%4(-N#[#J'(*4/7.)%'(##
\3-&4./#V(4/:N#
=0.'#&*#:$('&0*-,'($#553.3#0.2$
J#:/.30@$+31#*$('&;#1#:$
=0.'#&*#:$"#&(30@$#553.3#0.2$
=0.'#&*#:$#553.3#0.2$,5$#1#.('3.3(2$-',:/.(3,0$
^/.1#&'$#1#.('3.3(2$
$
$
]4(48.$&4*#.(2#Z%'*)'/.:4#
$
E'**%&6E34&6Z.*42#?)/.)4:%4*#
B/#1$*>3(."30@$A.,&1$(,$@&*D$
B,**31K4&*#:$#1#.('3.3(2$>3("$.&'4,0$.&-(/'#$a$*(,'&@#$A66WD$
6,&1$*205/#1*$>3("$66W$
B,**31K4&*#:$"2:',@#0$5/#1$>3("$66W$
#
T30:K@#0#'&(#:$#1#.('3.3(2$$
W,1&'$#1#.('3.3(2$
T30:K@#0#'&(#:$"2:',@#0$5/#1$
b3,5/#1*$
B,'#*($*(,'&@#$
W,31$*(,'&@##
$
#
$
%&."$*('&(#@2$.&0$4#$&--13#:$(,$,0#$,'$+,'#$*#.(,'*9$30:3.&(#:$42$("#$5,11,>30@$*2+4,1*`$
$
#######U#V&4-)/%-%)N#W/'23-)%'(I########U94.)%(:#.(2#X%/4-)#E34&#Y*4I########UD/.(*5'/).)%'(I#######U#Z%'*)'/.:4
!
! #
!
>(-/4.*42#V,,%-%4(-N#[#J'(*4/7.)%'(#
!
!
!
!
0F#D/.(*5'/)#V,,%-%4(-N$
N$(2-3.&1$UM$+31#*$-#'$@&11,0$AUM$+-@D$.&'$:'3;30@$CM9MMM$+31#*$-#'$2#&'$#+3(*$&$(,0$,5$.&'4,0$30(,$("#$&3'$
&00/&112<$$!,:&2$("#'#$&'#$&4,/($&4,/($LMM$+3113,0$.&'*$30$("#$>,'1:9$&0:$3()*$-'#:3.(#:$("&($("#'#$>311$4#$
&4,/($8$43113,0$-&**#0@#'$;#"3.1#*$,0$("#$',&:$30$QM$2#&'*<$$=#842:4#',#4B%**%'(*#*.7%(:*#8'3&2#$4#
.-;%4742#%,#);4#,34&#4,,%-%4(-N#',#.&&#);4#-./*#5/'Q4-)42#,'/#G"MM#84/4#2'3$&42#,/'B#H"#B5:#)'#^"#
B5:<$$$%553.3#0.2$3+-',;#+#0(*$.,/1:$.,+#$5',+$/*30@$"24'3:$&0:$:3#*#1$#0@30#$(#."0,1,@3#*9$&*$>#11$&*$
+&?30@$;#"3.1#*$,/($,5$*(',0@$4/($13@"(#'$+&(#'3&1*<$
!
6/((30@$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$5',+$('/.?*$&0:$-1&0#*$42$+&?30@$("#*#$#0@30#*$+,'#$#553.3#0($.&0$&1*,$"#1-$>3("$
("3*$>#:@#<$N;3&(3,0$3*$("#$5&*(#*($@',>30@$.,+-,0#0($,5$('&0*-,'(&(3,0<$
$
$
GF#D/.(*5'/)#J'(*4/7.)%'(#
4
!
=#842:4#8'3&2#$4#.-;%4742#%,#);4#(3B$4/#',#B%&4*#)/.74&42#$N#);4#8'/&2T*#-./*#84/4#-3)#%(#;.&,<$$
W/."$&$'#:/.(3,0$30$:'3;30@$.,/1:$4#$&."3#;#:$35$/'4&0$-1&0030@$1#&:*$(,$+,'#$/*#$,5$+&**$('&0*3($&0:$35$(#1#K
.,++/(30@$4#.,+#*$&$@,,:$*/4*(3(/(#$5,'$5&.#K(,K5&.#$.,++/03.&(3,0<$
$
#
HF#Z3%&2%(:#V,,%-%4(-N#
!,:&2$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$&'3*#$&4,/($#V/&112$5',+$-',;3:30@$#1#.('3.3(29$('&0*-,'(&(3,09$&0:$"#&($5,'$30:/*('2$
&0:$4/31:30@*<$!"#$1&'@#*($-,(#0(3&1$*&;30@*$30$("#$4/31:30@*$*#.(,'$&'#$30$*-&.#$"#&(30@$&0:$.,,130@9$>&(#'$
"#&(30@9$13@"(30@9$&0:$#1#.('3.$&--13&0.#*<$
=()*$4##0$-',_#.(#:$("&($("#$4/31:30@*$*#.(,'$&*$&$>",1#$"&*$("#$(#."0,1,@3.&1$&0:$#.,0,+3.$-,(#0(3&1$(,$./($
#+3**3,0*$30$"&15<$$J3))%(:#4B%**%'(*#$N#GM_#%(#.&&#(48#.(2#4L%*)%(:#/4*%24()%.&#.(2#-'BB4/-%.&#
$3%&2%(:*#8'3&2#.-;%474#.#842:4#8'/);#',#4B%**%'(*#/423-)%'(F$6&'4,0$*&;30@*$5',+$*-&.#$&0:$>&K
(#'$"#&(30@$>311$.,+#$5',+$4,("$#0:K/*#$#553.3#0.2$*('&(#@3#*9$13?#$>&11$&0:$',,5$30*/1&(3,09$&0:$'#0#>&41#$
#0#'@2$*('&(#@3#*9$13?#$*,1&'$>&(#'$"#&(30@$&0:$-&**3;#$*,1&'$:#*3@0<$$$
$
$
1F#V,,%-%4(-N#%(#V&4-)/%-%)N#W/'23-)%'(#
!
!,:&2)*$.,&1K4/'030@$-,>#'$-1&0(*$-',:/.#$&4,/($,0#K5,/'("$,5$("#$>,'1:)*$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*9$*,$30.'#&*#*$30$
#553.3#0.2$&($("#*#$-1&0(*$,55#'$&0$3+-,'(&0($,--,'(/03(2$(,$'#:/.#$#+3**3,0*F##W/'23-%(:#);4#8'/&2T*#-3/6
/4()#-'.&6$.*42#4&4-)/%-%)N#8%);#2'3$&42#4,,%-%4(-N#8'3&2#*.74#.#842:4#8'/);#',#-./$'(#4B%*6
*%'(*F##$
],'#$#553.3#0($.,0;#'*3,0$'#*/1(*$&($("#$-1&0($1#;#1$5',+$4#((#'$(/'430#*9$5',+$/*30@$"3@"K(#+-#'&(/'#$5/#1$
.#11*9$&0:$5',+$.,+43030@$5/#1$.#11*$&0:$(/'430#*<$N($("#$*2*(#+$1#;#19$+,'#$#553.3#0($.,0;#'*3,0$'#*/1(*$5',+$
+,'#$#;#0$:3*('34/(3,0$,5$#1#.('3.3(2$:#+&0:9$5',+$.,@#0#'&(3,0$A("#$.,K-',:/.(3,0$,5$#1#.('3.3(2$&0:$/*#5/1$
"#&(D9$&0:$5',+$-,12@#0#'&(3,0$A("#$.,K-',:/.(3,0$,5$."#+3.&1*$&0:$#1#.('3.3(2D<$
c/#$(,$1&'@#$.,0('34/(3,0*$42$"2:',-,>#'$&0:$0/.1#&'$#0#'@29$("#$#1#.('3.3(2$*#.(,'$&1'#&:2$@#(*$&4,/($UQd$
,5$3(*$#0#'@2$5',+$0,0K.&'4,0$*,/'.#*<$$T#:@#*$.&0$,012$.,+#$5',+$("#$'#+&3030@$LQd<$
$$
$
W/@@#*(#:$e30?`$
>WJJ#`%)%:.)%'(#]45'/)I#RD4-;('&':%-.&#[#V-'('B%-#W')4()%.&#
',#a/44(;'3*4#a.*#VB%**%'(*#]423-)%'(S#
;))5bcc888F:/%2.F('c-&%B.)4c%5--d)./c8:Hc"!eF;)B#
!
! $
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
J./$'(#J.5)3/4#[#?)'/.:4#fJJ?g#
J./$'(#J.5)3/4#[#?)'/.:4#fJJ?g
#
$
$
=5$("#$678$#+3**3,0*$5',+$5,**31$5/#1*$.&0$4#$.&-(/'#:$&0:$*(,'#:9$'&("#'$("&0$;#0(#:$(,$("#$&(+,*-"#'#9$("#0$.,&19$,319$
&0:$0&(/'&1$@&*$.,/1:$.,0(30/#$(,$4#$/*#:$(,$+##($>,'1:$#0#'@2$:#+&0:*$>3(",/($"&'+5/1$.13+&(#$.,0*#V/#0.#*<$$!"#$
+,*($#.,0,+3.&1$>&2$(,$-/'*/#$("3*$3*$(,$.&-(/'#$678$&($1&'@#$#1#.('3.3(2$,'$5/#1*$-1&0(*9$("#0$*(,'#$3($/0:#'@',/0:<$$!"3*$
*('&(#@29$.&11#:$.&'4,0$.&-(/'#$&0:$*(,'&@#9$,'$JJ?9$3*$&1'#&:2$4#30@$(#*(#:$30$-31,($-',_#.(*$&',/0:$("#$>,'1:<$
MF#JJ?#V&4-)/%-%)N#
#
!,:&2)*$.,&1K4/'030@$-,>#'$-1&0(*$-',:/.#$&4,/($,0#$5,/'("$,5$("#$>,'1:)*$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$&0:$&'#$1&'@#$
-,30(K*,/'.#*$,5$678$(,$("#$&(+,*-"#'#<$#=#842:4#8'3&2#$4#.-;%4742#$N#.55&N%(:#JJ?#)'#!""#&./:4#f0#
$%&&%'(#8.))g#$.*4&'.2#-'.&#5'84/#5&.()*#'/#0^""#&./:4#$.*4&'.2#(.)3/.&#:.*#5'84/#5&.()*#%(#M"#
N4./*F#=*#8%);#.&&#JJ?#*)/.)4:%4*9$)'#5/'7%24#&'86-./$'(#4(4/:N#);4#-.5)3/42#JKG#8'3&2#(442#)'#
$4#*)'/42#,'/#-4()3/%4*F##
#
!"#'#$&'#$./''#0(12$U$-31,($*(,'&@#$-',_#.(*$30$("#$>,'1:9$>"3."$#&."$*(,'#$&4,/($C$+3113,0$(,0*$,5$.&'4,0$/0K
:#'@',/0:$-#'$2#&'<$$W(,'30@$&$>#:@#$>,'("$,5$#+3**3,0*$>311$'#V/3'#$UQMM$(3+#*$("#$.&-&.3(2$,5$,0#$,5$("#*#$
-',_#.(*<$
#
^F#JJ?#9N2/':4(#
!
$
4
4
4
!
#
F2:',@#0$3*$&$:#*3'&41#$5/#1$5,'$&$1,>K.&'4,0$*,.3#(2$4#.&/*#$>"#0$3()*$4/'0#:$("#$,012$#+3**3,0$-',:/.($3*$
>&(#'$;&-,'<$$$b#.&/*#$5,**31$5/#1*$&'#$.,+-,*#:$+&3012$,5$.&'4,0$&0:$"2:',@#0$("#2$&'#$-,(#0(3&1$*,/'.#*$,5$
"2:',@#0$5/#19$4/($(,$"&;#$&$.13+&(#$4#0#53($("#$#R.#**$.&'4,0$+/*($4#$.&-(/'#:$&0:$*(,'#:<$
Y/'#$"2:',@#0$3*$0,>$-',:/.#:$+&3012$30$(>,$30:/*('3#*`$&++,03&$5#'(313S#'$-',:/.(3,0$&0:$-#(',1#/+$'#530K
30@<$$!,:&2$("#*#$"2:',@#0$-',:/.(3,0$-1&0(*$@#0#'&(#$&4,/($CMM$+3113,0$(,0*$,5$.&-(/'&41#$.&'4,0<$$^,>$
("3*$678$3*$;#0(#:9$4/($,012$*+&11$."&0@#*$>,/1:$4#$0##:#:$(,$3+-1#+#0($.&'4,0$.&-(/'#<$D;4#*-.&4#',#;N6
2/':4(#5/'23-)%'(#)'2.N#%*#'(&N#)4(#)%B4*#*B.&&4/#);.(#);4#*-.&4#',#.#842:4#',#-./$'(#-.5)3/4F$$$
$
c3*('34/(30@$"2:',@#0$5/#19$",>#;#'9$'#V/3'#*$4/31:30@$&$"2:',@#0$305'&*('/.(/'#$.,00#.(30@$1&'@#$-1&0(*$>3("$
*+&11#'K*.&1#$/*#'*<$
$
$
+F#JJ?#?N(,34&*#
$
=0$QM$2#&'*$&$*3@0353.&0($5'&.(3,0$,5$("#$5/#1*$/*#:$30$;#"3.1#*$&0:$4/31:30@*$+&2$0,($.,+#$5',+$.,0;#0(3,0&1$
,319$4/($5',+$.,&1<$$T"#0$.,&1$3*$"#&(#:$&0:$.,+430#:$>3("$*(#&+$&0:$&3'$,'$,R2@#09$.&'4,0$+,0,R3:#$&0:$
"2:',@#0$&'#$'#1#&*#:$&0:$.&0$4#$-',.#**#:$(,$+&?#$&$13V/3:$5/#1$.&11#:$&$G*205/#1<H$
$
6,&1K4&*#:$*205/#1*$'#*/1($30$0#&'12$(>3.#$("#$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$,5$-#(',1#/+K:#'3;#:$5/#1*9$*30.#$1&'@#$
&+,/0(*$,5$#R.#**$.&'4,0$&'#$'#1#&*#:$:/'30@$("#$.,0;#'*3,0$,5$.,&1$30(,$13V/3:$5/#1<$$!"#$>,'1:)*$1&'@#*($*20K
5/#1*$5&.313(29$1,.&(#:$30$W,/("$N5'3.&9$3*$("#$1&'@#*($-,30($*,/'.#$,5$&(+,*-"#'3.$678$#+3**3,0*$30$("#$>,'1:<$$=#
842:4#%*#.(#.-)%7%)N#);.)I#'74/#M"#N4./*I#-.(#-.5)3/4#);4#JKG#4B%**%'(*#,/'B#0!"#*3-;#-'.&6)'6
*N(,34&*#,.-%&%)%4*F#
W/@@#*(#:$130?`$
YF?F#\.)%'(.&#V(4/:N#D4-;('&':N#h.$'/.)'/Nb#?4P34*)/.)%'(#E=iT*#
;))5bcc888F(4)&F2'4F:'7c)4-;('&':%4*c-./$'(d*4Pc,.P*F;)B&!
!
! %
!
$
E34&#?8%)-;%(:#
E34&#?8%)-;%(:#
!
!
!
4
#
!F#E34&6?8%)-;%(:#,'/#V&4-)/%-%)N#
$
b#.&/*#$,5$("#$1,>#'$.&'4,0$.,0(#0($,5$0&(/'&1$@&*$&0:$"3@"#'$#553.3#0.3#*$,5$0&(/'&1$@&*$-1&0(*9$-',:/.30@$
#1#.('3.3(2$>3("$0&(/'&1$@&*$'#*/1(*$30$,012$&4,/($"&15$("#$#+3**3,0*$,5$.,&1<$$=#842:4#8'3&2#/4P3%/4#01""#
&./:4#f0#$%&&%'(#8.))g#(.)3/.&#:.*#5&.()*#2%*5&.-%(:#*%B%&./#-'.&64&4-)/%-#5&.()*F#
$
!"3*$>#:@#$>,/1:$'#V/3'#$@#0#'&(30@$&--',R3+&(#12$5,/'$(3+#*$("#$f#&'$8MMM$@1,4&1$-',:/.(3,0$,5$#1#.('3.3(2$
5',+$0&(/'&1$@&*<$$=0$8MQQ9$C$43113,0$(,0*$,5$.&'4,0$-#'$2#&'$>,/1:$4#$#+3((#:$5',+$0&(/'&1$@&*$-,>#'$-1&0(*$
30*(#&:$,5$8$43113,0$(,0*$-#'$2#&'$5',+$.,&1K4&*#:$-,>#'$-1&0(*<$
$
]&(#'3&1*$51,>*$#V/3;&1#0($(,$,0#$43113,0$(,0*$,5$.&'4,0$-#'$2#&'$&'#$"/@#`$&$>#:@#$,5$51,>30@$0&(/'&1$@&*$3*$
#V/3;&1#0($(,$QM$1&'@#$13V/#53#:$0&(/'&1$@&*$Ae^XD$(&0?#'*$:,.?30@$&0:$:3*."&'@30@$#;#'2$:&2<$6/''#0($e^X$
*"3-+#0(*$>,'1:K>3:#$&'#$&4,/($,0#K(#0("$&*$1&'@#<$
$
$ W/@@#*(#:$130?`$
$ YF?F#V(7%/'(B4().&#W/')4-)%'(#=:4(-Nb#V&4-)/%-%)N#,/'B#\.)3/.&#a.*#
;))5bcc888F45.F:'7c-&4.(4(4/:Nc(.):.*F;)B!
#
#
#
#
# \3-&4./#V(4/:N!
#
!
$
#
eF#\3-&4./#V&4-)/%-%)N##
$
^/.1#&'$53**3,0$./''#0(12$-',;3:#*$&4,/($C[d$,5$("#$>,'1:)*$#1#.('3.3(29$&0:$-',:/.#*$0,$678<$$=22%(:#(48#
(3-&4./#4&4-)/%-#5&.()*#)'#)/%5&4#);4#8'/&2T*#-3//4()#(3-&4./#-.5.-%)N#8'3&2#-3)#4B%**%'(*#$N#'(4#
842:4#%,#-'.&#5&.()*#84/4#2%*5&.-42F##$
$
=0$("#$CPLM*9$>"#0$0/.1#&'$-,>#')*$-',+3*#$&*$&$*/4*(3(/(#$5,'$.,&1$>&*$+,*($"3@"12$'#@&':#:9$&$@1,4&1$30K
*(&11#:$0/.1#&'$.&-&.3(2$,5$&4,/($8MMM$43113,0$>&((*$>&*$-',_#.(#:$5,'$("#$2#&'$8MMM<$!"#$>,'1:$0,>$"&*$
&4,/($,0#K*3R("$,5$("&($#0;3*3,0#:$.&-&.3(2<$$=5$("#$'#+&30:#'$>#'#$(,$4#$4/31($,;#'$("#$0#R($QM$2#&'*$(,$:3*K
-1&.#$.,&1K4&*#:$#1#.('3.3(29$',/@"12$(>,$>#:@#*$.,/1:$4#$&."3#;#:<$$
$
=0$.,0('&*(9$-"&*30@$,/($("#$>,'1:*)$./''#0($.&-&.3(2$,5$0/.1#&'$-,>#'$>,/1:$'#V/3'#$&::30@$&0$&::3(3,0&1$
"&15$>#:@#$,5$#+3**3,0*$./(*$(,$?##-$#+3**3,0*$&($(,:&2)*$1#;#1*<$
$
^/.1#&'$53**3,0$-,>#'$@#0#'&(#*$-1/(,03/+9$&$5/#1$5,'$0/.1#&'$>#&-,0*<$$!"#*#$0#>$'#&.(,'*$>,/1:$&::$*#;K
#'&1$(",/*&0:$(,0*$,5$-1/(,03/+$(,$("#$>,'1:)*$./''#0($*(,.?$,5$'#&.(,'$-1/(,03/+$A',/@"12$CMMM$(,0*D<$
W/@@#*(#:$130?`$
J&%B.)4#J;.(:4#G""0b#`%)%:.)%'(I#R\3-&4./#W'84/S#
;))5bcc888F:/%2.F('c-&%B.)4c%5--d)./c8:Hc0G!F;)B!
!
! &
#
#]4(48.$&4#V(4/:N#[#Z%'*)'/.:4!
#
$
$
$
4
$
0"F#A%(2#V&4-)/%-%)N#
$
T30:$./''#0(12$-',:/.#*$1#**$("&0$Cd$,5$(,(&1$@1,4&1$#1#.('3.3(29$4/($>30:$#1#.('3.3(2$3*$@',>30@$&($&$'&(#$,5$
&4,/($UMd$-#'$2#&'<$$D'#:.%(#.#842:4#',#4B%**%'(*#*.7%(:*#,/'B#8%(2#2%*5&.-%(:#-'.&6$.*42#
4&4-)/%-%)NI#-3//4()#8%(2#-.5.-%)N#8'3&2#(442#)'#$4#*-.&42#35#$N#.#,.-)'/#',#H"F#$
$
b&*#:$,0$./''#0($(/'430#$*-&.30@$,0$>30:$5&'+*9$&$>#:@#$,5$>30:$-,>#'$>,/1:$'#V/3'#$&$.,+430#:$&'#&$
',/@"12$("#$*3S#$,5$X#'+&02<$F,>#;#'9$1&0:$5',+$>"3."$>30:$3*$"&';#*(#:$.&0$4#$/*#:$5,'$+&02$,("#'$
-/'-,*#*9$0,(&412$5,'$.',-*$,'$-&*(/'#<$
$
$
$
00F#?'&./#V&4-)/%-%)N#
$
Y",(,;,1(&3.$AYgD$.#11*$.,0;#'($*/013@"($(,$#1#.('3.3(29$-',;3:30@$&$*,/'.#$,5$678K5'##$&0:$'#0#>&41#$#0K
#'@2<$!"#$1&0:$:#+&0:$5,'$*,1&'$3*$1#**$("&0$>3("$,("#'$'#0#>&41#*9$4/($%(*).&&%(:#.#842:4#8'/);#',#
Wj#8'3&2#*)%&&#/4P3%/4#.//.N*#8%);#.(#./4.#',#)8'#B%&&%'(#;4-)./4*I#'/#G"I"""#CBGF$$!"#$&''&2*$
.,/1:$4#$1,.&(#:$,0$#3("#'$:#:3.&(#:$1&0:$,'$,0$+/1(3-1#K/*#$*/'5&.#*$*/."$&*$("#$',,5*$&0:$>&11*$,5$4/31:K
30@*<$$!"#$.,+430#:$&'#&$,5$("#$&''&2*$>,/1:$.,;#'$&0$&'#&$("#$*3S#$,5$("#$h<W<$*(&(#$,5$^#>$i#'*#29$,'$
&4,/($C8$(3+#*$("#$*3S#$,5$("#$e,0:,0$+#(',-,13(&0$&'#&<$$$
$
W30.#$Yg$./''#0(12$-',;3:#*$1#**$("&0$&$(#0("$,5$,0#$-#'.#0($,5$@1,4&1$#1#.('3.3(29$&."3#;30@$&$>#:@#$,5$
#+3**3,0*$'#:/.(3,0$>,/1:$'#V/3'#$30.'#&*30@$("#$:#-1,2+#0($,5$Yg$42$&$5&.(,'$,5$[MM$30$QM$2#&'*9$,'$30K
*(&1130@$Yg$&($LM$(3+#*$("#$./''#0($'&(#$5,'$QM$2#&'*<$$
$
N$./''#0($:'&>4&.?$5,'$Yg$#1#.('3.3(2$3*$3(*$-'3.#9$>"3."$3*$:#.13030@$4/($3*$*(311$8KQ$(3+#*$"3@"#'$("&0$5,**31K
5/#1K4&*#:$#1#.('3.3(2<$N1*,9$Yg$.&0$0,($4#$.,11#.(#:$&($03@"($&0:9$13?#$>30:9$3*$&0$30(#'+3((#0($#0#'@2$
*,/'.#<$$
$
$
$
0GF#A%(2#9N2/':4($
F2:',@#0$3*$&$:#*3'&41#$5/#1$5,'$&$1,>K.&'4,0$*,.3#(2$4#.&/*#$>"#0$3()*$4/'0#:$("#$,012$#+3**3,0$-',:/.($
3*$>&(#'$;&-,'<$$!,$+&?#$"2:',@#0$5/#1$5',+$>30:$#0#'@29$#1#.('3.3(2$@#0#'&(#:$42$>30:$(/'430#*$3*$/*#:$
30$#1#.(',12*3*9$&$-',.#**$("&($134#'&(#*$"2:',@#0$5',+$>&(#'<$$A%(2#;N2/':4(#2%*5&.-%(:#74;%-&4#,34&#
%*#'(&N#.$'3)#;.&,#.*#4,,%-%4()#.)#/423-%(:#-./$'(#4B%**%'(*#.*#8%(2#4&4-)/%-%)N#2%*5&.-%(:#-'.&#
4&4-)/%-%)NI#.(2$1#B%&&%'(#f/.);4/#);.(#G#B%&&%'(g#8%(2B%&&*#8'3&2#$4#(44242#,'/#'(4#842:4#',#
4B%**%'(*#/423-)%'(F#$!"&($30.'#&*#$>,/1:$'#V/3'#$*.&130@$/-$./''#0($>30:$.&-&.3(2$42$&4,/($jM$(3+#*9$
'#V/3'30@$&$1&0:$&'#&$',/@"12$("#$*3S#$,5$B'&0.#<$$
$
h013?#$"2:',@#0$-',:/.#:$5',+$5,**31$5/#1*$>3("$66W9$>30:$"2:',@#0$.,/1:$4#$-',:/.#:$&($*+&11$*.&1#*$
>"#'#$3($3*$0##:#:<$$T30:$"2:',@#0$("/*$>,/1:$'#V/3'#$1#**$30;#*(+#0($30$305'&*('/.(/'#$5,'$5/#1$:3*('34/K
(3,0$(,$",+#*$&0:$;#"3.1#*<$$
$
$$
$
$
!
! '
$
! ]4(48.$&4*#[#Z%'*)'/.:4#f-'()T2g
!
4
$
$
$
0HF#Z%',34&*#
$
b#.&/*#$-1&0(*$(&?#$/-$.&'4,0$:3,R3:#$5',+$("#$&(+,*-"#'#9$.,+4/*(3,0$,5$G43,5/#1*H$+&:#$5',+$-1&0(*$
13?#$.,'0$&0:$*/@&'$.&0#$*3+-12$'#(/'0*$4,'',>#:$.&'4,0$(,$("#$&(+,*-"#'#<$$!"/*$4/'030@$43,5/#1*$5,'$
('&0*-,'(&(3,0$&0:$"#&(30@$>311$0,($'&3*#$("#$&(+,*-"#'#)*$0#($678$.,0.#0('&(3,0<$$
$
!"#$1&0:$.,0*('&30(*$5,'$43,5/#1*9$",>#;#'9$&'#$+,'#$*#;#'#$("&0$5,'$>30:$&0:$*,1&'$#1#.('3.3(2$K$_/*($,0#$
>#:@#$>,'("$,5$.&'4,0K0#/('&1$43,5/#1*$>,/1:$'#V/3'#$CkL("$,5$("#$>,'1:)*$.',-1&0:$&0:$&0$&'#&$',/@"12$
("#$*3S#$,5$=0:3&<$b3,#0@30##'30@$(,$30.'#&*#$("#$#553.3#0.2$,5$-1&0($-",(,*20("#*3*$&0:$/*#$,5$.',-$'#*3:/#*$
.,/1:$'#:/.#$("&($1&0:$:#+&0:9$4/($1&'@#K*.&1#$-',:/.(3,0$,5$-1&0(K4&*#:$43,5/#1*$>311$&1>&2*$4#$&$1&0:K
30(#0*3;#$-',-,*3(3,0<$
$
%("&0,1$-',@'&+*$30$("#$h<W<$&0:$b'&S31$./''#0(12$-',:/.#$,;#'$UQ$43113,0$13(#'*$,5$43,5/#1$-#'$2#&'$5',+$.,'0$
&0:$*/@&'.&0#9$'#*-#.(3;#12<$$K(4#842:4#',#$%',34&*#*.7%(:*#8'3&2#/4P3%/4#%(-/4.*%(:#)'2.NT*#
4);.('&#5/'23-)%'(#$N#.$'3)#H"#)%B4*I#.(2#B.C%(:#%)#*3*).%(.$&4F##
#
$
01F#E'/4*)#?)'/.:4#
$
e&0:$-1&0(*$&0:$*,31*$.,0(&30$1&'@#$&+,/0(*$,5$.&'4,0<$!,:&29$("#'#$3*$&$0#($'#+,;&1$,5$.&'4,0$5',+$("#$
&(+,*-"#'#$42$("#*#$G0&(/'&1$*30?*9l$30$*-3(#$,5$:#134#'&(#$:#5,'#*(&(3,0$42$-#,-1#$("&($&::*$4#(>##0$C$
&0:$8$43113,0$(,0*$,5$.&'4,0$(,$("#$&(+,*-"#'#<$%;3:#0(129$("#$.&'4,0$30$5,'#*(*$3*$30.'#&*30@$#1*#>"#'#$,0$
("#$-1&0#(<$
$
e&0:$-1&0($43,+&**$.&0$4#$30.'#&*#:$42$4,("$'#:/.30@$:#5,'#*(&(3,0$&0:$-1&0(30@$0#>$5,'#*(*<$9.&)%(:#
:&'$.&#24,'/4*).)%'(#%(#M"#N4./*#8'3&2#5/'7%24#'(4#842:4#',#4B%**%'(*#*.7%(:*F$$!,$&."3#;#$&$
>#:@#$("',/@"$5,'#*($-1&0(30@$&1,0#9$0#>$5,'#*(*$>,/1:$"&;#$(,$4#$#*(&413*"#:$,;#'$&0$&'#&$("#$*3S#$,5$("#$
.,0(3@/,/*$h03(#:$W(&(#*<$
$
$
0MF#?'%&#?)'/.:4#
#
6,0;#'*3,0$,5$0&(/'&1$;#@#(&(3,0$(,$.',-1&0:$'#:/.#*$*,31$.&'4,0$.,0(#0($42$,0#K"&15$(,$,0#K("3':<$$F,>K
#;#'9$*,31$.&'4,0$1,**$.&0$4#$'#;#'*#:$42$&@'3./1(/'&1$-'&.(3.#*$("&($4/31:$/-$("#$.&'4,0$30$*,31*9$*/."$&*$
'#:/.30@$("#$-#'3,:$,5$4&'#$5&11,>9$-1&0(30@$.,;#'$.',-*9$&0:$'#:/.30@$&#'&(3,0$,5$("#$*,31$A*/."$&*$42$0,$
(3119$'3:@#$(3119$,'$."3*#1$-1,>$-1&0(30@D<$$=#842:4#',#4B%**%'(*#*.7%(:*#-'3&2#$4#.-;%4742#$N#.55&N%(:#
-./$'(#B.(.:4B4()#*)/.)4:%4*#)'#.&&#',#);4#8'/&2T*#4L%*)%(:#.:/%-3&)3/.&#*'%&*F#
#
W/@@#*(#:$130?*`$
YF?F#XKVI#V(4/:N#V,,%-%4(-N#[#]4(48.$&4#V(4/:N#
;))5bcc888F44/4F4(4/:NF:'7c#
#
J&%B.)4#J;.(:4#G""0b#`%)%:.)%'(I#Rh.(2#Y*4I#h.(26Y*4#J;.(:4I#.(2######
J./$'(#JN-&%(:#%(#D4//4*)/%.&#V-'*N*)4B*S#
;))5bcc888F:/%2.F('c-&%B.)4c%5--d)./c8:Hc0M!F;)B#
!
! (
hV??K\#Wh=\#
D;4#?).$%&%@.)%'(#A42:4*#a.B4#k#h4**'(#W&.(#
$
a'.&*#
!"#$.,'#$-/'-,*#$,5$("3*$@&+#$3*$(,$.,0;#2$("#$*.&1#$,5$#55,'($0##:#:$(,$&::'#**$("#$.&'4,0$&0:$.13+&(#$*3(/&(3,0$&0:$("#$
0#.#**3(2$,5$:#;#1,-30@$&$-,'(5,13,$,5$,-(3,0*<$$b2$("#$#0:$,5$("#$#R#'.3*#9$*(/:#0(*$*",/1:$/0:#'*(&0:$("#$+&@03(/:#$,5$
"/+&0K*,/'.#:$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$&0:$5##1$.,+5,'(&41#$.,+-&'30@$("#$#55#.(3;#0#**9$4#0#53(*9$&0:$:'&>4&.?*$,5$&$;&'3#(2$
,5$.&'4,0K./((30@$*('&(#@3#*<$$!"#$*(/:#0(*$*",/1:$&--'#.3&(#$("&($);4/4#%*#('#4.*N#'/#R/%:;)S#*'&3)%'(#)'#);4#-./$'(#
.(2#-&%B.)4#5/'$&4BF#
$$$
K$Q4-)%74*#
W(/:#0(*$>311$1#&'0$&4,/($("#$(#."0,1,@3#*$./''#0(12$&;&31&41#$("&($.&0$*/4*(&0(3&112$./($.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*9$:#;#1,-$.'3(3.&1$
'#&*,030@$*?311*$&*$("#2$.'#&(#$("#3'$,>0$-,'(5,13,$,5$*('&(#@3#*$(,$./($#+3**3,0*9$&0:$;#'4&112$.,++/03.&(#$("#$'&(3,0&1#$
5,'$("#3'$*#1#.(3,0*<$$T,'?30@$30$(#&+*9$*(/:#0(*$>311$:#;#1,-$("#$*?311*$(,$0#@,(3&(#$&$*,1/(3,0$("&($3*$4,("$-"2*3.&112$-1&/K
*341#$&0:$-,13(3.&112$&..#-(&41#9$&0:$:#5#0:$("#3'$*,1/(3,0$(,$&$1&'@#'$@',/-<$
#
\.)%'(.&#?-%4(-4#J'()4()#?).(2./2*##
#
•4
•4
W2*(#+*9$7':#'$&0:$7'@&03S&(3,0$
W.3#0.#$&*$=0V/3'2$
•4
$
$
W.3#0.#$30$Y#'*,0&1$&0:$W,.3&1$Y#'*-#.(3;#*$
^&(/'&1$&0:$F/+&0$=0:/.#:$F&S&':*$
%0;3',0+#0(&1$m/&13(2$
$
$
$
`.)4/%.&*#A*##$?)324()#a.B4#`.)4/%.&*$&($#0:$,5$-&.?#(D$
•4 C$.,-2$,5$=0*('/.(3,0*$&0:$T#:@#$!&41#$54/#*)324()#f5/%()#*%(:&46*%242#)'#.&&'8#3*4#',#:.B4$'./2#5%4-4*lg$
•4 C$T#:@#$T,'?*"##($&0:$C$X&+#4,&':$>3("$+/1(3K.,1,'#:$>#:@#$-3#.#*$54/#:/'359$-1/*$*.3**,'*$5,'$./((30@$,/($
@&+#$-3#.#*$&0:$@1/#$*(3.?*$,'$(&-#$(,$*#./'#$-3#.#*$(,$@&+#4,&':$
•4 7-(3,0&1$K$,;#'"#&:$('&0*-&'#0.3#*9$-,*(#'*9$,'$,("#'$+&(#'3&1*$5,'$@',/-$-'#*#0(&(3,0*$
#
#
D%B4#]4P3%/42#
T#$*/@@#*($/*30@$8KU$*(&0:&':$AIMKQM$+30/(#D$.1&**$-#'3,:*$(,$-'#-&'#$5,'$&0:$-1&2$("#$W(&4313S&(3,0$T#:@#*$@&+#<$$=0$
("#$53'*($-#'3,:9$("#$W(&4313S&(3,0$!'3&0@1#$&0:$("#$.,0.#-($,5$>#:@#*$&'#$:3*./**#:$&0:$("#$(#."0,1,@3#*$30(',:/.#:<$W(/K
:#0(*$.&0$5/'("#'$'#*#&'."$("#$(#."0,1,@3#*$&*$",+#>,'?<$$=0$("#$*#.,0:$-#'3,:9$*(/:#0(*$-1&2$("#$@&+#$&0:$-'#*#0($
("#3'$'#*/1(*<$c#-#0:30@$,0$("#$0/+4#'$,5$@',/-*$30$("#$.1&**9$&0$&::3(3,0&1$-#'3,:$+&2$4#$0##:#:$5,'$("#$-'#*#0(&(3,0$,5$
'#*/1(*<$$N**#**+#0($&0:$&--13.&(3,0$V/#*(3,0*$&'#$30.1/:#:$&0:$+&2$4#$&**3@0#:$&*$",+#>,'?$&5(#'$("#$@&+#$"&*$4##0$
-1&2#:9$,'$:3*./**#:$&*$&$@',/-$&*$-&'($,5$&0$&::3(3,0&1$.1&**$-#'3,:k&**3@0+#0(<$
$
#
#h4**'(#W/'-423/4c`4);'2'&':N##
#
"#' #>()/'23-)%'(#f1"#B%(3)4*g#
&<4 `')%7.)%'(F##J#;3#>$("#$/'@#0.2$,5$("#$.&'4,0$&0:$.13+&(#$-',41#+$&0:$-,(#0(3&1$>&2*$3($+&2$3+-&.($("#$*(/K
:#0(*)$5/(/'#*<$
$F' W/4*4()#);4#J'(-45)*<$=0(',:/.#$("#$3:#&*$,5$("#$W(&4313S&(3,0$!'3&0@1#$&0:$3(*$*#;#0$G>#:@#*H<#
-F' >()/'23-4#);4#D4-;('&':%4*F##b'3#512$:#*.'34#$("#$CQ$>#:@#$*('&(#@3#*$3:#0(353#:$42$6]=9$("#0$"&;#$*(/:#0(*$
5&+313&'3S#$("#+*#1;#*$>3("$("#$*('&(#@3#*$&*$",+#>,'?<$Y&'(3.3-&0(*$&'#$5'##$(,$.'3(3V/#$&02$,5$("#$>#:@#$*('&(#K
@3#*$("&($6]=$"&*$3:#0(353#:9$&0:$(#&+*$*",/1:$5##1$5'##$(,$/*#$*('&(#@3#*$0,($,0$,/'$13*(<$$#
2F' E'/B#D4.B*F##!#&+*$,5$U$(,$L$-1&2#'*$&'#$4#*(9$&0:$3($3*$-&'(3./1&'12$"#1-5/1$(,$"&;#$#&."$*(/:#0($4#$&0$&-K
-,30(#:$G#R-#'(H$30$&$5#>$,5$("#$(#."0,1,@3#*$(,$-',+,(#$@,,:$:3*./**3,0*<$f,/$+&2$>&0($(,$3:#0(352$&$'#.,':#'$
&0:$'#-,'(#'$30$#&."$@',/-<#
4F' VL5&.%(#);4#]3&4*F##W##$30*('/.(3,0*$30$?)324()#a.B4#`.)4/%.&*#&($4&.?$,5$-&.?#(#
#
#
)!
hV??K\#Wh=\#
""#' W&.N%(:#);4#a.B4#f1"#B%(3)4*g#
.F' E%&&%(:#%(#);4#?).$%&%@.)%'(#D/%.(:&4<$$!#&++&(#*$*",/1:$>,'?$(,@#("#'$(,$4/31:$&$(#&+$*(&4313S&(3,0$('3&0@1#$
/*30@$[$.,1,'K.,:#:$>#:@#*$1&4#1#:$>3("$*-#.353.$*('&(#@3#*<$$]&02$*('&(#@3#*$.&0$4#$/*#:$+,'#$("&0$,0.#<$$#
$F' A42:4#A'/C*;44)F$$%&."$(#&+$*",/1:$5311$30$,0#$*).$%&%@.)%'(#842:4#8'/C*;44)$(,$+&?#$*/'#$-1&2#'*$"&K
;#0)($;3,1&(#:$("#$.,0*('&30(*$,5$("#$@&+#9$(,$(&112$.,*(*9$&0:$(,$-'#:3.($_/:@#*)$'&(30@*$,5$("#3'$*,1/(3,0<$^7!%`$
6,*(*$&'#$5,'$@/3:&0.#$,012$E$("#2$&'#$0,($+#&0($(,$4#$/*#:$(,$-',:/.#$&$0/+#'3.&1$*.,'#$("&($>30*$,'$1,*#*$("#$
@&+#n#
-F' ]47%48%(:#);4#D/%.(:&4F$$%&."$(#&+$*",/1:$'#;3#>$("#$*('#0@("*$&0:$>#&?0#**#*$,5$3(*$*('&(#@3#*$30$-'#-&'&K
(3,0$5,'$'#-,'(30@$&0:$:#5#0:30@$3(*$*,1/(3,0*$(,$("#$.1&**<#
"""#' ]45'/)*#f2454(2%(:#'(#);4#(3B$4/#',#:/'35*#);%*#B.N#/4P3%/4#.(#.22%)%'(.&#-&.**#54/%'2g#
.F' J#-'#*#0(&(3;#*$5',+$#&."$(#&+$>311$:#5#0:$("#3'$*,1/(3,0*$(,$("#$.1&**$30$&$QK+30/(#$'#-,'(<$$!"#$-'#*#0(&(3,0$
.&0$4#$&$*3+-1#$;#'4&1$:3*./**3,0$42$("#$@',/-$,'$&$'#-,'(#'$:#*3@0&(#:$42$("#$@',/-<$$=5$&::3(3,0&1$(3+#$3*$&;&31K
&41#9$("#$-'#*#0(&(3,0*$.,/1:$30.1/:#$;3*/&1$&3:*9$*/."$&*$&$-,*(#'9$Y,>#'Y,30($-'#*#0(&(3,09$#(.<$$#
$F' W(/:#0(*$*",/1:$&::'#**$0,($,012$("#$(#."03.&1$;3&4313(2$,5$("#3'$>#:@#*9$4/($&1*,$("#$#.,0,+3.9$*,.3&19$#0;3',0K
+#0(&1$&0:$-,13(3.&1$3+-13.&(3,0*$,5$3+-1#+#0(30@$("#3'$.",*#0$*('&(#@3#*$,0$&$+&**3;#$*.&1#<#
"$#' m32:%(:##
=0$6]=$>,'?*",-*9$("#$(#&+*)$('3&0@1#*$"&;#$4##0$_/:@#:$42$#R-#'(*$5',+$;&'3,/*$@1,4&1$*(&?#",1:#'$@',/-*9$*/."$&*$
&0$#0;3',0+#0(&1$&:;,.&.2$,'@&03S&(3,09$("#$&/(,$30:/*('29$&$:#;#1,-30@$.,/0('29$,'$("#$h<W<$$i/:@30@$#0*/'#*$("&($
#.,0,+3.$&0:$-,13(3.&1$3+-&.(*$&'#$.,0*3:#'#:$&0:$#+-"&*3S#*$("#$0##:$5,'$.,0*#0*/*$&+,0@$&$4',&:$.,&13(3,0$,5$
*(&?#",1:#'*<$$B,'$&$.1&**',,+9$_/:@#*$.&0$4#$'#.'/3(#:$5',+$1,.&1$@,;#'0+#0(9$.,11#@#*9$4/*30#**#*9$&0:$0,0K-',53($
,'@&03S&(3,0*9$,'$&$(#&."#'k5&.313(&(,'$.&0$-',4#$#&."$(#&+$&4,/($("#$;3&4313(2$,5$3(*$*('&(#@3#*<$
$#' J&'*3/4c=**4**B4()#',#?)324()#h4./(%(:#
=0$&::3(3,0$(,$&::'#**30@$("#$@&+#$&0:$1#**,0*$1#&'0#:9$:3*./**3,0$V/#*(3,0*$&'#$-',;3:#:$4#1,>$("&($@3;#$,--,'(/K
03(2$(,$:#;#1,-$&0:$&**#**$("#$*(/:#0(*)$/0:#'*(&0:30@$,5$("#$>#:@#*$.,0.#-($&0:$3(*$&--13.&(3,0*<#
$
CD4 X3;#0$-"2*3.&1$."&11#0@#*$&0:$'3*?*9$",>$+&02$>#:@#*$:,$2,/$("30?$#&."$>#:@#$*('&(#@2$.&0$#&."$'#&13*(3.&112$-',K
;3:#o$
$
8D4 =0$.",,*30@$>#:@#$*('&(#@3#*9$3()*$3+-,'(&0($(,$&;,3:$:,/41#$.,/0(30@$E$'#+,;30@$("#$*&+#$#+3**3,0*$>3("$(>,$:355#'K
#0($*('&(#@3#*<$B,'$#R&+-1#9$("#'#$&'#$L$*('&(#@3#*$5,'$./((30@$#+3**3,0*$5',+$#1#.('3.3(29$4/($>#$-',_#.($,012$Q$>#:@#*$
>,'("$,5$.&'4,0$-',:/.#:$5',+$("#$#1#.('3.$*#.(,'$QM$2#&'*$5',+$0,><$$6&0$2,/$("30?$,5$'#&*,0*9$,("#'$("&0$("#$
&:,-(3,0$,5$&1(#'0&(3;#$,'$0/.1#&'$#0#'@29$("&($#+3**3,0*$5',+$#1#.('3.3(2$>,/1:$4#$1,>#'$,'$"3@"#'$("&0$>#$-'#:3.(o$
%R&+-1#*`$30.'#&*#:$/*#$,5$.&'4,0K30(#0*3;#$.,&1$;#'*/*$0&(/'&1$@&*$A"3@"#'D9$*1,>#'$-,-/1&(3,0$@',>("$A1,>#'D9$*/4K
*(3(/(3,0$,5$#1#.('3.3(2$5,'$5/#19$&*$;3&$-1/@K30$#1#.('3.$.&'*$A"3@"#'D<$
$
UD4 =0:/*('3&13S#:$.,/0('3#*$&0:$:#;#1,-30@$.,/0('3#*$0,>$#&."$.,0('34/(#$&4,/($"&15$("#$>,'1:)*$#+3**3,0*9$&1(",/@"$("#$
-,,'#'$.,/0('3#*$"&;#$&4,/($jQd$,5$("#$>,'1:)*$-,-/1&(3,0<$A!"#$h<W<$&1,0#$#+3(*$,0#$5,/'("$,5$("#$>,'1:p*$678<D$=5$
>#$&@'##$(,$5'##S#$@1,4&1$#+3**3,0*$&($./''#0($1#;#1*9$("&($+#&0*$35#4B%**%'(*#%(#'(4#/4:%'(#',#);4#8'/&2#:'#35#
.*#.#/4*3&)#',#4-'('B%-c%(23*)/%.&#2474&'5B4()I#);4(#4B%**%'(*#B3*)#$4#-3)#4&*48;4/4<$W",/1:$("#$'3."#'$
.,/0('3#*$'#:/.#$("#3'$#+3**3,0*$QM$2#&'*$5',+$0,>$*,$("&($#R('&$.&'4,0$#+3**3,0*$.&0$4#$&;&31&41#$(,$:#;#1,-30@$
.,/0('3#*o$$=5$*,9$42$",>$+/."o$
$
ID4 ^/.1#&'$#0#'@2$3*$&1'#&:2$-',;3:30@$,0#K"&15$>#:@#$,5$#+3**3,0*$*&;30@*$E$>"&($:,$2,/$("30?$("#$5/(/'#$,5$("#*#$
-1&0(*$*",/1:$4#o$
$
QD4 N/(,+,431#$#+3**3,0*$&'#$&$-,-/1&'$(&'@#($5,'$@'##0",/*#$@&*$./(*<$$T"&($-#'.#0($,5$@'##0",/*#$@&*#*$:,$2,/$("30?$
.,+#$5',+$("#$>,'1:)*$-&**#0@#'$;#"3.1#*o$A&0*>#'`$&4,/($CjdD$
#
]4*'3/-4*#[#E442$.-C#
],'#$*(&4313S&(3,0$>#:@#$'#*,/'.#*9$30.1/:30@$4&.?@',/0:$&'(3.1#*$&0:$*13:#*9$&0:$&$5,'+$5,'$5##:4&.?$&'#$&;&31&41#$&($
;))5bcc888F5/%(-4)'(F423cn-B%c/4*'3/-4*c*).$842:4F;)B#
*+!
?DYXV\D#a=`V#`=DV]>=h?###k###W/%()#*%(:&46*%242#
?)324()#a.B4#>(*)/3-)%'(*#[#`.)4/%.&*#
!"#$@,&1$,5$("3*$@&+#$3*$(,$-'(*)/3-)#.#*).$%&%@.)%'(#)/%.(:&4#3*%(:#*474(#842:4#*)/.)4:%4*9$>3("$,012$&$5#>$.,0K
*('&30(*$(,$@/3:#$2,/<$$B',+$("#$CQ$-,(#0(3&1$*('&(#@3#*9$.",,*#$[$>#:@#*$("&($2,/'$(#&+$.,0*3:#'*$("#$4#*($@1,4&1$*,1/K
(3,0*<$q##-$.,*(*$&0:$3+-&.(*$30$+30:<$$$$
$
0g'E%(2#);4#A42:4#a.B4$'./2$30$("#$4&.?$,5$("3*$-&.?#($&0:$./($&-&'($("#$'#:9$@'##09$2#11,>9$&0:$41/#$>#:@#$-3#.#*$
*/--13#:$A35$0,($&1'#&:2$:,0#$5,'$2,/D<$
$
Gg']4.2#);4#%(,'/B.)%'($,0$#&."$,5$("#$CQ$*('&(#@3#*$30$("#$A42:4#D.$&4$4#1,><$$6,*(*$Ar9$rr9$rrrD$&'#$30:3.&(#:$,0$
&$'#1&(3;#$4&*3*9$&0:$&'#$30(#0:#:$,012$(,$-',;3:#$@/3:&0.#9$0,($&$0/+#'3.&1$*.,'#<$
$
$
H
G
D
F
1.2%
8,'+
",-,(/
)*2.-(
#"
2.
01-
334)5/6"
'7.$
!"#$%&'"()*++,-,.$-/
E
B
I
Hg'%&."$(#&+$*",/1:$-;''*4#'(4#842:4#*)/.)4:N#.)#.#)%B4$(,$5311$("#$[$
*-,(*$,0$("#$>#:@#$@&+#4,&':$A*##$311/*('&(3,0$,5$@&+#4,&':$>3("$I$
>#:@#*$5311#:$30$&($1#5($E$("3*$3*$,012$&0$#R&+-1#nD<$$
$
1g'D;4#,'3/#-'&'/*#',#);4#842:4#5%4-4*#%(2%-.)4#);4#B.Q'/#-.)4:'/N$
A5,**31$5/#1K4&*#:$A41/#D9$#553.3#0.2$&0:$.,0*#';&(3,0$A2#11,>D9$0/.1#&'$
A'#:D9$&0:$'#0#>&41#*$&0:$43,*(,'&@#$A@'##0DD<$$6",,*#$&$'#:9$2#11,>9$
41/#9$,'$@'##0$>#:@#$5,'$2,/'$*('&(#@29$("#0$&.$4&#);4#842:4#)'#
%(2%-.)4#);4#*54-%,%-#*)/.)4:N#A#R&+-1#*$*",>0$30$311/*('&(3,0$&($1#5(D<$
$
$
Mg'`'*)#*)/.)4:%4*#B.N#$4#3*42#B'/4#);.(#'(-49$
$3)#(')#.&&#-3)*#-.(#-'B4#,/'B#'(4#4(4/:N#
*4-)'/F#$$
J./$'(#VB%**%'(*#$N#?4-)'/!
75$("#$CI$43113,0$(,0*$,5$.&'4,0$#+3((#:$30$("#$8MQQ$
4&*#130#$*.#0&'3,9$>#$&**/+#$#1#.('3.3(2$-',:/.(3,0$
&..,/0(*$5,'$Q$>#:@#*9$('&0*-,'(&(3,0$5/#1*$&..,/0(*$
5,'$I$>#:@#*9$&0:$:3'#.($5/#1$/*#$5,'$"#&($&0:$,("#'$
-/'-,*#*$&..,/0(*$5,'$Q$>#:@#*$A*##$-3#$."&'($
'3@"(D<$$
W1+)
E
R#1*),"*")8
E
7,+%&B$,)
A
b#.&/*#$43,*(,'&@#$(&?#*$.&'4,0$5',+$&11$*,/'.#*$
,/($,5$("#$&(+,*-"#'#9$43,*(,'&@#$>#:@#*$:,$0,($
.,/0($(,>&':$&0$#0#'@2$*#.(,'<$
#
^##:$[$>#:@#*$E$0,($&11$>#:@#*$.&0$.,+#$5',+$,0#$#0#'@2$*#.(,'n$
$
^g'J'*)#.(2#%B5.-)*#B3*)#$4#-'(*%24/42F$$%&."$>#:@#$*",/1:$4#$;3#>#:$30$(#'+*$,5$4,("$(#."03.&1$&0:$-,13(3.&1$;3K
&4313(2<#
$
+g'B,'$#&."$,5$("#$[$*('&(#@3#*$.",*#09$#&."$(#&+$*",/1:$,%&&#'3)#'(4#&%(4#%(#);4$A42:4#A'/C*;44)<$N5(#'$&11$[$
>#:@#*$"&;#$4##0$.",*#09$(&112$(,(&1$./(*$5',+$#&."$#0#'@2$*#.(,'$A%1#.('3.3(29$!'&0*-,'(9$&0:$F#&(D$&0:$.,*(*<$h*#$
("#$*.,'30@$(&41#$(,$-'#:3.($",>$:355#'#0($30(#'#*($@',/-*$>,/1:$'&(#$2,/'$>#:@#$,0$&$*.&1#$5',+$C$(,$Q<$
$
!g'%&."$(#&+$*",/1:$:%74#.#M6B%(3)4#'/.&#/45'/)$,0$("#$'#&*,030@$4#"30:$3(*$('3&0@1#<$$!"#$'#-,'($*",/1:$_/*(352$2,/'$
.",3.#$,5$>#:@#*$(,$("#$_/:@#A*D$&0:$(,$("#$,("#'$(#&+*<$$\')4b#D;4/4#%*#('#R/%:;)S#.(*84/$E$("#$(#&+$("&($+&?#*$
("#$4#*($.&*#$>30*9$0,($0#.#**&'312$("#$(#&+$>3("$("#$."#&-#*($,'$1#&*($."&11#0@30@$*,1/(3,0$
$
!
**
?DYXV\D#a=`V#`=DV]>=h?###k###W/%()#*%(:&46*%242#
A42:4#D.$&4#
########
#
#####U#V&4-)/%-%)N#W/'23-)%'(I########U94.)%(:#.(2#X%/4-)#E34&#Y*4I########UD/.(*5'/).)%'(I#######U#Z%'*)'/.:4
?)/.)4:N$
?4-)'/$
X4*-/%5)%'($
0#842:4#-'3&2#-'B4#,/'Bo$
J'*)$
J;.&&4(:4*$
$
=0.'#&*#$&/(,+,431#$5/#1$$
#553.3#0.2$
A8$43113,0$.&'*$-',_#.(#:$30$
8MQMD$
o#2'3$&%(:#);4#4,,%-%4(-N#',#);4#
.&&#8'/&2T*#-./*#,/'B#H"#)'#^"#
B5:#
p#
6&'$*3S#$a$-,>#'$
$
J#:/.#$+31#*$('&;#1#:$42$-&*K
*#0@#'$&0:k,'$5'#3@"($;#"3.1#*$
o#-3))%(:#B%&4*#)/.74&42#$N#.&&#
5.**4(:4/#74;%-&4*#%(#;.&,#
p#
=0.'#&*#:$-/413.$
('&0*-,'(9$/'4&0$
:#*3@0#
=0.'#&*#$30*/1&(3,09$5/'0&.#$$
&0:$13@"(30@$#553.3#0.2$
o#3*%(:#$4*)#.7.%&.$&4#)4-;('&6
':N#%(#.&&#(48#.(2#4L%*)%(:#
$3%&2%(:*#
p#
F,/*#$*3S#9$.,0K
*/+#'$:#+&0:$5,'$
&--13&0.#*$
=0.'#&*#$#553.3#0.2$,5$-,>#'$
@#0#'&(3,0$
o#/.%*%(:#5&.()#4,,%-%4(-N#,/'B#
1"_#)'#^"_$
p#
=0.'#&*#:$-1&0($
.,*(*#
678$5',+$5,**31$5/#1$-,>#'$
-1&0(*$.&-(/'#:9$("#0$*(,'#:$
/0:#'@',/0:$
A[MM$1&'@#$.,&1$-1&0(*$,'$CIMM$
0&(/'&1$@&*$-1&0(*D$
o#%(Q4-)%(:#.#7'&3B4#',#JKG#
474/N#N4./#4P3.&#)'#);4#7'&3B4#
',#'%&#4L)/.-)42#$
pp$
Y,**34313(2$,5$678$
1#&?&@#$
$
F2:',@#0$5/#1$5',+$5,**31$
*,/'.#*$>3("$66W$:3*-1&.#*$
"2:',.&'4,0$5/#1*$
o#5/'23-%(:#;N2/':4(#.)#0"#
)%B4*#);4#-3//4()#/.)4#
ppp$
^#>$305'&*('/.(/'#$
0##:#:9$"2:',@#0$
*&5#(2$3**/#*$
+F' JJ?#?N(,34&*#
6&-(/'#$&0:$*(,'#$678$#+3((#:$
:/'30@$*205/#1*$-',:/.(3,0$
5',+$.,&1$
o#3*%(:#JJ?#.)#0!"#&./:4##
*N(,34&*#5&.()*#
pp#
%+3**3,0*$*(311$,012$
4'#&?$#;#0$>3("$
@&*,130##
!F' E34&######
?8%)-;%(:#k#
V&4-)/%-%)N#
$
J#-1&.30@$.,&1K4/'030@$#1#.('3.$
-1&0(*$>3("$0&(/'&1$@&*$-1&0(*$
ACIMM$C$XT$.,&1$-1&0(*D$
o#3*%(:#.(#.B'3()#',#(.)3/.&#
:.*#4P3.&#)'#);.)#3*42#,'/#.&&#
53/5'*4*#)'2.N$
p#
$
^&(/'&1$@&*$
&;&31&4313(2$
$
$
c3*-1&.#$.,&1K4/'030@$#1#.('3.$
-1&0(*$>3("$0/.1#&'$-1&0(*$
A8$R$./''#0($.&-&.3(2D$
o#nH#)%B4*#);4#4,,'/)#E/.(-4#
53)#%()'#4L5.(2%(:#(3-&4./#
5'84/#%(#);4#0e!"T*I##*3*).%(42#
,'/#M"#N4./*$
pp$
T#&-,0*$-',135#'&K
(3,09$0/.1#&'$>&*(#9$
1,.&1$,--,*3(3,0$
$
T30:$:3*-1&.#*$.,&1K4&*#:$
#1#.('3.3(2$
AUM$R$./''#0($.&-&.3(2D$
o#3*%(:#./4.#4P3.&#)'#nH_#',#
YF?F#&.(2#./4.#,'/#8%(2#,./B*$
pp#
^,($=0$]2$b&.?$f&':$
A^=]bfD$
$
$
W,1&'$Yg$:3*-1&.#*$.,&1K4&*#:$
#1#.('3.3(2$
A[MM$R$./''#0($.&-&.3(2D$
FF#3*%(:#);4#4P3%7.&4()#',#.#0""#
L#G""#CB#Wj#.//.N$
ppp#
Yg$.#11$+&(#'3&1*$
$
Y',:/.#$"2:',@#0$>3("$>30:$$
#1#.('3.3(2$
o#5'84/%(:#;.&,#);4#8'/&2T*#
-./*#5/42%-)42#,'/#G"M"#8%);#
;N2/':4(#
pp#
^=]bf9$F2:',@#0$
305'&*('/.(/'#9$*&5#(2
$
pp#
#
b3,:3;#'*3(29$.,+-#(K
30@$1&0:$/*#$
$
p#
#
b3,:3;#'*3(29$.,+-#(K
30@$1&0:$/*#$
$
p#
#
J#;#'*#:$35$1&0:$3*$
:##-K-1,>#:$1&(#'$
$
0F' V,,%-%4(-N#k#
D/.(*5'/)$
#
GF' J'(*4/7.)%'(##
6#D/.(*5'/)#
HF' V,,%-%4(-N#6
Z3%&2%(:*$
$
1F' V,,%-%4(-N#k
V&4-)/%-%)N$
$
MF' JJ?############
V&4-)/%-%)N#
^F' JJ?##
9N2/':4(#
$
$
#
eF' \3-&4./#######
V&4-)/%-%)N#
0"F' A%(2########
V&4-)/%-%)N#
00F' ?'&./########
V&4-)/%-%)N#
0GF' A%(2#########
9N2/':4(#
$
$
0HF' #Z%',34&*$
01F' E'/4*)#$
?)'/.:4$
0MF' ?'%&##
?)'/.:4#
b3,+&**$5/#1*$5',+$-1&0(&(3,0*$ o#*-.&%(:#35#8'/&2#4);.('&#5/'6
'#-1&.#$-#(',1#/+$5/#1*$
23-)%'(#$N#.#,.-)'/#',#H"$
$
6&'4,0$*(,'#:$30$0#>$5,'#*(*$
#
o#;.&)%(:#24,'/4*).)%'(#%(#M"#
N4./*#$
B&'+30@$(#."3V/#*$30.'#&*#$
#o#3*%(:#-'(*4/7.)%'(#)%&&.:4#'(#
.&'4,0$'#(#0(3,0$,'$*(,'&@#$30$
.&&#);4#8'/&2T*#.:/%-3&)3/.&#*'%&*##
*,31*$
*"!
?DYXV\D#a=`V#`=DV]>=h?###k###W/%()#*%(:&46*%242#
A42:4#A'/C*;44)#
!
0F##]4-'/2#N'3/#*)/.)4:%4*#)'#/423-4#)').&#,'**%&#,34&#4B%**%'(*#$N#+#842:4*#$N#G"MM##
AC$G>#:@#H!Z$C$43113,0$(,0*$.&'4,0$-#'$2#&'D$
##
•$f,/$+&2$/*#$&$*('&(#@2$+,'#$("&0$,0.#$$
•$h*#$,012$>",1#$0/+4#'*$,5$>#:@#*$
•$f,/$+&2$/*#$&$+&R3+/+$,5$
,$Q$#1#.('3.3(2$>#:@#*$A%D$
,$I$('&0*-,'(&(3,0$>#:@#*A!D$$
,$Q$"#&($,'$:3'#.($5/#1$/*#$>#:@#*$AFD4 4
A42:4#
#q#
?)/.)4:N#
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
#
DKD=h?#
#
0#
G#
H#
1#
M#
^#
+#
$
4
?4-)'/#
%9$!9$F9$,'$b$
J'*)#
J;.&&4(:4*#
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$ R'J'XXX' DE'C+YG
$
7'J'XXX''DA'C+YG'
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
J4
W'J'XXX''DE'C+YG'
!'J'XXX'
GF##a34**#);4#*-'/4#4.-;#*).C4;'&24/#:/'35#8'3&2#:%74#N'3/#)4.BT*#)/%.(:&4#'(#.#*-.&4#',#0#)'#M#fM#U#$4*)gF#
!
D.L5.N4/*c#
V(4/:N#
J'B5.(%4*#
V(7%/'(B4().&#
a/'35*#
`.(3,.-)3/4/*
>(23*)/%.&%@42#
-'3()/N#
:'74/(B4()*#
X474&'5%(:#
-'3()/N#
:'74/(B4()*#
#
#
#
#
#
#
m32:4b# J'(*3B4/*#
?-'/4b#
#
*#!
?).$%&%@.)%'(#A42:4#
a.B4$'./2#
0F' Y3.?$'#:9$41/#9$2#11,>$,'$@'##0$>#:@#*$(,$'#-'#*#0($("#$+&_,'$>#:@#$
.&(#@,'3#*$,5$("#$+#*)/.)4:%4*$(,$4#$/*#:$$AB,**31KB/#19$^/.1#&'9$$$$$$
%553.3#0.2$a$6,0*#';&(3,09$,'$J#0#>&41#*$a$b3,*(,'&@#D<$
GF' e&4#1$>#:@#*$(,$30:3.&(#$*-#.353.$*('&(#@3#*<$
!
E>'81+,&'
*$!
4
F'-"##"$%'
)$%&'*+,-$%'
B1,'81+,'
?DYXV\D#a=`V#`=DV]>=h?###k###W/%()#*%(:&46*%242#
H4
G4
D4
F4
E4
B4
I4
$
4
!
*%!
K<,4-023640/378
]4(48.$&4*#[#Z%'*)'/.:4#A42:4*#
I4
B4
E4
F4
D4
G4
H4
?DYXV\D#a=`V#`=DV]>=h?###k###W/%()#*%(:&46*%242#
4
!
I4
B4
E4
F4
D4
G
H4
K<,4-023640/378
$
E'**%&#E34&6Z.*42#A42:4*#
4
!
*&!
K<,4-023640/378
V,,%-%4(-N#[#J'(*4/7.)%'(#A42:4*#
I4
B4
E4
F4
D4
G4
H4
?DYXV\D#a=`V#`=DV]>=h?###k###W/%()#*%(:&46*%242#
4
!
I4
B4
E4
F4
D4
G4
H4
K<,4-023640/378
$
$
\3-&4./#A42:4*#