Free-market capitalism is the central core of the U.S. economy. However, there are some cases in which the solution favored by the free market is not in the best interest of the country. Ever since the industrial revolution, America has been the leading consumer of fossil fuels. These energy sources are cheap and efficient, making them economically ideal. However, use of fossil fuels has many negative effects. Fossil fuels have a definite supply, which will eventually run out. Our need to purchase oil makes us dependent on many unstable regimes all over the world. Furthermore, burning fossil fuels releases dangerous pollutants in to the atmosphere, which causes many health problems and may be impacting global warming. There are many ways to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, such as renewable fuel sources or more energy efficient technology. However, these alternatives are often more expensive, leaving businesses and individuals no financial incentive to use them. The federal government needs to make it easier for Americans to switch to green energy providing financial incentives.
For the past century, America has been struggling with an unhealthy addiction to Fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are problematic both for the world’s reliance on them and for their effects on the planet. Fossil fuels such as oil and coal are non-renewable, meaning that once we deplete them, they will be so scarce that it will be too costly to retrieve what is left of them. When burned for energy, these fossil fuels also release harmful chemicals into the air including CO2, a major greenhouse gas [1]. Once the greenhouse gases that result from the combustion of fossil fuels are released into the air, they build up in the atmosphere. This buildup allows the heat from the sun to warm the surface of the earth, but doesn't let it leave the atmosphere. This “greenhouse” effect is known as global warming. The process is deemed by climatologists around the world to be a serious threat to planet earth; the more greenhouse gases and carbon dioxide humans add to the atmosphere, the faster temperatures rise, and the more humans contribute to global warming. The United States consumes more fossil fuels than any other country in the world, and fossil fuels make up over 85% of America’s total energy consumption [2]. If the U.S. can not reform it’s energy habits, there could be detrimental consequences four the country, as well as the world.
The largest source of energy in the United States is petroleum products, better known as oil. According to Walter Youngquist, “oil fuels the modern world,” and this could not be more true [3]. The United States takes advantage of this resource more than any other country. In the modern world, oil is the most convenient source of energy. It is readily available, safe and opportune to use, and quite versatile. Oil is able to generate huge amounts of energy, and is also easy to store and ship. These factors have turned oil into the central fuel source of America. While oil is cheap and convenient, the negative aspects of it’s use are becoming apparent. Science is showing that the use of oil has a drastic impact CO2 into the Earth’s atmosphere, on global climate change. Combustion of oil releases depleting the ozone layer and causing the global temperature to rise [4]. Over time, this climate change may have a significant impact on future generations. Additionally, two thirds of necessary U.S. oil is imported from foreign nations. For example, the Middle East and Africa, two oil-rich regions, have become major economic partners with America over the trade of oil. However, these regions are both plagued by violence and instability. By importing oil from them, the United States has been supporting these unstable nations. Additionally, we run the risk of an energy crisis if we become unable to buy oil from these countries. Trading oil with these developing regions is not safe and is far too big a part of the country’s foreign policy. The United States needs to limit its use of oil so it can secure a more stable energy supply.
As a response to our dependence on fossil fuels, the U.S. has been pursuing the use of renewable energy sources. These are sources that can never run out or be completely used up. They also emit far fewer pollutants into the air than do fossil fuels. Renewable sources include solar power, wind power, geothermal, and many more [5]. Many scientists warn that if we continue to exhaust the world’s oil supply and to use harmful fossil fuels, then “future economic and humanitarian disasters are inevitable” [3]. Therefore, the United States, the country responsible for the most greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, needs to increase its energy independence from oil and shift to an energy supply that focuses on renewable energy (Wald,2009). However, many view the use of renewable energy as impractical. Renewable energy sources typically cost more money and are more difficult to use. To help overcome these obstacles, the federal government needs to create incentives towards the use of renewable energy. “The U.S. government would be wise to allocate federal funds to the development of renewables” [4]. Supporters of alternative energy say that if the United States government doesn’t find a way to replace oil, and continues to consume as it does now, then, according to scientist Alan Betts, “the cost of doing nothing will be far higher than the cost of using our technology to fix a problem that was generated by our technology in the first place.” [4]. The scientific community is clearly stating that the U.S. government needs to start taking action before it is too late.
If renewable energy sources are to compete with fossil fuels as major sources of energy, then they require serious government funding. There are many different means of doing this. First, there is a method called “cap-and-trade.” This method caps, or puts limits on greenhouse gas emissions for companies. Permits that allow companies to emit these gases are then auctioned off. This method would stop pollution from companies while promoting new cheap and clean forms of energy. While critics argue this could lead to job loss, it could actually lead to profit from the auctioned caps, and a much cleaner environment [5]. This process has already proven to be successful in an agreement called the Kyoto Protocol. Many European countries have joined it and already there has been a 3% reduction in emissions since it was started in 1990 [4]. Another potent method is government incentives. Often in the form of tax breaks, these incentives offer companies money if they are willing to use any renewable sources. These are a way to help companies and limit the effects of global warming. If many companies were to take these incentives, it would help to further develop alternative energy, thus making it more affordable and leveling the playing field between fossil fuels and renewable energy[2].
Clearly, action needs to be taken to decrease the U.S.’s dependence on fossil fuels, especially oil. These harmful resources are nonrenewable, contribute to global warming, and are imported from unstable regions of the world. Renewable resources are much more favorable in the long run; they cannot be depleted, they are much cleaner than fossil fuels, and they ultimately are more dependable than oil. In order to increase the use of these renewable sources, the United States government must take steps towards making this happen. Providing financial rewards for those who use green energy and penalties for those who refuse to adapt is necessary to get our country back on the path towards a cleaner future. If the government does not provide these opportunities, businesses and individuals will be forced to stick with fossil fuels. Spending money on green energy may be a difficult action to take now, but it is an investment in the future of our country.
For the past century, America has been struggling with an unhealthy addiction to Fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are problematic both for the world’s reliance on them and for their effects on the planet. Fossil fuels such as oil and coal are non-renewable, meaning that once we deplete them, they will be so scarce that it will be too costly to retrieve what is left of them. When burned for energy, these fossil fuels also release harmful chemicals into the air including CO2, a major greenhouse gas [1]. Once the greenhouse gases that result from the combustion of fossil fuels are released into the air, they build up in the atmosphere. This buildup allows the heat from the sun to warm the surface of the earth, but doesn't let it leave the atmosphere. This “greenhouse” effect is known as global warming. The process is deemed by climatologists around the world to be a serious threat to planet earth; the more greenhouse gases and carbon dioxide humans add to the atmosphere, the faster temperatures rise, and the more humans contribute to global warming. The United States consumes more fossil fuels than any other country in the world, and fossil fuels make up over 85% of America’s total energy consumption [2]. If the U.S. can not reform it’s energy habits, there could be detrimental consequences four the country, as well as the world.
The largest source of energy in the United States is petroleum products, better known as oil. According to Walter Youngquist, “oil fuels the modern world,” and this could not be more true [3]. The United States takes advantage of this resource more than any other country. In the modern world, oil is the most convenient source of energy. It is readily available, safe and opportune to use, and quite versatile. Oil is able to generate huge amounts of energy, and is also easy to store and ship. These factors have turned oil into the central fuel source of America. While oil is cheap and convenient, the negative aspects of it’s use are becoming apparent. Science is showing that the use of oil has a drastic impact CO2 into the Earth’s atmosphere, on global climate change. Combustion of oil releases depleting the ozone layer and causing the global temperature to rise [4]. Over time, this climate change may have a significant impact on future generations. Additionally, two thirds of necessary U.S. oil is imported from foreign nations. For example, the Middle East and Africa, two oil-rich regions, have become major economic partners with America over the trade of oil. However, these regions are both plagued by violence and instability. By importing oil from them, the United States has been supporting these unstable nations. Additionally, we run the risk of an energy crisis if we become unable to buy oil from these countries. Trading oil with these developing regions is not safe and is far too big a part of the country’s foreign policy. The United States needs to limit its use of oil so it can secure a more stable energy supply.
As a response to our dependence on fossil fuels, the U.S. has been pursuing the use of renewable energy sources. These are sources that can never run out or be completely used up. They also emit far fewer pollutants into the air than do fossil fuels. Renewable sources include solar power, wind power, geothermal, and many more [5]. Many scientists warn that if we continue to exhaust the world’s oil supply and to use harmful fossil fuels, then “future economic and humanitarian disasters are inevitable” [3]. Therefore, the United States, the country responsible for the most greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, needs to increase its energy independence from oil and shift to an energy supply that focuses on renewable energy (Wald,2009). However, many view the use of renewable energy as impractical. Renewable energy sources typically cost more money and are more difficult to use. To help overcome these obstacles, the federal government needs to create incentives towards the use of renewable energy. “The U.S. government would be wise to allocate federal funds to the development of renewables” [4]. Supporters of alternative energy say that if the United States government doesn’t find a way to replace oil, and continues to consume as it does now, then, according to scientist Alan Betts, “the cost of doing nothing will be far higher than the cost of using our technology to fix a problem that was generated by our technology in the first place.” [4]. The scientific community is clearly stating that the U.S. government needs to start taking action before it is too late.
If renewable energy sources are to compete with fossil fuels as major sources of energy, then they require serious government funding. There are many different means of doing this. First, there is a method called “cap-and-trade.” This method caps, or puts limits on greenhouse gas emissions for companies. Permits that allow companies to emit these gases are then auctioned off. This method would stop pollution from companies while promoting new cheap and clean forms of energy. While critics argue this could lead to job loss, it could actually lead to profit from the auctioned caps, and a much cleaner environment [5]. This process has already proven to be successful in an agreement called the Kyoto Protocol. Many European countries have joined it and already there has been a 3% reduction in emissions since it was started in 1990 [4]. Another potent method is government incentives. Often in the form of tax breaks, these incentives offer companies money if they are willing to use any renewable sources. These are a way to help companies and limit the effects of global warming. If many companies were to take these incentives, it would help to further develop alternative energy, thus making it more affordable and leveling the playing field between fossil fuels and renewable energy[2].
Clearly, action needs to be taken to decrease the U.S.’s dependence on fossil fuels, especially oil. These harmful resources are nonrenewable, contribute to global warming, and are imported from unstable regions of the world. Renewable resources are much more favorable in the long run; they cannot be depleted, they are much cleaner than fossil fuels, and they ultimately are more dependable than oil. In order to increase the use of these renewable sources, the United States government must take steps towards making this happen. Providing financial rewards for those who use green energy and penalties for those who refuse to adapt is necessary to get our country back on the path towards a cleaner future. If the government does not provide these opportunities, businesses and individuals will be forced to stick with fossil fuels. Spending money on green energy may be a difficult action to take now, but it is an investment in the future of our country.
References
- Clemmitt, M. (2006, January 27). Climate change. CQ Researcher, 16, 73-96. Retrieved from http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/
- Cooper, M. H. (1997, November 7). Renewable energy. CQ Researcher, 7, 961-984. Retrieved from http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/
- Youngquist, W. (n.d.). Alternative Energy Sources. Retrieved from http:// www.hubbertpeak.com/youngquist/altenergy.htm
- Global Warming. (2009, October 12). Issues & Controversies On File. Retrieved from Facts On File News Services database.
- Wald, M. L. (2009, March 28). Cost Works Against Alternative and Renewable Energy Sources in Time of Recession. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/business/energy-environment/29renew.html
No comments:
Post a Comment