Argumentative Essay: The Clean Power Plan

Evidence: According to the Obama Administration, the United States has nearly doubled clean renewable energy generated by wind, solar, and geothermal since 2008.

With American population expected to increase by approximately fifty percent over the next fifty years, some sort of energy reform is needed (Lehrman 2). The most commonly proposed idea is for America to stop relying so heavily on fossil fuels, and to turn its focus onto renewable sources of energy, such as solar power and hydroelectricity (Energy Information Administration). If the United States could realize the benefits of renewable energy, then much of the world’s energy problems could be solved.

This article discusses the problems with switching to renewable energy. Obama's Clean Power Plan sets a goal for the United States to have 28% of its power come from renewable energy sources by the year 2030 and the two following problems came from it.

Conference Focus: Implement a new policy within five years to move into renewable energy, with a focus on solar power, while decreasing the use of fossil fuels. This policy will examine the barriers to implement new renewable energy technologies that will decrease the carbon dioxide emissions and identify ways to overcome these barriers through incentives, tax breaks, and attitudinal changes.

Hydroelectric power has been used for many years. And over the past few years, it has grown throughout our country. Using an alternative energy source will overall become the best solution for the loss of nonrenewable energy sources. 7% of people using renewable energy are using Hydroelectric power. This might not seem like much, but it compares to the other alternatives knowing only 4% of people use solar power. People have been collecting energy from moving water for centuries, and why not put this to use. I believe that hydroelectric energy is the ¨best¨ source for a few reasons. First i'm going to define what being the best means. The best means that it is overall going to help us in the future by using what he already have. It doesn't have to necessarily be the cheapest but it does have to do the job and last as long as possible so that the country can be able to thrive with an alternate energy source. The first reason it´s the best is that the country is already using it. It's the most used source of renewable energy.This makes it easier to expand the usage as more people are influenced. The second reason is that it uses materials we already have. Water covers 71% of the earth, and this can make hydroelectric energy the most reasonable to use.

While this is great to the consumer, the renewable sector’s growth was more stagnant. Attention was diverted to use another greenhouse producing fossil fuel rather than a clean renewable. A trend in U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (2017) data showed renewable sector’s power production since 2008 grew only 5.7% as compared to natural gas production 18%. Another disadvantage to the diversion from renewables is the additional carbon dioxide generated from these additional plants operating. “About 24 percent of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions are related to natural gas in 2011” (Natural gas prices. (n.d.)). The replacement of coal-fired power plants with natural gas has let to a decrease of the green house gases, mainly particulate matter and sulfur dioxide emissions. “Sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions produced in the generation of electricity at power plants in the United States declined by 73% from 2006 to 2015, a much larger reduction than the 32% decrease in coal-fired electricity generation over that period.” U.S. Energy Information Administration (2017). This shows that more efficient control equipment can be used to almost eliminate the trace amounts of sulfur dioxide in natural gas.

In 2013, the Obama Administration issued the Climate Action Plan to focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 17 % reduction below 2005 levels by 2020. This plan’s three objectives were carbon reduction, strengthening capacity for climate change response, and leading international cooperation for climate change crisis (White House, 2013). To reduce the

His administration insists that with these new rules going into an effect will cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other deadly gases by thirty percent between the years 2012-2016 (Baker,2010). Unfortunately Obama’s new policy will only help conserve for the next six years. The following resource plan will not only help do the same but will hopefully have the same if not better results even farther into the future.

I agree. Over the next four years we will have to take environmental protection into our own hands, especially mitigating climate change. There have already been reports that the climate change webpage on Whitehouse.gov has been taken down and replaced with the Trump Administration’s “America First” energy plan.

Carbon emissions are changing the planet for the worse. Energy production (mostly coal) is producing a one third of the US 's global warming emissions. Renewable sources produce little to zero percent. The balance of coal and renewable energy in the U.S. needs to be evened out with renewable techniques. Statistics from the Union of Concerned Scientist’s “Benefits of Renewable Energy Use” show that most renewable resources emit less than one pound of CO2E/kWh. These have significantly less of a carbon footprint than coal, which emits 1.4 to 3.6 lbs. CO2E/kWh or natural gas, which emits .6 to 2 lbs. CO2E/kWh. This impressive difference of carbon emissions between renewable and fossil fuel is the key to caring for our environment. A 2009 USC study found that if 25 percent of the US 's

With our modern technology, yes, we can burn our coal within the limits of the Clean Air Act” (Reagan,1980) and Reagans lack of policy regarding the environment while pushing for increased coal production seem to mirror his skepticism regarding the environmental issues of the time. The partisan nature of environmental policy spending can be shown most clearly when Reagan’s nonchalant approach to the environmental policy when they are compared to the new technologies that were put in to place during the presidency of Jimmy Carter. In an address to a joint session of congress in 1977, Carter outlined a national energy plan which included “We must start now to develop the new, unconventional sources of energy we will rely on in the next century” (Carter, 1977) and this included “In the long term, to develop renewable and essentially inexhaustible sources of energy for sustained economic growth” (Carter, 1977). This brings a different perspective to the policy changes that are now occurring in the government in a change from President Obama to President Trump. Just as Reagan followed Carter and the shift on environmental policy was moved from developing new technologies to returning to coal burning as a primary source of energy, the change from Obama’s policies to Trump’s may not be totally

Americans should conserve energy because of the cost, the impact on the environment, and the economy. As each year goes by americans are using more and more energy. Our electricity's price is slowly raising up which cost more money.

Shifting the majority of energy consumption in the U.S. to clean energy would affect people and businesses both in and outside of the nation. This inevitably creates concern surrounding the topic and causes delays due to necessary controversy and questioning. While plenty of concerns are valid, others have been answered by studies and reports by various organizations but have yet to reach the public in masses.

Common-sense regulatory initiatives, developed by EPA to minimize greenhouse gas was found to be efficient. For example, EPA's vehicle greenhouse gas rules will save consumers $1.7 trillion at the pump by 2025, and eliminate six billion metric tons of GHG pollution. EPA's Clean Power Plan addresses emissions from power plants, the largest source of carbon pollution in the country. When the Clean Power Plan is fully in place in 2030, carbon pollution from the power sector will be 32 percent below 2005

For nearly everyone on earth, fossil fuels are a part of our daily lives. Some of the more obvious places to find petroleum products would be gas and diesel in cars and trucks, but it is in more than just your tank. Without fossil fuels, we would not have things such as plastic to make a wide variety of things such as tires, kayaks, or even computers. The question remains, do we need fossil fuels?