Energy Debate in the Us

If wind turbines are supposed to be good for the environment, what is to be said about their lethal effects on birds? How about the noise produced from the large turbines, whom many consider to be horrible eyesores that tarnish the countryside? Investing in these large, hideous structures is initially expensive, and while it may be true that there is an unlimited supply of wind, how is the resulting energy to be distributed? Undoubtedly, just as the advantages of wind power need to be taken into account, the disadvantages also need to be

America should pursue alternative energy sources because “With only 5 percent of the worlds population, the United States consumes almost one-quarter (22.5%) of global energy”. (((Josef Bram, 15))) With such a small percentage of the world’s population and still one of the largest consumers of energy the U.S should be looking for new and better ways to generate energy. Currently The U.S’s energy is supplied using traditional sources. According to Canadian scientist and policy analyst Vaclav Smil “Todays energy 29% from coal, 33% from oil and gas, and 33% from soft-energy (alternative sources)” (((Smil, 47))) Most of the energy we use on a daily basis is not produced using clean methods. Some alternative energy sources that are already in place within the United Stats are wind, solar, and hydraulic.

At the beginning of last year, I convinced my family to start using environmentally products, focusing on green technology. In order to apply environmental technology properly and effectively, I had to figure out what alternative forms of energy existed and how well they worked. This led to my questioning: what other forms of energy could the United States be pursuing to increase its production of electricity? In an effort to research different form of energy and their benefits and detriments, I read two articles: “A Letter to the Editor” by David Rockwood and “Why Uranium is the New Green” by William Sweet. In his letter, David Rockwood, a professional engineer, discusses the several inaccuracies and possible ramifications of wind power as a main source of electricity. Rockwood claims that wind power is unreliable because of flaws in its system and design, not to mention the detrimental environmental impact. Similarly, in his article William Sweet, a college graduate, talks about different ways to impose some kind of carbon regulation. Sweet compares nuclear and wind power to coal-burning power, remarking that nuclear and wind power technologies can make an immediate beneficial difference on greenhouse gas emissions. Despite the fact that Rockwood goes in depth on only wind power while Sweet talks about multiple sources of power, both of the articles made me think that the United States should pursue some other form of energy to increase its production of electricity.

The Alternative energy industry in the United States has been at a steady rate of growth for the past decade, however there is still controversy over the use of renewable energies, their impact on the economy, and their impact on the environment. As controversial as the topic is, the argument boils down to a moral need to support environmental regulations, and an economical need to sustain domestic growth in the Energy industry of the United States. Mainly, the question is can alternative energy effective replace fossil fuels? There are of course arguments for both sides of this question.

At the beginning of the year the President of the United States announced that the United States was in the middle of a nation wide energy crisis. The President gave many solutions including using more solar and wind energy, nuclear power, and drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). The President told the American people that they would have to watch their energy use and conserve as much as possible. Gas prices reached $2 per gallon in the Midwest for the second straight summer, and California continued to be hit by unprecedented power woes that forced rolling blackouts. The price of crude oil rose sharply, from around $10 a barrel to a peak of $37. The

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.

The U.S. energy policy is not sustainable in that a vast majority of the energy consumed comes from finite resources like oil, coal, and natural gas. While the continued use of these sources pollutes and contributes to global warming an even larger issue is emerging for the future generations of the earth, what to do when all fossil fuels have run out or come to the point where their extraction and development is economically unfeasible? There is no doubt that renewable energy will have to become the primary source of power for the U.S. and the world at some point in the future and increased research, development, and use of these technologies now will

Big idea: Solar energy is great for the environment because of no pollution, it gets a lot of energy, and it is a great investment. However, solar panels can come at a high cost to buy and to get installed.

The United States is in an energy crisis. We rely almost solely on crude oil for most of our “gasoline” needs, meaning our fuels. The issue with our current reliance on crude oil is, plainly, that it is running out. We don’t currently have enough crude oil production in the US to support our current demand, so we are forced to import oil from overseas. And, we import a lot of it. With a gas demand of roughly 134 billion gallons per year, there exists a large risk relying on a fuel that is unsustainable and imported from overseas. Our country has the capability of greatly reducing our dependence on foreign oil, perhaps to the point where we would not have any need to import oil from overseas. With the use of our own crude oil, natural gas, and other alternative fuels, the United States can become nearly completely self-sustainable in terms of fuels. Moreover, becoming self-sustainable can have an effect of reducing geopolitical tensions particularly with regard to relations in the Middle East, the world’s largest producer and exporter of oil.

In “Alternative Energy Should Not Be Pursued” the author argues that alternative energy sources are in fact more costly and less efficient than traditional energy sources. Environmentalists and advocates of renewable energy propose that the world can be powered without producing harmful greenhouse gases via renewable resources; but the author argues, with the help of experts Peter Van Doren and Jeremy Taylor, that the higher costs would override any benefits. The United States government has bolstered the renewable energy industry since the 1970s with incentives and subsidies despite there being little to no economic benefit to promoting such types of energy production. The author also seeks to show that this is not a battle between “Big Oil” and an “infant industry,” but this alleged

California’s reliance on high polluting fossil fuels requires that the state strongly emphasize the development of Alternative Energy Sources (AES) such as hydrogen power, electric vehicle, hydroelectricity, as well as wind and solar power. It proposes that a wholesale move towards AES will improve life in the state in three distinct ways. First, it will increase Californians’ consumer reliance on finite non-renewable energy. Second, it will create jobs in the state by generating a domestic AES production infrastructure. Finally, it will reap enormous environmental benefits whereby fossil fuel emissions will be cut significantly. While the move away

Energy is more than a utility that keeps the lights on in our homes or the gas in our cars; it’s a foundational resource that plays a key role in a nation’s ability to provided economic opportunity and basic services and security to its people. As such, it is imperative to a nation’s overall security that it develops/acquires access to energy, ensures energy needs are properly met and supplies are readily available, and disruptions minimized. Policy directs that the U.S. has a role in developing energy security throughout the world. For the U.S., we’ve long recognized the importance of energy security and have gone to great lengths to ensure its protection by developing depth and breadth in energy capabilities,

Conserving energy is what Americans should start doing because it will save money. Saving money is a very good reason, because we could spend less money on the electricity if they kept the lights off. The lightbulb that amerians use could also be a big reason why our energy bill is so high. If we started using CFL’s or LED’s then we would save 30% to 80% on energy bills.

The cause for this great rate of growth in wind power is contributed to tax incentives and state laws mandating renewable energy research. The nation 's total Wind power production is relatively low but some states like Iowa are investing in it heavily. Wind power produces 4.7 percent of the United States electrical energy and makes up over thirty percent of Iowa 's energy (American Wind Energy Association). Wind energy is gaining a lot of traction in northern states but almost does not exist in the southern states. When it comes to reliability wind energy is inferior to Hydropower. In order for a wind turbine to work wind speeds need to be around 8-55 mph and they are only efficient at wind speeds above 30 mph, anything below that minimal (National Wind Watch). This makes wind turbines less reliable because the wind can vary wildly throughout a day. Wind power also comes with some environmental impacts too. Wind Turbines kill tens of thousands of birds a year do to Turbines essentially being giant metal fans (Hosansky). Bats are especially affected because they rely on echolocation to see and giant moving blades confuse them into running into the blades.

Since, fossil fuels have been a part of our environment for some time now, they have been the main resource we’ve needed and used to keep our country running. The truth of the matter is, since we obtain fossil fuels from plants and animals that lived millions of years ago they will soon be gone. As indicated by Eric McLamb, founder, chief executive officer, and president of the ecology communications group, “The problem is fossil fuels are nonrenewable. They are limited in supply and will one day be depleted.” People realize that the crisis of running out of fossil fuels is upon us; however, these same people are timid about moving on to renewable energy. One main reason is because individuals do not believe renewable energy is cost efficient. For instance, solar energy is known to be fairly expensive, particularly more expensive than the conventional energy used now, which makes people uncertain about changing to renewable energy.