Methane Emissions In The Obama Administration

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.

The U.S obtains more than 84% of its energy from fossil fuels including oil, coal and natural gas. This is because people rely on it to heat their homes, power industries, run vehicles, manufacturing, and provision of electricity. It is apparent that the country’s transportation industry highly depends on conventional petroleum oil, which is responsible for global warming, thus threatening economic opulence and national security. Apart from that, increasing consumption of fossil fuels have elevated health problems in the state, destroyed wild places, and polluted the environment. After conducting Environmental Impact Assessment, projections showed that the world energy consumption would increase by more than 56% between 2010 and 2040. However, fossil fuels will cater for more than 80% of the total energy used in 2040. Sadly, it will be a trajectory to alter the world’s climate, as well as, weaken the global security environment. Importantly, the rate at which the US relies on fossil fuels needs to reduce since it has adverse effects on the planet’s supplies. The society needs to realize that fossil fuels are nonrenewable, thus taking millions of years to form (Huebner, 2003). Notably, the country can reduce dependency on fossil fuels by practicing energy conservation and efficiency,

The United States is the second largest producer of greenhouse gases in the world, and yet is doing very little to fix this startling statistic (Dennis). The US’ reliance upon outdated energy sources continues to harm both the environment and the economy by producing millions of tonnes of pollution every year and costing the government billions of dollars (“Fact Sheet: Clean Power Plan”). Fossil fuels have been the main energy sources in America since the industrial revolution, and it is time to make a change. Renewable energy is energy harnessed from sources like the sun, wind, or water, and has little to no negative effects on the environment (“Renewable Energy Technology Basics”). The United States needs to integrate and increase the use of these types of energy across the country, as well as implement positive environmental policies, to prevent further pollution of the earth and combat the effects of climate change.

Fossil fuels have been used in the United States of America for hundreds of years as a source of energy to power machinery and to do a lot of work more efficiently. If they had not been easily monetized, they would not be so important to the United States’ economy as they are now, but does their effectiveness as an energy source outweigh the damaging effects that burning fossil fuels has on the world? Texas alone emits 641 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, which is not only a massive amount, but also doubles the amount produced by California, the second largest carbon producer in the country (Magill, “Texas, California Lead Nation in Carbon Emissions”). Carbon dioxide is the emission of humans breathing as well, so this may not seem so important at first, but the production of it not only by people, but by industrial factories, transportation, and electricity production, which all can use the combustion of fossil fuels, is poisonous to life on Earth and is slowly heating up the planet. The rising levels of heat due to fossil fuel emissions can have devastating effects on the environment and often leads to the kinds of extreme weather situations that were previously mentioned.

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

“In addition to carbon pollution, fracking exploits massive amounts of methane pollution, which drive global climate change. Methane warms the climate approximately 80 times more than the equivalent of carbon dioxide over a 20-year period.” This is a big problem which needs to

Supporters of hydraulic fracturing correctly point out that energy derived natural gas is less damaging to the environment than coal. However, this does not take natural gas leaks into account. Leaks in the piping that transports the extracted natural gas from the well to a storage container emit methane into the atmosphere. Methane has a greenhouse effect 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide. (Environmental Protection Agency) In 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency estimated that these leaks totaled 570 billion cubic feet (Alvarez, Pacala and Winebrake 6435), making natural gas operations the largest source of methane emissions in the United States (Environmental Protection Agency). When this amount of leakage and the damaging nature of methane is taken into account, natural gas is actually worse for the environment overall than coal (Alvarez, Pacala and Winebrake

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

In the recent news headlines, the oil crisis and the plummeting gas prices have caused a concern among many. The topic of the oil industry and gas prices are such a controversial matter that has been debated for years on what should be done. On a positive note if gas prices continue to drop, those that do not work in the oil industry will be pleased with this result. With the gas prices dropping to a significant low in the past couple of years, President Obama feels as though he needs to improve this situation.

The repeal of Obama’s methane emission rule that limits global warming methane leaks from operations of oil and gas was rejected by the United States Senate on Wednesday.

Have you ever imagine the earth run out of resources, especially gasoline? The most significant energy we use to take for granted may be in tight supply. It would be a major inconvenience for us. That’s why I am here to discuss about it, that’s why I am here to save the earth, and that’s why I want all of you to join with me today. With fossil fuels nearing extinction, the United States has very limited options for providing the country’s millions of energy consumers with an energy source that is affordable and cost effective ; therefore, the solution is hydraulic fracking, also known as “fracking,” Natural Gas has the capabilities of fueling American cars and homes for the next hundred years, and the best part is the United States is the largest supplier of natural gas. Let’s broke it down to 3 major parts: first, how fracking natural gas affects our environment, second how it is going to boost up the economy, and third how it makes the United States becomes energy independent.

Global warming has been a controversial topic for years and some have even denied its existence; however, as more studies are being published every day in regards to our changing climate, it is hard to ignore this growing issue and how humans contribute to it. The term greenhouse gases refers to the group of gases that are primarily responsible for global warming and chief among these gases is carbon dioxide. Rising carbon dioxide levels can be attributed to a combination of burning fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and petroleum as well as deforestation in general ( Source A). To slow the effects of global warming, it is important for leaders in our society to consider their greenhouse gas emissions, especially carbon dioxide, and make

Coal and natural gas are the United States’ main fossil fuels used as energy sources. These fossil fuels both contain mixtures of hydrocarbons, which is a chemical compound of carbon and hydrogen (Olah, 2005). Currently, fossil fuels provide eighty-five percent of commercial energy, such as businesses, worldwide and this eighty-five percent does not even account for residential use. Imagine if the residential energy use was accounted for in that eighty-five percent (Davison, 2007). According to Goodell (2006), “Between 1950 and 2000, the world population increased by 140 percent and fossil fuel consumption increased by 400 percent. By 2030, the world’s demand for energy is expected to more than double,” with most of the electricity

It is reported that nearly three quarters of green house gases are a result of humans burning fossil fuels from nonrenewable energy, cars, and electricity (LaMeaux, 2014). The effects of carbon emission on climate change are having devastating and many irreversible

The concept of global warming has become one of the most widely debated and controversial topics of our time. Scientists learned long ago that the earth’s climate has powerfully shaped the history of humanity. However, it is only in the past few decades that research has revealed that humans have a significant influence on the climate as well. A growing body of scientific evidence indicates that since 1950, the world’s climate has been warming, primarily as a result of emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and the destruction of tropical forests. More importantly, an article titled "Global Warming" published in the New York Times shows that methane, a gas that is emitted from landfills, livestock and oil gas facilities,