The Energy Policy Act Of 1992

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.

Thesis: If the United States is going to choose to conserve energy responsibly, then our government's energies should not be focused on developing oil in the ANWR, but rather on the topics of conservation through higher fuel efficiency standards in vehicles and by developing alternative energy sources. Conservation, fuel efficiency and alternative energy sources are the solutions that will lead us to a long term and sustainable energy future.

As we have moved further beyond the Event Horizon, a sense of short-sightedness is occurring. Sen Bill Cassidy (R-LA), for example, sponsored the failed S. 3110 - American Energy and Conservation Act of 2016, which called for increased drilling and increasing the revenue cap to Gulf States from $500 million to $750 million. The details of the distribution of the funds were detailed through numerous state and federal programs, seemingly ignoring the people that suffer the most during these events. Even with the proposed increase in revenue with this program, Sen Cassidy included additional Atlantic States in the equation. This would naturally decrease the revenue stream to the original four states.

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.

The following paper is a comprehensive energy policy platform for a candidate running the 2020 presidential election. This candidate is considered to be a centrist when it comes to energy policy. They have liberal and conservative ideas depending on the issues. Overall, the candidate would like to instate a plan that preserve American energy independence while also becoming a leader in the international green energy market. Cutting taxes for green energy companies, instituting a carbon tax, revitalizing the nuclear energy market and raising CAFE standards for the automotive industry are the cornerstone pieces of this policy. Long term goals include phasing out all coal plants, reducing dependence on natural gas, developing affordable

Since the gasoline and fuel oil shortages of the 1970’s, the topic of renewable energy has been

This paper explores the economic impact the Clean Power Plan, as proposed by President Obama, would have on the coal industry and on society as a whole. The plan, also known as the CPP, has a goal of reducing carbon dioxide emissions by the year 2030. Many proponents of the coal industry claim that the CPP would harm the United States economy with little positive impact on the environment. The White House, other government agencies, scholarly organizations, and organizations regarding the protection of human health and the environment dispute these claims, stating that the CPP would actually lead to a net increase in employment, increased air quality, and an overall healthier society, all while promoting the renewable energy sector. After analyzing the data from both sides, it was determined in this paper that the overall benefits of the Clean Power Plan outweigh the costs, therefore the plan should go forward as planned.

In the same manner, in Ontario, the Ministry of Energy (DOE’s counterpart) establishes the energy policy for the province and “ensures that Ontario’s electricity needs are met in a sustainable manner” (Ministry of Energy, (n.d.),

Briefings on EPA’s Clean Power Plan: How state emission budgets were established, and legal (reasonableness and fairness) issues.

With total vote of 219 to 212, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), also known as Waxman-Markley Cap and Trade bill ( Waxman-Markey), was passed on June 26, 2009 by the U.S. House of Representatives. The ACES Act contains five main categories. The first one is clean energy. The second is energy efficiency. The third is reducing global warming pollution. The fourth is transitioning to a clean energy economy, and the last is agriculture and forestry related offsets. In fact, Waxman-Markey is a comprehensive national climate and energy legislation that would establish an economy-wide, greenhouse gases (GHGs) cap-and-trade system and critical complementary measures to help address climate change and build a clean energy economy. Through Waxman-Markey, GHGs emission allowance of organizations will be allocated and auctioned.

Specific Speech Goal: Show the importance on why we should change our ways and convert to renewable energy.

How does it work? Local utility companies own the grids that bring power to buildings. Prior to the new regulations, they would buy the gas and/or electricity from a source that produces for an undisclosed price, provide the building energy, then charge the responsible party for that energy. Considering

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.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) was created in 1974, its command is to endorse energy security between 28 member countries. The aim is to ensure sufficient, secure and sustainable energy among the countries, each country is oblige to hold oil stock equivalent to 90 days. The IEA targets include some of the following objectives:

Renewable energy policy will have varying effects on different industries across agriculture, some more or less and to different degrees within industries. In order to identify these influences, the actual policy must be identified and then the industries involved must be defined. The current relevant policy directive under the U. S. Department of Agriculture, itself an agency under the Executive Branch i.e. White House, is the 2009 Americal Clean Energy Leadership Act, or ACELA. A stream of other proposals flows into Congress ongoing which would presumably have similar economic effects on agriculture. Different sectors within agriculture are defined under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) class 11, which provides a convenient and authoritative framework for comparing industries (U.S. Census, 2002). Changes to national renewable energy policy will have different effects in different industries, but also different effects within industry classes based on geographic location and firm size, so this analysis will consider effects between groups and also within specific NAICS classes. While this discussion considers logging and husbandry as included under NAICS 11, the results would be the same in theory were the scope limited to farming only.