He also points out the fact that people should focus on the present consumption of energy, rather than the future for energy conservation. Nader said that people should start conserving energy right now, such as not using electricity when it is not needed. Shellenberger has the argument other alternative energies such as coal cause over 3000 deaths. As the demand for energy increases with revolutionized technology, Shellenberger believes that nuclear energy would be much better compared to other alternative energies. Nader comes back with the fact that we should focus on conserving the alternative use of energies given to us today and not to create power plants that have additional risks caused by nuclear energy.
Nationally, different Governments are involved in the global supply of energy. They have a role to conserve as much energy as possible so supplies don’t run out as quickly. Monitoring, setting drilling and exploration licences and providing national policies on oil and fuel availability are some of the ways the government are important players in the supply of energy globally. In the UK for example, the government has provided different places with nuclear power stations as an alternative to using other energy supplies. Nationalised companies such as Gazprom also provides energy supplies worldwide.
If a stable, effective and affordable fuel is created, everything else should be a breeze. Solar Energy is something that, when improved, will put extra cash in people’s pockets. Solar energy will be the best step towards having more money, and if people spend it wisely, they will not go into debt like so many people
Practice 7.3 * Introduction to Albert Lin of EmberClean. * Works particularly in the U.S. and China to address the issue of energy consumption and productions * Covers coal’s legacy of emitting CO2 and other fossil fuels that are guilty as well. * CO2 is leading to the global climate change * Coal is the mainstay of energy production. * People fight for a new energy to improve lives, but Albert is here to talk about his commitment toward trying to improve the outcome of coal consumption that is needed. * Coal: The once and future fuel * Coal is not going away * Many think it is an old fuel that would eventually disappear.
Fracking is bad for the environment. People still need natural gas or oil to live their life. It will take time to get all of the bugs worked out of fracking. Fracking companies are using the new technology to insure the protection of the environment. Fracking is a cheaper way of obtaining gas.
Western society should sincerely consider overconsumption as a major threat to humanity. Society needs to focus on the environment and the earth we live on because it is what sustains human life and the natural habitat. Since we live in a time where alternative technologies which aid in cutting back consumption are available; We should all take the incentive to start using them. The burning of fossil fuels should decrease and be replaced with energy saving technologies, as this will significantly reduce fuel consumption. It is evident that society has resources such as solar and wind power available.
“Pennsylvania legislature approved Act 13, known as the Unconventional Gas Well Impact Fee Act.” (Rabe 336). This shows that hydraulic fracking is included into state constitutions and has a right to operate. The Pennsylvanian legislator Corbett stated “thanks to this legislation, this natural resource will safely and fairly fuel our generating plants and heat our homes while creating jobs and powering our state’s economic engine for generations to come” (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 2012) (Rabe 336). Showing that the government is coming to the side of hydraulic fracking because they see the economic benefits. This does not only debunk the claims of critics but it strengthens the argument that hydraulic fracking is worth it.
It will also discuss the so-called “War on Coal” and President Obama’s strides to more heavily regulate coal and embrace cleaner energy. Part III will discuss the cleaner and renewable energy options for Pittsburgh and how the region can benefit from the Federal Government’s plan to move away from fossil fuels, especially coal. The article will debate on the effects on the Pittsburgh region, and will argue that at first the costs may be high, but the planned sanctions will be advantageous to Pittsburgh. This section will also discuss the forthcoming legal issues facing coal powered plants in the region. The purpose of this article is not to condemn coal or its history with the Pittsburgh area, but rather to advocate a brighter, cleaner future for the region.
A Fracking Problem Drill, baby, drill, has been the mantra behind the ever-present need to find cheaper, more efficient energy. The most recent solution to our energy dilemma has been hydraulic fracturing, a process that may be causing more harm then benefit. While the natural gas produced from fracking, as the practice is nicknamed, is a cleaner alternative to both coal and oil, it still releases carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere promising no relief from the dangers of climate change. In addition to the climate change issue, the process of fracking is being investigated for claims of methane contamination of groundwater sources and possible negative geological effects, including human-induced earthquakes. The dangers
All of this is true; however, natural gas is a cleaner burning fuel and it has other advantages. One reason fracking should be allowed is the jobs it creates. The fracking industry employs engineers, truck drivers, office administrators, construction workers, geologist, and well drillers, and the list is too large to include.