You are on page 1of 9

Simitz

Lauren Simitz
Mr. Rogers
Government 1
12 October 2016
Fossil Fuel Fallacy
Cars, electricity, and sunglasseswhat do these seemingly unrelated items have in
common? Fossil fuels make each object possible, whether powering its function or its creation.
However, the energy potential of such a fuel source comes with disastrous drawbacks,
particularly for the future of the planet. The United States boasts remarkable scientific
innovations; yet, even with the introduction of renewable, environmentally safe fuel, the nation
still depends on the fleeting supply of oil, coal, and natural gas. Despite the immense benefits of
switching sources, legislation still faces significant opposition from influential oil and coal
corporations. The Obama Administration made bold strides in renewable energy by incorporating
$27.8 billion into the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for its advancement, but these
provisions were temporary, meant primarily to aid economic stimulus following the Great
Recession. Therefore, the government should continue to promote green energy through the
extension and redistribution of funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 as to further encourage economic growth, ensure fuels reliability, and address the
impending complications of climate change.
As countless small businesses and Americans struggle to earn a sustainable wage,
alleviating economic stress is vital; funding renewable energy, specifically as part of the
Recovery and Reinvestment Act, aims to do just that. Currently, the United States dependence
on foreign oil is the greatest cost to its energy industry, as importing the fuel source loses the

Simitz

country 28,000 jobs and $305 billion annually, according to the former head of the National
Defense Council Foundation Milton Copulos (Haugen 27). Considering the position of the
United States as an industrial superpower, the excessive amount dwindled reflects a major
economic weakness that deprives hardworking citizens of their rightful jobs. The switch to
renewable energy encouraged by bill this can substantially limit, eventually even terminate these
unnecessary financial devastations. Even if America produces oil within its borders, the oil
industry is less labor-intensive, creating a comparably smaller number of jobs per dollar invested
than renewable energies (National Renewable Energy Laboratory). Particularly with solar and
wind energy, the construction and maintenance of the machines like turbines and solar panels
requires both more physical and technical work than its fossil fuel counterparts. By employing a
larger number of renewable energy workers through this stimulus package, more Americans will
receive money imperative to supporting themselves and their families, along with additional
salary to put back into the economy through the means of more frequent spending. Finally, the
country has assurance that promoting renewable energy through the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act would be successful in restoring prosperity; in the bills first year alone, solar
grid capacity tripled the 2008 amount while employment levels rose by approximately 2.5-3.5
million (Aldy). By including successful renewable energy provisions, ones that significantly
combated unemployment, President Obama proved that solar and wind are competitive on a
national scale with a necessary jumpstart. The United States has seen how beneficial this act and
renewable energy has been for the nation, but only with the continuation of these funds can it
better economic conditions and one day achieve assimilation into the bold, future outlook of
American industry and the lives of its people.

Simitz

When anticipating this future vision of the United States, renewable energy is a necessity
to ensure the capability and welfare of each and every one of its citizens. By 2030, scientists
predict that global population growth will cause demands for electricity to double and fuel and
heat demands to rise 60% from current amounts (Crabtree and Lewis). As it is, fossil fuels are
already under the stress of demand, with the remainder of oil to be half depleted in the next fifty
years even with foreign dependence (Murphy). To put further pressure on a finite resource is not
sustainable, causing costs per barrel to skyrocket for the consumer and potentially inciting
military conflict in scarcity. The Stimulus Package of 2009 emphasizes alternative energy
sources that, if continued, could supplement fossil fuels to extend their usage and eventually
replace them completely. Not only are fossil fuels limited in quantity but also are predicted to
cause thousands of premature deaths due to ozone-related illness by 2030, according to the
Environmental Protection Agency (Climate Impacts on Human Health). When fossil fuels are
consumed, they release toxic gases into the atmosphere, where they react with other chemicals
and accumulate. Denser gases, such as smog, hang low enough for inhabitants to respire,
particularly affecting the lungs of children and the elderly. Yet, eliminating this prevalent health
hazard still puzzles scientists and is prevented by staying inside, depriving those of the mere
ability to enjoy the outdoors. On the other hand, renewable energy releases no injurious
emissions. Promoting green energy through the previous acts extension would maintain high air
quality standards and keep the American people healthy, so that they can focus on their
aspirations and enjoy their freedoms. Along with being emission-free, solar power has the
unmatched potential to provide 173,000 terawatts, enough to satisfy the worlds need 10,000
times (Pierce). Unlike coal and oil, that energy does not unfairly belong to whatever countries
happen to own the land where they are located. With solar, there will be no fight for the suns

Simitz

rays, or energy industry monopoly. Ultimately though, those 173,000 terawatts are simply more
expansive than fossil fuel coverage ever can be. Thus, oil and coals overtime detriment is
unreliably unjust for Americas bright future. It cannot compete with solar powers lasting
advantages, a notion that resounds even more urgently when fossil fuels specific contribution to
global warming is considered.
Of possible energy sources, only renewable energy can prevent climate changes growth
and the catastrophic damage that it will wreak as a result. Rising tidal levels and ocean acidity
are calamitous realities, but there is special need to worry about the Environmental Protection
Agencys forecast regarding United States agriculture. Corn production will plummet by 10-30%
if temperatures climb a mere 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (Agriculture). Crop yields tend to rise
with slight increases in temperature, but after a maximum peak, sharply descend with the plants
reproductive ability. The decline applies to the majority of imperative crops, causing inflated
prices with demand and, especially with the impoverished, the unacceptable inability to get
crucial nutrients. Within the next 100 years, 25% of the worlds animal and plant species are
expected to go extinct as well (Plants, Animals, and Ecosystems). Extinction this large would
comparable to prehistoric periods, where the lack of producers and consumers disrupted and
destroyed once balanced ecosystems. These are creatures not only depended on, but also
treasured as an innate part of the planets beauty, equally valuable to preserve. The country needs
a solution, and it lies with solar and wind energy. Californias wind plants alone replace the
products of fossil fuels that would have put 2.5 billion pounds of carbon dioxide and 15 million
pounds of other pollutants into the atmosphere (Wind Energy Basics). These pollutants, the
ones that result from fossil fuels, trap electromagnetic radiation from space and reflect it back
onto Earth, causing rising global temperatures. Both wind and solar rely entirely on the sun and
its warming of Earth, having no environmental impact besides their physical placement.

Simitz

However, to urgently and effectively replace fossil fuels with environmentally compatible
sources, to fight the devastation of climate change, the United States needs a stimulusa bill
known as the Energy Extension Act of 2017for support. In conclusion, commercial renewable
energy is sole solution to avert the drastic consequences of climate change by reducing
emissions, though the bill that ensures its action still faces resistance.
Despite conspicuous advantages, opponents of an aggressive pivot to alternative energy
point out its limitations in collection and overall expense in comparison to fossil fuels. One
inconvenience in harnessing the suns rays is that amount of energy generated from the sun
directly depends on weather and hours of daylight, making certain regions difficult to acquire
solar energy from (Haugen 73). To accommodate these conditions, a team of MIT and Harvard
engineers has developed a commercial crystalline silicon cell that is 17.5% more efficient for
multiple crystals and 19.5% for singular crystals (Cox 2). The quantity of the suns rays is
inexhaustible, greater than the worlds overall need. In order to fulfill the national demand,
panels do not even need to be placed on every available site. Instead, the energy industry can
produce more kilowatts by employing efficiency techniques like those created by engineers, ones
that under the revival of the Recovery and Reinvestment Act would find funding to reach the
commercial level. Although solar prices continue to plummet, both investors and developers feel
their expensive installation costs at 20-30 cents per kilowatt and 15-41 cents per kilowatt
respectively (Perez). In anticipation of these charges, the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act covers up to 30% of the total system price for consumers using a system of tax credits (Go
Solar California). When an individual or business replaces outdated systems with new solar
modules, they improve the efficiency and safety of their energy production methods. Along with
the practicality of the swap, the government compensates the consumer with a certain cent per
each kilowatt, known as a tax credit, that totals almost a third of the overall cost. Even without

Simitz

federal funds, the ability to freely collect electromagnetic energy after set-up in comparison to
the continual costs of purchasing electricity created by fossil fuels means solar energy not only
surpasses the cost effectiveness of fossil fuels overtime, but also returns the initial investment of
the consumer. Thus, it is more affordable overall. Further, addressing the economic detriment of
climate change is a much greater expense than making an investment already discounted by
existing federal practices. If the government can displace two-thirds of carbon emissions,
returning to the 1960s level, then the solar CO2 mitigation value would be at 3 cents per
kilowatt (Perez). The solar CO2 mitigation value is a measure of how much is saved by
eliminating a quantity of emissions that otherwise would cause worsening health conditions and
contribute to climate change. Demonstrated by the three cents per kilowatt payback, the fossil
fuels-induced conditions are more uneconomical to address than the soft costs of solar energy, as
well as requiring difficult clean up. Voting for extension of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act to support solar power would eliminate the concern for such hazards by
limiting emissions. As a result, the United States saves money for the energy produced. Although
solar energy may appear to have greater inefficiencies and higher expenses than fossil fuels,
statistical examination reveals ray-trapping panels to be just as efficiently and economically
prudent, if not more, under the Stimulus Package of 2009.
For critical economic stimulus, future fuel dependability and supply, and the resolution of
climate change, the government must encourage the switch to renewable energy through the
continuation and rearrangement of funds within the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
The financial benefits of industries like solar and wind validate its ability to compete in industry,
but it is really this forward-looking attitude of the nation that necessitates the use of renewable
energy. The United States just will not survive on finite fossil fuels. Yet, the biggest aversion to
the clean energy movement is the fossil fuel industry itself and those they endorse. For instance,

Simitz

politicians positive promotion of oil and coal obscures the true detriment behind their use.
Particularly, climate change is a century-old issue concealed behind the denial or minimization of
its existence. With the disastrous impacts of climate change, we can no longer accept this
misleading rhetoric. Renewable energy is not an immediate fix to global warming. The extension
of the Recovery and Reinvestment Act is not a complete solution to a widespread phenomenon
tracing its roots back hundreds of years. However, it is an imperative start for the nation to
remove the hazardous carbon emissions from entering the atmosphere. Thus, it is up to you, the
voter, to pass this critical bill to support renewable energy, so the United States can not only do
their portion in combating climate change but also inspire the rest of the world to follow.

Works Cited
Agriculture. A Student's Guide to Climate Change, Environmental Protection Agency, 3 Mar.

Simitz

2016, https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/kids/impacts/effects/agriculture.html.
Aldy, Joseph Edgar. A Preliminary Review of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act's
Clean Energy Package. Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard, John F. Kennedy
School of Government, 2011, https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/5688917.
Climate Impacts on Human Health. EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 9 Aug. 2016,
https://www.epa.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-human-health.html
Cox, Cassandra R. et al. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, vol. 111, no. 39, 15 Sept. 2014,
doi:10.1073/pnas.1414290111.
Crabtree, George W., and Nathan S. Lewis. Solar Energy Conversion. CaltechAUTHORS,
California Institute of Technology, Mar. 2007, http://authors.library.caltech.edu/13481/.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Dollars from Sense. Washington, DC, NREL, 1997,
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/legosti/fy97/20505.html.
Go Solar California. Go Solar California, California Energy Commission, 2007,
http://www.gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov/consumers/taxcredits.php.
Haugen, David M. et al. Energy Alternatives: Opposing Viewpoints. Detroit, MI, Greenhaven
Press, 2010.
Murphy, Tom. Fossil Fuels: I'm Not Dead Yet. Do the Math, University of San Diego, 14 Feb.
2012, https://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2012/02/fossil-fuels-im-not-dead-yet/.
Perez, Richard et al. Solar Power Generation in the U.S. GW Solar Institute, George
Washington University, 2011,
http://solar.gwu.edu/research/solar-power-generation-us-too-expensive-or-bargain.
Pierce, Erin R. Top 6 Things You Didn't Know About Solar Energy. Energy.gov, Department

Simitz

of Energy, 6 June 2016,


http://energy.gov/articles/top-6-things-you-didnt-know-about-solar-energy.
Plants, Animals, and Ecosystem. A Student's Guide to Climate Change, Environmental
Protection Agency, 3 Mar. 2016,
https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/kids/impacts/effects/agriculture.html.
Wind Energy Basics. Wind Energy Development Programmatic EIS, United States Department
of the Interior, 30 Sept. 2014, http://windeis.anl.gov/guide/basics/.

You might also like