Emily Thomas English Portfolio

Proposal:
Natural Resources Exigence: Our nation runs on energy. Every type of resource has a major impact in todays society, but what resources will have impacts in the future and which ones will merely disappear? Does America have a plan for energy independence? We as Americans are most familiar with oil and natural gas, but others are just as important and could prove to be even more so in the near future. Our society has become energy dependent. In an effort to preserve our natural resources, we need to learn how to use the nonrenewable sources wisely and how to increase the production of the renewable sources. For example, oil, coal, and natural gas are nonrenewable, as opposed to nuclear power, solar power, and water, which are all renewable.

Inquiry: What is our future in natural resources here in the United States? These resources are great in theory, but are they environmentally friendly and cost-effective? To get oil from Alaska, oil drillers run pipe lines across the countryside. These could cause a natural disaster if there was a major leak or break in the line. The oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico are also in question. Just a few years ago, a major explosion and spill caused a huge disaster in the Gulf. To use coal, coal miners have to burn the coal, a dirty natural resource. Nuclear power plants are very useful, but are very dangerous and could potentially hurt many people. Consider the Chernobyl disaster- the area surrounding that power plant is still lifeless. In using the natural resources, the producers have to turn the raw material into a useable source which could be very costly. Is the United States financially willing to pursue such a costly endeavor? Most Americans take energy for

Emily Thomas English Portfolio

granted. Most of us dont even know where our electricity comes from. We worry about gas prices, but we dont know why the prices fluctuate.

Method: In doing this project, I plan to work closely with my geology professor, Dr. William J. Garcia, who will give good feedback since he works in this field. I will also be checking out professional journals, magazine and news articles from the Atkins library. The US. Department of Energy will also be a value source to look into. Adapting these sources and the information I gather from these sources are all equally important. Each source contributes another aspect in developing my project.

Annotated Bibliography:

Fallows, James. "DIRTY COAL, CLEAN FUTURE. (Cover Story)." Atlantic Monthly (10727825) 306.5 (2010): 64. MasterFILE Complete. Web. 16 Feb. 2013. As the worlds major coal producers, China and the United States need to work together to create methods to use coal in an environmentally-friendly way. This article will give room for thought as to the feasibility of working together with a rival country.

Gist: This article clearly gives environmentalist something to think about. Is it possible to use coal in an environmentally friendly way? Many environmentalists would say no, but this article proposes that using coal is the only way to meet the worlds energy needs. Since China and the

Emily Thomas English Portfolio

United States are together the worlds greatest energy users, and the worlds greatest producers of coal, it stands to reason that finding a clean way to use coal would benefit everyone.

Klare, Michael T. "Clean, Green, Safe And Smart." Nation 291.5/6 (n.d.): 11. Science Reference Center. Web. 16 Feb. 2013.

This article argues that a comprehensive energy policy would incorporate conservation policies along with sensible energy programs.

Gist: This article is extremely biased against the exploration of oil and states that the United States is falling far behind other industrialized countries in the development of clean, renewable sources. It uses negative terms and connotations towards Dick Cheney and George Bush as the main instigators of oil development in the Gulf. It proposes that the United States instead push towards solar and wind energy as an alternative.

Rogers, Heather. "Against The Grain." Washington Monthly 42.11/12 (2010): 32. TOPICsearch. Web. 17 Feb. 2013.

Are biofuels a good alternative to petroleum or do they cause more harm to the environment than coal or petroleum based products?

Gist: Biofuels sound like a good alternative to petroleum based products, but according to this article, they are just as bad for the environment and offer no long-term solution to the problem of energy. President Obama is a proponent of biofuels, but the article argues that this advocacy is somewhat based on politics, as Iowa corn-growers appreciate the government subsidies. The article also argues that most environmentalists know that the use of biofuels is harmful and do not support this measure at all. Schweiger, Larry J. "Why Doesn't The United States Have An Energy Policy To Create Jobs And Protect The Environment." National Wildlife (World Edition) 49.3 (2011): 6. Middle Search Plus. Web. 16 Feb. 2013.

Emily Thomas English Portfolio

A failure to have a comprehensive energy plan has resulted in higher defense expenditures, a loss of jobs in the United States economy, annual losses in federal and state revenues, annual losses to the countrys Gross National Product and annual economic penalties. This article, written for the National Wildlife Federation, is very biased towards the environment.

Gist: This article adds to the conversation by advocating a solid, planned approach to the problem of energy. It clearly shows the costs of importing oil from foreign countries and advocates having a plan to create more jobs here in the United States. It pushes a balanced approach to the issue of conservation and energy-consumption. It shows a very strong bias against all the measures that have been used thus far and pushes for new ways of thinking about the problem.

German, Ben. "Policy energy & environment." Hill 25 June 2012: 16. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 17 Feb. 2013.

These are news briefs concerning the Gulf oil spill and legislation concerning it. Included are articles that spell out President Obama s proposed legislation to eliminate tax breaks for oil companies, increase the use of electric vehicles and put a stop to most the countrys use of carbon-based energy.

Gist: Put together, these articles show a variety of concerns with the environment and energy. At the top is the issue of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the efforts to clean up the mess. It also sets out President Obamas plan for the future, with electric cars and a drastic downturn in the use of carbon-based fuels. Also interesting is the legislation and politics involved with the energy/conservation issue.

Synthesis:

The issue of environment versus energy production is one that divides countries and politicians. What the country has done for years does not seem to be working for the future. The

Emily Thomas English Portfolio

United States reliance on fossil fuels has resulted in an incredible increase in the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Twenty years ago, human activity put some 20 tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Today, the total is 37 tons per year. Estimates are that these totals could be 50 tons in another twenty years (Fallows) Yet, coal, a major contributor in these totals, is readily available in both the United States and China. Why should these countries want to reduce the use of a resource that they have in abundance? Some scientists believe that it is possible to decarbonizes coal and make it save for the environment. There is no plausible other way to meet what will be, absent an economic or social cataclysm, the worlds unavoidable energy demands, write James Fallows, in his article, Dirty Coal, Clean Future. This is a pressing issue for China and the United States, since most of the energy consumption in the world, resulting in the largest pollution, comes from these two countries. Would it be feasible to reduce the energy consumption of these major countries? The article, "Clean, Green, Safe And Smart, written by Michael T. Klare, says, Enough is known about the potential energy savings of various conservation and efficiency initiatives to be confident that our economy can produce more in the years ahead using far less energy. Likewise, Americans can lead equally satisfying lives with less energy use. The article goes on to speak of using hybrid and electric cars along with other energy saving devices. Of course, cost is the driving factor in every decision. The cost of hybrid or electric cars far outstrips the cost of cars that consume gas. Biofuels, largely touted as the wave of the future, are seen by many as worse than petroleum based energy. Heather Rogers, in her article, Against the Grain, say, Biofuel production adds to global warming while also eroding topsoils and exacerbating all the other environmental harms caused by industrialized agriculture. President Obama is a big proponent of ethanol and corn based fuels. However, some accuse him of playing politics with the environment, since many of his supporters are Iowa corn growers who depend on these subsidies.

Emily Thomas English Portfolio

Where then is the answer? If biofuels are not the answer, coal is too dirty, oil is too dangerous, and hybrids are too expensive, where does that leave this country or the world? The answer goes round and round between environmentalists and energy producers. As Fallows asked Ming Sun, a geologist and energy expert who was born in Shanghai, Will you turn off your refrigerator for 30 years while we work on renewables? Turn off the computer? Or ask the people in China to do that? Unless you will, you cant get rid of coal for decades. Obviously, no one wants to do without energy, so this discussion will continue for years to come.

Genre Piece:

If clean and affordable energy is the goal of the future for the United States and the world, ways to clean up coal must be must be considered. Many people feel that clean coal is not possible. For decades, coal has been known for the destruction it causes to the environment, the health issues it causes for the miners and the pollution causes when it is burned. For coal to be acceptable for the future, a way must be found to use coal in such a way that it is used in an environmentally friendly way. It would be helpful if the world could just stop using coal. However, the truth is while natural gas provides 23 percent, nuclear power around 20 percent, and hydroelectric power about 7 percent, coal supplies nearly half (about 46 percent) of the energy used in the United States. The article, "Environmental and Alternative Energy Information Sources, written by B.N. Brown, says, Though abundant, coal is a dirty energy source that is responsible for more than a quarter of the nation's total global warming emissions, including 80 percent of all those from power plants. In China, the other coal-producing giant in the world, the consumption of coal is

Emily Thomas English Portfolio

around 70 percent. In general, coal-fired plants supply about half of the worlds overall electric supply (Fallows). So getting rid of coal does not seem to be a good option. Emotionally, we would all like to think that wind, solar, and conservation will solve the problem for us, David Mohler of Duke Energy told me. Nothing will change, our comfort and convenience will be the same and we can avoid that nasty coal. Unfortunately, the math doesnt work that way (Fallows). The most compelling point about coal is that the United States has one of the worlds largest reserves. So, developing ways of using it safely would solve some of the United States largest problems. Cleaning up coal would be a costly venture, and one that no one has tried to solve on a large scale basis. Keeping burning coal from emitting carbon dioxide or keeping it from sending these emissions into the atmosphere is where the process needs to start. Both of these solutions are impractical at this time because no one is penalizing coal users for using dirty emissions. Until this happens, the prospects of cleaning up coal are not great (Fallows). Governments around the world struggle with the issue of what kind of fuel to promote and develop. For decades, the United States and much of the world has relied on fossil fuels, regardless of their cost and their impact on the environment. Many people think it is time to change to alternate methods. Michael Klare, in the article, Clean, Green, Safe and Smart, writes, By far the most important part of this strategy must be a change in the overarching philosophy that steers decisions on how much energy the United States should seek to produce, of what sorts and under what conditions. It may not seem as if we operate under such a philosophy today, but we doone that extols growth over all other considerations, that privileges existing fuels over renewables and that ranks environmental concerns below corporate profit.

Emily Thomas English Portfolio

So many other types of energy resources are available. Each one seems to have some issue that makes it too expensive or not effective enough. Just getting the fuel creates its own issue. Coal is not the only resource with persistent production problems. Bio-fuels, sometimes regarded as the fuel of the future, come with their own series of issues. For one thing, bio-fuels are labor intensive, requiring efforts in every stage of production. Bio-fuels productions was costly, thanks to all the land as well as labor required for sowing, fertilizing, cultivating, harvesting, storing, transporting and processing, says Heather Rogers, in the article, Against the Grain. She also says that a refinery operating at maximum capacity will only process 1.3 gallons of corn ethanol while using up to one gallon of fossil fuels. That is not a very good return on the money for all the effort put into it. Along with this, if fossil fuel prices go up, so does the cost of producing bio-fuels. Although in 2007, the United States government put 75 percent of its energy budget into corn ethanol production, this production is difficult (Rogers). Growing the corn necessary for corn ethanol and processing that corn also takes a tremendous amount of water. According to Rogers, Currently agriculture accounts for 70 per cent of human water consumption. Refining the corn into ethanol also takes water. Another issue with raising corn for energy consumption is the amount of fertilizer needed to raise the corn. These fertilizers run off into waterways and have created one of the worlds largest aquatic dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico (Rogers). Todays corn production also creates enormous land erosion. More than half of Iowas fertile topsoil is now gone, washed away in the decades since pioneers first settled that area (Rogers).

Emily Thomas English Portfolio

The environmental impact of raising corn for ethanol could be mitigated if anyone tried, or had any financial rational to try. Farmers in the United States get practically no aid from the government to help this problem. Rogers states, Proven soil-building techniques such as composting, no-till planting, and cover crops in winter would help with the issues of run-off and water usage; the problem is that no one does it. Cost is going to be the driving force for all energy produced in the future. Klare also writes, Until we replace this outlook (relying on existing fuels) with one that places innovation and the environment ahead of the status quo, we will face more ecological devastation and slower economic dynamism. Only with a new governing philosophyone that views the development of climate-friendly energy systems as the engine of economic growth can we move from our current predicament to a brighter future. Perhaps governments and citizens will be willing to put the money into a better future.
Bibliography Brown, BN. "Environmental And Alternative Energy Information Sources... Part 2." Searcher 18.2 (2010): 12. CINAHL Plus with Full Text. Web. 16 Feb. 2013. Fallows, James. "DIRTY COAL, CLEAN FUTURE. (Cover Story)." Atlantic Monthly (10727825) 306.5 (2010): 64. MasterFILE Complete. Web. 16 Feb. 2013. German, Ben. "Policy energy & environment." Hill 25 June 2012: 16. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 17 Feb. 2013. Jones, Jeffrey M. "Public Favors Environment Protection Over Energy Production As Priority For U.S.: Concern About Energy Remains High." Gallup Poll Briefing (2007): 1. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 17 Feb. 2013. "Keystone XL Pipeline Overview." Congressional Digest 90.10 (2011): 290. MAS Complete. Web. 17 Feb. 2013. Klare, Michael T. "Clean, Green, Safe And Smart." Nation 291.5/6 (n.d.): 11. Science Reference Center. Web. 16 Feb. 2013. "North American And World Updates." Enviromation 70 (2011): 9-11. Environment Complete. Web. 17 Feb. 2013. Rogers, Heather. "Against The Grain." Washington Monthly 42.11/12 (2010): 32. TOPICsearch. Web. 17 Feb. 2013.

Emily Thomas English Portfolio

Schweiger, Larry J. "Why Doesn't The United States Have An Energy Policy To Create Jobs And Protect The Environment." National Wildlife (World Edition) 49.3 (2011): 6. Middle Search Plus. Web. 16 Feb. 2013.

EIP Reflection:
This project as a whole has been a challenge for me in many ways. I am not a strong writer so English has never been my strong suit. When the semester started and we were given out first assignment to read over the EIP I thought Oh great this should be fun., but in the end it helped me grow. I was never swamped with things to do, each section of writing was broken up and was easy to manage. Finding a topic I really enjoyed was the first and easiest step; however, I bit off more than I could chew and had to narrow down my topic to something I could more easily manage. My major issues sprouted from not having a clear topic. I went back and forth and really confused my writing. Once I narrowed down my topic and went to the workshops, doing the rest was much easier. The project as a whole helped me grow as a writer. Being able to get advice and throw ideas off my group members was a major advantage in my growth. I am still not where I think I should be, but with the knowledge I have gained this semester, I think I am heading the right direction.