Assignment: To Drill or Not to Drill Renewable energy is a debatable issue because on one hand, it could potentially reduce the need to Burn fossil fuels. Burning fossil fuels for energy releases much of the harmful gases that exist today. Scientists estimate that about 35 percent of the greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, being released into the atmosphere are from the United States (Renewable Energy Is Beneficial for the Environment, May 2013). Less fossil fuels being burned the less threat pollution will have on the earth.
However, the opposing side feels that in order for renewable to contribute meaningfully to energy production, they would use up vast amounts of land and cause serious environmental damage (Usable, Jesse H. Renewable Energy Is Not Beneficial for the Environment, May 2013). I thought I was for the renewable side 100 percent. The reason why I was for it is, it would be healthier for not only humanity but for animals as well. After reading the opposing side I am now split because of how much sense they make. I would have to do more research to actually find the deter of the two.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
The reason I am even debating on wanting the opposing side is because of how much room we would take up building windmills, solar stations, and dams for hydro power. I do feel that solar energy would be the best way Just hook up panels to every homes roofs with a battery that can hold a decent charge until the sun come back up to charge them. The perceptual blocks and habits that hinder my thoughts when deciding to use renewable resources, is the fact that in order to use these sources we may have to take away from nature.
Society will eventually allow building on lands, which are meant for the animals to run free. It could even interfere even more with the rain forest. I cannot get past the fact that in order to reduce pollution we must take even more away from animals that do not deserve to be put in cages or zoos. When it comes to this fact I feel that fossil fuels including nuclear power plants would work better instead. On the other hand the opposing side wishes to use power plants to save land space. The perceptual block and habits hat hinder my thoughts on this side of the topic is Nuclear power plants are not safe.
They can cause multiple health issues not to mention in emergency situations they can cause major damages to the environment and to society health. As far as power plants taking up less space, Society could always place Solar panels on all homes and business for the majority of the electricity demand, then society could use the other sources to provide electricity when solar cannot provide. In conclusion, the best way to overcome my perceptual blocks would be to actually see both sides DOD and bad.
To determine which path I would choose by furthering my knowledge on the subject. Maybe even researching how the renewable side would save the land for nature. As for the opposing sides what would they do to ensure society is safe and how can they lessen pollution in the world. The problem with opening up your mind to debatable issues is the fact that a persons’ mind can be manipulated by perception. You perceiver Tanat cleaner energy would Nett ten world, you near ten ads and visually see ways it does improve the earth, so automatically your brain learns ore in that direction.
If a person could perceive even a diagram of what the world could look like with all the renewable resources after they have been built, and how much land we would actually need. I am sure everyone would find a way to meet both sides in the middle, so we could all find the proper solution to cleaner energy.