From One Fossil Fuel to Another

Since the late nineteenth century, the burning and mining of coal has been damaging our health, polluting our air, and destroying our environment. Today, coal-fired power plants are the greatest contributors to global warming and air pollution, as they are responsible for over 83 percent of the carbon dioxide pollution since 1990. However, carbon dioxide is not the only harmful substance contained in coal. The burning and mining of coal emits an array of toxic elements and compounds that have significant health effects. Today, the pollution from coal-burning power plants causes approximately 30,000 deaths each year in the United States alone. To put that in perspective, that’s more deaths than are caused by drunken driving, AIDS, and homicides. And still, nearly 50 percent of our electricity here in the United States is generated by coal!Coal Power

Clearly, the United States, along with the rest of the world, must strive to reduce its use of coal as an energy source before the effects of global warming become irreversible and more people are harmed by the emitted waste and pollution. Although it is hard to believe that we can cut down on something we rely so heavily on, there are various other sources of energy and electricity that environmentalists, engineers, and even political representatives hope to implement within the near future. Unfortunately, it appears as though the next major source of energy will be another harmful, toxic fossil fuel.

During President Obama’s State of the Union Speech, Obama once again brought up his “all-the-above” energy strategy which he proposed in 2012. However, rather than an “all-the-above” strategy, he made it sound more like a “one-of-the-above” strategy. In the year 2012, Obama seemed to discuss every possible energy source in an attempt to improve the future.

“We’ve got to invest in a serious, sustained, all-of-the-above energy strategy that develops every resource available for the 21st century. We’ve got to choose between the past and the future. And that’s a choice we shouldn’t be afraid to make because we’ve always bet on the future, and we’re good at it. America is good at the future. We are good at being ahead of the curve. We’re good at being on the cutting edge.”

President Barack Obama, March 15, 2012

 This year however, Obama seemed to forget about everything except for natural gas. Although he made a brief reference to solar power, Obama said nothing about nuclear power, biofuels, or wind power. His strong interest in the usage of natural gas merely suggests that he, along with other political representatives, is willing to put the short-term benefits of fossil fuels ahead of the long term development of valuable renewables.

ngas 130212_obama_state_of_union_speaking_ap_605

Natural gas production has created thousands of jobs throughout the United States and it has slowed the growth of carbon emissions in our country, but it is still in no way safe for the environment nor for our health. For this reason, many environmentalists criticized Obama’s policy that heavily supports fossil fuel development, claiming that his “all-the-above” policy is fundamentally at odds with his goal of cutting carbon emissions. Obama argued that “if extracted safely,” natural gas is “the bridge fuel that can power our economy with less of the carbon pollution that causes climate change.”

However, the truth is that there is no truly “safe” way to extract and utilize natural gas. After all, the primary component of natural gas is methane. Even though natural gas does not release quite as much carbon dioxide as coal, it is still nearly just as harmful to the environment because methane is a greenhouse gas 20 times as potent as carbon dioxide. Therefore, natural gas is just as prone to cause global warming and other harmful effects as coal. One researcher and environmentalist even said, “Going from coal to natural gas is like switching from Marlboros to Camels” (Brune).

Marlboro4wiki2

 

 

 

 

 

As this quote shows, we need to stop alternating between fossil fuels, and instead work on developing safer and more efficient energy sources for the future. After all, fossil fuels will one day run out and we will be forced to turn to renewable energy. Whether this energy comes in the form of sunlight, wind, hydrogen, or some other undiscovered source, we must begin implementing such renewable sources now in order to cause no further harm to our environment and the world around us.

Green_Renewable_Energy1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://energy.gov/coal

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116397/obamas-energy-policy-all-above-meaningless

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/our-energy-choices/coal-and-other-fossil-fuels/the-hidden-cost-of-fossil.html

 

3 thoughts on “From One Fossil Fuel to Another

  1. You are entirely right with your post. The United States needs to stop looking to fossil fuels for the solution to everything. Unfortunately, the chances of that happening are zero. Too many lobbyists will lose huge amounts of money if we switch energies. Fossil fuel companies will pay anything they possibly can to stay as the top dogs in energy production and until we do something about money in politics, nothing will change. Natural gas production is terrible for the environment and should not be our goal. All in all, your post is very well written and it is very well organized.

  2. This is such an eye-opening issue. I really had no idea that there were so many deaths that resulted from this every year. It is also interesting to further look at what other options we do have in regards to fuel. Great first post!

  3. The fact i found most interesting in this post is about the massive amount of deaths caused by coal-burning and pollution. Where do those deaths come from? Is that take the form of cancer, lung issues, or what? That’s a crazy amount of casualties.

Leave a Reply