Nation after nation, including the United States, have laid claims to their intent of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050. Still, with less than 30 years left to do so, experts are calling upon the U.S. government to begin ramping up its efforts, before it’s too late. The transition away from fossil fuels into renewable energy sources has a large role to play in reducing carbon emissions. Unfortunately, this transition is being stalled by many factors, a major one being misinformation. From 1997 to 2018, Exxon and brothers Charles and David Koch have together given nearly approximately 182 million dollars to fund climate misinformation and support groups that deny the existence of climate change (1). The government’s limited action to educate and counteract this has set the United States back immensely, with only 42% of our nation’s energy projected to be renewable by 2050 (2). With this, it is necessary for the U.S. government to place more resources on environmental and energy-themed education, specifically targeting universities, our nation’s hubs for the future.
1). Comment on the title. How does it offer a way forward on the issue? Does it hint at or echo the paper’s thesis? Make suggestions.
Your title definitely relates to your paper’s thesis, but I think you could phrase it in a way that provokes a greater sense of urgency. Also, when you say “university-wide” are you talking about Penn State or all U.S. colleges? Your thesis doesn’t seem to be about any specific college.
2). Does this piece’s title and introduction respond to an exigence?-Does it make the issue pressing or connect to other pressing needs and issues? Make suggestions.
I like how you bring in the stories of how people are actively working to spread misinformation. It makes your issue seem much more pressing. I also like how you say that the U.S. isn’t meeting it’s goals. This makes me want to see more change, which is the point of the paper. I think you might be able to expand some of these claims and make them more into stories rather than just one sentence claims.
3). Comment on the thesis. Does it set up a clear argumentative claim? Is it advancing a specific policy or practice? Can you imagine how the rest of the argument will unfold?
I think you have a solid thesis that points to a specific argument: energy education at colleges. I can see where the rest of the paper is going pretty clearly. It might make sense to include more about why college education specifically is important somewhere in your introduction because other than the title, I don’t know why you’re talking specifically about colleges.
1. Your title is very straightforward and I can clearly see how it offers a way forward on the issue. It is also not too specific that it limits what you should talk about based on the title.
2. Both the title and introduction do respond to the exigency of the situation. I like how you included facts and numbers when talking about the need for net zero emissions. The inclusion of how fossil fuel companies push misinformation further backed your point.
3. Your thesis does set up a clear argumentative claim. You made in pretty clear that a great way to move forward on this issue is to educate college students so that they can do good in the future. I can see how this argument will unfold, especially with fields and disciplines relating to the energy sector.