[N]uclear energy with current efficiency levels isn’t enough . . .there needs to be much more research efforts, mainly to improve efficiency in order to make [a] nuclear energy solution capable to replace fossil fuels.” Since nuclear energy will never be a good substitute for fossil fuels, it is clear that its production needs to be abandoned completely. Others agree that efficiency is an issue. “[H]e considers much more efforts should be mainly done to improve nuclear power efficiency .
We have to look at the bigger picture and think about the long term goals. Bottom line oil is needed to reduce energy prices and U. S. dependence on foreign oil however at what cost. We have to protect the environment and the animal’s writhing in it. 2.Discuss the benefits as well as adverse effect of drilling oil in Alaska on the environment and people. Drill can destroy habitats; disrupt animal life force people to give up their traditional way of living their lives.
Weebly, n.d. Web. 26 Feb. 2014. JulietteH. “30 Things You Can Do for the Arctic 30.” Greenpeace International, N.p., 16 Oct. 2013.
However, both developments will bring security issues, as arctic countries will compete for such access. "Whether the open access and greater shipping is a benefit to the world is an open book, we are going to produce even more oil and gas and carry it to the world and just enhance the (greenhouse gas) emissions” (Roach); However, the opening up of the new shipping route will cause higher production of fossil fuel and will lead to high greenhouse gas emission, causing the greenhouse effect to be even worse, while produceing no benefit to the environment. Also, some plant physiologists think that global warming will be beneficial. They believe that plants will be able to benefit from warmer temperatures and have better growth, producing more food. On the ot... ... middle of paper ...
Cáitlin Zampieron Professor Sillo Composition and Rhetoric 101 25 April 2014 Ban Keystone XL The Earth’s climate has changed significantly in recent years for the worst. Human’s reliance on fossil fuels has become almost uncontrollable and shows no signs of stopping. The United States continues to make poor decisions concerning the environment, most recently pertaining to the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. The Keystone XL pipeline would take the world’s most toxic tar sands from Canada through the heartland United States to oil refineries on the gulf coast. The building the XL pipeline would cut though many thousands of miles of wildlife and will threaten vast pristine landscapes and rivers.
Just like the fish in the gulf of Mexico lost their home so will the animals of Alaska more specifically the area of the ANWR, it is the home of hundreds of bird species, bears, foxes, and multiple other animals. The 200 million gallons of oil spilled into the Gulf is proof that oil drilling is a serious threat to the environment. Thousands of animal species, including fish, birds, molluscs, reptiles, and mammals. each of these species homes have now been contaminated with oil. (“More Oil Drilling Not Worth the Risk”) which will stick to their skin and corrode on them.
Today republicans and some democrats want to repeal the title of National Wildlife Refuge and drill there for oil. This could have adverse effects for wildlife and the Inuit natives that call the ANWR and surrounding area home. In this paper I will lay out my reasons for why we should not drill in the refuge. First of all, there is a drilling site in Alaska about 60 miles west of the ANWR. The big oil site has turned 1,000 square miles of tundra into a network of roads and pipelines (Sierra Club 1).
The record was broke in 2006 with the total close to 100,000 wild fires destroying almost ten million acres (Dye, 2013). There was the death of two hundred and twenty five people due to severe heat waves in July the same year (NRDC, 2008). This issue is important because it affects so many things. Over time this will change all of the world’s ecosystems (Dye, 2013). Any animal unable to adapt to these new changes will go extinct.
With decreased amounts of conventional oil available around the globe, experts, including Prime Minister Stephen Harper, see the oil sands as becoming a legitimate global source of oil, thus in Harper’s mind, turning Canada into an “energy superpower”. This paper is designed to promote that the economic benefits are vitally important to Alberta, and are significant to Canada’s economy. To further justify this side of the debate, three principal arguments will be presented. To begin, the advantages to Canada’s economy will be outlined. This argument will be followed by an explanation of the technologies that will be put into effect to improve the oil sands’ impact on the environment.