More handpicked essays just for you.
Environmental impacts of the use of fossil fuels
Controversy over global warming
Environmental impacts of the use of fossil fuels
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Environmental impacts of the use of fossil fuels
Politicians have had a major influence over how the environment is treated; whether it is for the benefit or detriment of the environment. However, environmentalists mostly agree that the environment is in danger. Much of the negative effects have been coming from the fossil fuel industry. However, the essential question is: If fossil fuels are bad for the environment, then why are they not being regulated more strictly? Republicans are to blame for two reasons; one being bad talking environmentalist terms such as “global warming”, and two being their policies that are biased in favor of the fossil fuel industry. Another issue is the way companies are negatively affecting people of lower income, especially those of non-white background. Both claims work hand in …show more content…
A greater concern is the list of proposals that Republicans are making in favor of the fossil fuel industry. What is concerning about this, is that these same Republicans are financially backed by major fossil fuel companies. If there is a conflict of interest, politicians are likely to advocate on the behalf of their backers. A great example of this is the Republican senator of Oklahoma, James M Inhofe. Sen. Inhofe is probably most known for his uneducated claim that global warming is a myth because it still snows during winters. However, if one were to look at his campaign contribution list on OpenSecrets.org, one would find the following contributors, Devon Energy, a petroleum producer, and Murray Energy, a coal mining company. In fact, roughly 39.63% of Inhofe’s campaign contributions come from the Oil and Gas Industry.
Customers usually make decision of purchase by comparing the “value” of a product or service, which can be looked as the benefit–sacrifice ratio. Many customers find the prices of most health club and gyms too high because they see little value in some of extra amenities, in other words, they find that the benefit they receive is not valuable, comparing to the sacrifices they make; in this case, the benefit-sacrifice ratio in this case is pretty low. Therefore, Planet Fitness offers good value membership, which means high benefit-sacrifice ratio for customers, comparing to other major gyms.
Exxon/Mobil, one of the nation’s leading oil producers, has its main refinery located in Beaumont, Texas. Each year, the residents of Beaumont/Port Arthur have to contend with the 39,000 pounds of pollution spewed each year by the Exxon refinery. Exxon’s emissions are 385% above the state refinery average. In 1999, the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Committee (TNRCC) allowed the plant to increase their emissions, without allowing the public to have a say in the matter. Interestingly, 95% of the people living near the plant are of African American descent and are in the poverty range. Some believe that this, along with the lack of education in the area, allows Exxon to get away with such high emissions. Residents in nearby neighborhoods have been complaining of headaches, nausea, eye, and throat irritation for years. Since 1997, Mobil has repeatedly violated health standards in its emissions of two key air pollutants: sulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide, These “rotten egg” smells are so strong, one can smell it through a car driving past the refinery. After numerous complaints and one record of a refinery worker becoming unconscious because of the fumes, the EPA awarded Exxon with a $100,000 environmental justice grant in October of 1998. Hopefully, Exxon has put the money to good use and cleaned up their emissions.
...nges that may have once been a regulation, but that still effects the environment. Other larger plants and companies are beginning to change the way that they take care of certain waste products because they have been brought into the public light and some groups have begun to campaign against the larger companies that are dealing with the regulations. The environmental push that is being created is affected by the ‘race to the bottom” even though regulations may be decreased the problem is already out in the public so it seems that since there used to be such stringent laws. The increased competition that can be created by the companies which are similar plays into interest groups. State policies are changing the way that larger companies are dealing with the environment as well as aiding in the improving the environment after there has been major damage done.
People need to reduce the use of carbon footprints because many companies like Exxon and Keystone XL did their dirty business that effect public health and environment. Political campaigns are part of the effect in global warming because they promise to go green but never make an effort. Obama forced to solve climate but fail to do so in 2008. Obama signed a billion that support teams of energy advisors and control carbon emissions. According to Derber, big business did not support the bill and tried to get rid of it. Fracking is a process used by fossil fuel companies to extract oil and gas from shale or other deep rocks. There was a movement against fracking lead by Jill Wiener who fought for 5 years to keep fracking legalized in New York and some people were arrested in the White house for
A Modest Proposal Concerning the Environment * Based on Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” (1729). It is a melancholy object to those who travel through this great country to see isolated corners of this fair realm still devoted to protecting the environment. The wretched advocators of these ideals are frequently seen doling out petitions and begging at their neighbours’ doors to feed their obsession, which keeps them in the contemptible poverty that they so richly deserve.
Climate Change has become an incredibly controversial topic because of the bid to win votes. As with any successful political party, capital and supporters are needed to fund and support campaigns and activities to secure votes. The Democratic and Republican parties have taken opposite sides of the ring regardless of scientific proof. In relation to global warming, the Democrats represent the environmentalists in the green corner and the Republicans represent the current energy tycoons in the red corner. The two opposing parties are simply trying to one up each other with each rhetorical combination thrown. The more irrational or misconstrued the rhetoric, the more the crowd rooting for each fighter reacts and the more independents rally to
Pollution has always been a big concern for anyone who has seen films or pictures from some of the Southeast Asian countries, where smog sometimes fills the whole sky of cities. Indeed, pollution is a terrible thing, but unfortunately it is a real concern for our modern times. There is always a price to pay for advancing, and in many cases that price is the creation of harmful substances to the environment around us, and sometimes even to us. One shocking example of this happened not so long ago right here in the United States, when one of the five great lakes, Lake Erie, was so full of pollution around Cleveland that almost all of the wildlife died and people could literally walk across the top of the pollution on the lake. Obviously, nobody wants anything like this to ever happen again. Fortunately, the lake was eventually cleaned up, but the damage was done, both to the environment and to the psyche and mindset of the American people. Some people see big box retailers as a cause of much pollution, and for some people that’s all they need to hear in order to be eternally opposed against big box retailers.
The political climate of environmental injustice movement does not seem promising. With a very polarized, divided Congress, and powerful monopoly run corporations, advocates have to battle—harder than ever to better their communities. Vig and Kraft point out the difficulties of getting environmental legislation passed through Congress when gridlock is occurring. They dissected the issue of policy gridlock into these main indicators: the diverging policy views due to partisan differences, separated powers and bicameralism which occurs when there are major disagreements between the House, Congress, and the President, the complexity of environmental problems where the injustice is so complex that
In 1989, seventy five percent of Americans identified themselves as environmentalists, and the number has continued to grow since then (Walls 1). Environmentalism is now the most popular social movement in the United States, with over five million American families donating regularly to environmental organizations (Walls 1). Environmentalists today focus on what kind of world they hope to see in the future, and largely deal with limiting pollution and changing consumption rates (Kent 1 and 9). Modern environmentalists also have much different issues than those Carson’s America faced. With climate change becoming more threatening each year, protection of the natural world is needed more than ever. Pollution has caused the warmest decade in history, the deterioration of the ozone layer, and species extinction in extreme numbers (Hunter 2). It not only threatens nature, but also human populations, who already suffer from lack of clean water and poisoning from toxic chemicals (Hunter 16). Unlike environmental actions in the 1960’s, which were mostly focused on protection, a massive increase in pollution has caused efforts to be focused on environmental restoration (Hunter 16). Like in the time of Silent Spring, environmentalists are not only concerned with one country. Protecting the environment remains a global issue, and every nation is threatened by the
In his essay “Being Green at Ben and Jerry’s,” George F. Will lays out his argument against the environmentalists who hypocritically prevent coal mining and oil drilling in or near foreign soil. Despite the United States having enough oil and coal to be self dependent for years, tree huggers want to save our earth and import instead. However, letting places like Iraq do all of the resource extraction and the United State buying it from them is not much better. These environmentalists then call for a decrease in energy consumption, but no politician in his right mind would go against the Americans who love their big, gas-guzzling cars. Mostly, energy conservatives make policies that help them sleep well at night, rather than anything of actual
The articles “The Environmental issue from hell” by Bill McKibben and “The Obligation to Endure” by Rachel Carson both talk about the environmental consequences that people have caused. However, McKibben writes about Global warming and argues that it is a moral responsibility to preserve the earth, while on the other hand, Carson writes about pollution of the earth caused by man. McKibben article makes good points and supports his claim with facts which makes his article valid. Carson supports her idea with adequate information and factual evidence which also makes her article valid.
The worst imaginable environmental catastrophe that could occur in Maryland has just become a reality. The lifeblood of Southern Maryland's Watermen has been forever affected. The ecosystems of the Patuxtent River and Chesapeake Bay have been irreversibly contaminated. The Three Mile Island and Chernobyl Nuclear Accidents have affected the world ecosystems; but the Chalk Point oil spill has reached us here in Southern Maryland. The ethical considerations with generating electricity from fossil fuels, specifically oil, has a profound impact on us all. We all use electricity to make our lives easier and more productive. By using this electricity have we given our permission for the oil companies free reign in order to provide us with the service we demand?? Are we just as responsible for the oil spill as the corporate leaders who run the companies? As citizens we are in a position to develop and enforce regulations to protect ourselves. Do we also protect the environment; or is the environment just something for us to use? These and many other moral dilemmas exist for modern man.
"China Plans to Regulate Some of Its Carbon Emissions for the First Time Ever." Smithsonian. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 May 2014.
Because of this the government has been put into a major predicament. They have, and must continue to create laws, to protect the environment. However they cannot simply place unrealistic restrictions and limitations onto the major polluters; that are the manufacturing companies. These manufacturers emit large quantities of waste and greenhouse gases. However that is the cost of today’s society. The world needs certain commodities to function properly; like paper products, gasoline, oil and other petroleum by-products, as well as many other products that; whether we like it or not, are harmful to the environment, to make and use.
Fuels like coal, and oil that once were a fine innovation in creating energy are now rapidly deleting and one day will be gone forever; energy that won’t last is often referred to as non-renewable energy. Besides being set up to fail and become inefficient in the future, fossil fuel energy is not clean to use and poses several environmental complications. Coal, for instance is “the dirtiest of all fossil fuels. Coal combustion not only produces sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides that contribute to acid rain and snow, it generates millions of tons of particulates that cause asthma and other respiratory diseases.” As with all usage of fossil fuels, it creates enormous amounts of carbon dioxide, which contributes to greenhouse gas. Not only are fossil fuels dirty, they also pose as a security risk and unforgiving on the American wallet. (Saini)