Vaughan 1

Davis Vaughan Instructor: Malcolm Campbell English 1103 2 October 2013 Forward Progress: Fossil Fuels or Renewable Energy?

We have a problem, America; a problem that is going to destroy our future generations unless something is done about it. We have been irresponsible with our fossil fuel energy resources that we are going to inflict serious and possibly unfixable damages on our atmosphere in the form of ozone depletion and atmospheric warming. It is going to happen, unless something major is done to halt the process and get us moving in the other direction. Why does this matter? some might ask. Why should I care about this small temperature increase? We should all care. This temperature increase would have numerous effects, including altering rain patterns, and intensifying already extreme weather events such as hurricanes and floods. According to EnergyBeyond Oil, this would destroy parts of croplands for pretty much all countries, resulting in a much lower production of crops and the potential to put farmers out of a job. So now we care, but what can we do about this? The answer is not simple, but there is a solution, which comes in the form of renewable energy. Specifically, energy based in four areas: geothermal, wind, nuclear, and solar.

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:42 PM Deleted: , levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:42 PM Deleted: The problem is that we levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:42 PM Deleted: so

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:43 PM Deleted: you levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:43 PM Deleted: Let me say right now, levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:43 PM Deleted: w levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:43 PM Deleted: In turn, levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:44 PM Deleted: a levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:44 PM Deleted: All right, so now you

Geothermal

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:50 PM Comment [1]: Added Paragraph about whether we need to make the switch at all for a counter argument levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:50 PM Comment [2]: Added numbers from EnergyBeyond Oil about energy cost

Vaughan 2

Geothermal energy may be one of the best ways for the average person to have an impact on the problem at hand. Daily, enormous amounts of gas or oil are needed to keep water heated in homes. Low temperature geothermal systems that include heat pumps could be a prime alternative to this problem. According to EnergyBeyond Oils author Fraser Armstrong, by switching to these systems, the average home will use less than 3,500 kWh of electricity for the heat pump, and will save 1.5 tons of carbon dioxide compared to gas, and 3.6 tons of carbon dioxide compared to oil per year. The best way to apply these circulation systems into practice is to add them into new building designs. It would be much less costly to add them to new houses instead of trying to replace the water heating systems in houses that currently stand, and there is no reason that new buildings could not incorporate these new systems into their designs. The main argument against geothermal energy is that it costs more than a conventional heating system. In the short run, this may be true. However, the projected time that it would take the geothermal system to pay for itself is about fifteen years, and since a house is normally a longterm investment, this is a negligible factor. Wind Wind is an idea that has already jumped ahead to being one of the fastest growing sources of renewable energy. There are multiple ways that wind energy can come into play, and can be a major factor for energy provision. Granted, there are places in the world where wind energy is not going to be efficient, however, many areas in the north and west have high potential for efficient wind turbines. One type of wind turbine is the AVX1000 turbine from AerVironment.
levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:46 PM Deleted: honestly levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:46 PM Deleted: all levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:44 PM Deleted: within levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:46 PM Comment [3]: Added Paragraph about what heat pumps do for the readers sake.

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:46 PM Deleted: seeing as how levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:46 PM Deleted: seems levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:47 PM Deleted: to be levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:47 PM Deleted: Here levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:47 PM Deleted: interesting

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:47 PM Deleted: to have levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:47 PM Deleted: The o levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:47 PM Deleted: that I will focus on

Vaughan 3

http://www.onestopgreen.com/innovative-product-solutions/windsolutions/architectural-wind-avx1000/architectural-wind-avx1000.aspx

This turbine seems designed to combat any and all arguments against it, such as: Argument 1) Wind turbines have low aesthetic value and high noise pollution! Not necessarily. These smaller turbines are placed on top of tall buildings to collect the strong gusts of wind that form there. Therefore, they are not seen unless you are actually looking for them, and they are also designed to be much quieter than the generic large wind turbine. Argument 2) Wind turbines kill hundreds of birds every year! Although generic, large turbines have killed birds every year, these turbines are different in that they are placed on top of buildings. Because these buildings are so tall, adding small turbines to the top will not cause any additional bird deaths that the buildings were not already creating. Argument 3) Turbines take up too much space and the opportunity cost is too high. Two things about this. First, obviously these building placed turbines will not take up much room whatsoever. And second, the generic large wind turbine that is placed out on the countryside only takes up vertical room. There would still be plenty of space underneath it for agriculture to grow. Wind technology has many benefits for the future, especially for larger buildings and even skyscrapers, and, unlike geothermal, it would not be much of a problem to install them onto preexisting buildings to allow them to switch over to renewable sources of energy.

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:47 PM Deleted: one levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:48 PM Deleted: to be specifically levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:48 PM Deleted: that are thrown at levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:48 PM Deleted: are ugly and noisy

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:51 PM Deleted: It is technically true that turbines have killed birds over the years. However, especially with these turbines that will be placed on already tall buildings, there will be no added damage to birds that the building was not already creating.

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:52 PM Comment [4]: Added 4th argument about number of wind turbines needed to be efficient

Vaughan 4

Nuclear Nuclear energy always seems to be a hot topic as a viable renewable resource. A major reason for this is because of the actual possibility that nuclear energy plants could put oil companies out of business. The high output from nuclear energy and almost negligible carbon emission compared to the smog produced by oil companies makes it a great contender to overtake the competition. Top dollar oil plants are obviously not happy about this. According to Jim Marston of The Atlantic, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is pushing for legislature that would actually teach climate change denial in schools around the country and has had success in getting this balanced teaching plan passed in Oklahoma, Colorado, and Arizona. This may or may not make some kind of noticeable change in the minds of youth later down the road, but for now, no one can really say. Some have claimed multiple problems with nuclear energy. Obviously a big debate is over safety. Nuclear meltdowns can be extremely fatal, and a clear example of that seems to be Chernobyl. However, it should be noted that Chernobyl was not a nuclear explosion whatsoever. According to scientist Bela Liptak, from the website CONTROL, Chernobyl was in fact caused by poorly trained, night shift workers running a test on the system that they incorrectly performed, resulting in a power generator exploding and causing a steam explosion that only then released an enormous amount of radioactivity. The key idea here is that this could have been prevented. This was not a random factor within the nuclear energy process that could naturally occur at any time. No, this was due to a lack of proper training, and errors like that can be helped. Another problem with nuclear energy is that it is very expensive. A new passive nuclear plant design would help solve this by making it impossible for a nuclear meltdown to
levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:54 PM Deleted: human error, and human error levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:54 PM Deleted: Lets take a second here and look at the levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:54 PM Deleted: are not a light topic to be joked about levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:54 PM Deleted: needs to levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:53 PM Deleted: producing levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:53 PM Deleted: tear apart

Vaughan 5

occur. The science behind this is complicated but basically passive means there is a plug that would melt if anything went wrong and any radioactive material would flow into a storage container to be cooled. This means that much less money would need to be spent on the countless security systems that had been put in place to counter for the damage that may occur if a nuclear meltdown actually did happen. Having this cheaper method would be an incredible step forward over using fossil fuels, making it much more environmentally friendly to generate electricity. Solar Ah, yes, solar energy. This might be the Big Kahuna of possible renewable energy sources. Armstrong seems to think so, for in EnergyBeyond Oil he states, Our present needs could be met by covering .5% of Earths surface with PV (photovoltaic) installations that achieve a conversion efficiency of 10% (120). So why has it not been done yet? Well, with the current technology available to us, it would be much too expensive to try to do this. Also, the efficiency factor is not up to par with what it should be to really be effective everywhere these solar energy devices might be placed. However, there is a promising new technology that is still being worked on called third generation photovoltaic cells. On the bulkscale, altering the solar absorbance levels of semiconductors such as silicon is impossible, however it can be done on the nanoscale. This is important because if this absorbance band can be expanded, then the atoms can absorb much more energy then they have been, allowing for an increase in efficiency. A professor of Chemistry at UNC Charlotte, Marcus Jones, has actually been spending his research time doing just this, and is, especially this year, beginning to make progress. (NOTE TO MALCOLM: the next step in my research will be to meet with him and discuss more about how viable this option is and when it could be rolled out on the market. That will be added here. Also, I will be doing

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:56 PM Comment [5]: Adding definition of passive for clarity.

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:56 PM Deleted: Our present needs could be met by covering .5% of Earths surface with PV (photovoltaic) installations that achieve a conversion efficiency of 10%. (p120 EnergyBeyond Oil). levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:57 PM Deleted: would need levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:57 PM Deleted: to

levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:57 PM Deleted: at levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:57 PM Deleted: C

Vaughan 6

research with him next semester, so this is clearly where a big part of my interest lies!) Solar energy, therefore, may not be the most current solution, but definitely in the future will be a major player in renewable energy since there is literally an infinite amount of energy that can be harnessed through it.

A move to renewable energy will affect us all. From the top dollar oil companies, to the everyday American, we will all have an impact on moving to a more sustainable world. Today, wind seems to be the largest growing source of new energy, but with the advances in solar energy, it will not be far behind. I said it before and I will say it again. We have a problem, America. So what are we going to do?
levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:58 PM Comment [6]: Addition of a few sentences about how the energy types will be used in conjunction with each other. levinescholar! 11/27/13 5:58 PM Deleted: At todays date,