Jester 1

Sam Jester

4/1/17

ENGL 1120-016

Simkins

The Viability of Renewable Energy

We live in a time where the usage of fossil fuels is at an all-time high. We as humans

apart from newborns and perhaps the Amish use fossil fuels every single day, whether we

realize it or not. If we drive a car, we are using gasoline. If we flick a light switch in our houses,

or use our heaters, we are using electricity, which is produced by power plants using fossil fuels.

Utilizing resources to create energy isnt inherently evil; after all, using energy allows us to

increase the standard of living, and makes our lives easier, but it comes with one major caveat,

pollution.

Pollution is anything that intrudes into an environment that has harmful or poisonous

effects. It takes the most prominent form in todays world in the shape of carbon emissions

caused by the burning of fossil fuels to create energy. The pollution caused by this directly harms

the environment, as well as causes health problems for the people and animals that breathe it in.

For example, China has possibly the biggest manufacturing sector in the world, and as such,

causes mass pollution that their citizens are obligated to breathe in. This causes health problems

for their people, something that is an obvious negative. In the words of Chinas Ministry of

Health, Public health is reeling. Pollution has made cancer Chinas leading cause of death.

Ambient air pollution alone is blamed for hundreds of thousands of deaths each year. Nearly 500
 Jester 2

million people lack access to safe drinking water. Only 1 percent of the countrys 560 million

city dwellers breathe air considered safe by the European Union (Kahn and Yardley). Were this

issue to be limited only to China, there would not be much cause for concern on our half of the

earth, but sadly, we are starting to see parallels in our own country, the United States.

My home city of Houston, TX has earned the nickname, the Energy Capital of the

World. This is because Houston has the largest energy district in the world, with almost all of

its downtown area being devoted to energy trading and production. My father even acts as a cog

in this energy machine, by trading energy futures (the rights to use a certain amount of energy

over a few years time) for Shell, the petroleum company. Many people recognize Shell as a gas

station firstly, but my father works on the side of acquiring the rights to accessing petroleum that

eventually ends up in our tanks. I have been to his place of work, and it is quite the spectacle.

There is a wide-open trade floor with hundreds of workers, buying and selling stocks and futures,

akin to something out of The Wolf of Wall Street. Chaotic, yet deliberate, like worker bees all

working for the queen, except the queens are multi-billion dollar corporations, and the hive is an

entire city. I am painting this scene to showcase how much stake the city of Houston has in the

global energy market. My father is one trader out of hundreds, who works on one trade floor out

of about thirty in his building, out of about five or six buildings for the same company, with tens

of companies operating in the same, cramped, downtown area. The energy markets presence in

Houston is nothing short of immense. The reason I even bring it up is because of the huge

amount of pollution that shrouds Houston due to its efficiency in the energy department. Houston

has the most polluted air per cubic inch in the country (American Lung Association). There are

other cities, like Los Angeles and New York, that may produce more pollution, but it is spread

thinner throughout the region. Houston isnt like that, being in such tight quarters. Even when
 Jester 3

looking at other tightly organized cities like Atlanta, Houston still stacks up pollution levels

much higher. Were Houstons scenario to be normalized, and other cities were as densely

polluted as Houston currently is, we could see our country turn into something like China, with

widespread cancer and a shortage of safe and breathable air. Because fossil fuels produce carbon

emissions, and carbon emissions are harmful to our body, we can safely reason that relying on

fossil fuels for our energy sources will cause health problems for Americans, and especially for

those living near heavy emission sites, such as power plants or factories. The NRDC (National

Resources Defense Council) have reported that, because the two are married, fixing one of the

problems should fix the other simultaneously (Long and Steinberger). This relationship is

important because of the harm that fossil fuels are tied to. Reducing the amount of fossil fuels,

we use will in turn reduce the carbon emissions we inhale, which in turn will not cause as many

health problems in our country.

With all this being said, its apparent that we cannot sit idly by and allow our country to

be ravaged by the harmful effects of air pollution. The only way to drop the levels of air

pollution is to cut back on our fossil fuel usage. However, doing this would lead to a shortage in

energy, so we would have to substitute other sources of energy to compensate for the energy we

would be losing. The way we could do this is by using renewable sources of energy. Still a

relatively untapped market, there is a lot of potential for a source of energy that can be used over

and over again. Some examples of renewable energy are wind, solar, and hydroelectric, all of

which have their pros and cons, but all can provide energy repeatedly. Finding out which form of

renewable energy is best was a topic I had difficulty researching, because they all had drawbacks

or shortcomings that werent experienced by the others. For example, wind energy can produce

ample energy, but can only be used in places that have ample wind, while solar can be used
 Jester 4

almost anywhere, but isnt as effective at harnessing the power of the sun (SEAI). However,

solar energy seems to be viable, because it can make up for what it lacks in efficiency with

abundancy. Astrophysicist Tom Murphy also thinks so. Dr. Murphy runs the blog Do the Math

that gives his point of view as a scientific expert on societal issues pertaining to energy

production and climate change. In an interview with Oilprice.com, an oil-focused energy site, he

specified that solar energy is viable, even if only in small quantities. When asked about

affordable renewable energy sources, he said When it comes to cheap, clean, and abundant, I

am drawn to solar. I don't care if it's two or three times the cost of fossil fuel energy - that's still

cheap. Abundance is unquestionable, and I don't see manufacturing as being inordinately caustic.

The fact that I have panels on my roof feeding batteries in my garage only confirms for me the

viability of this source of energy (Murphy). The fact that an energy expert has implemented a

renewable energy source into his life, even on the smallest scale, speaks volumes and gives the

renewable energy argument legs to stand on. Using solar energy to do simple, idle jobs like

charge batteries when not in use seems like a drop in the ocean when it comes to saving energy,

but were this to become a household occurrence, our nation could save big on pollution.

One of the first arguments I came across that objected to using more renewable energy is

that: a) implementing renewable energy costs too much and b) most renewable energy sources do

not produce enough energy to warrant pouring money into funding them. Fossil fuels have been

used for so long that the methods used to get them are very cost effective, and they are lumped

together in specific regions. Generally concentrated in giant deposits, fossil fuels have been

abundant and cheap; their price has largely been set simply at some markup on the cost of getting

them out of the ground and to the point of consumption (DGL). One of the principle concerns

with investing in renewable energy sources is the cost. Perhaps rightfully so, for renewable
 Jester 5

energy sources are far more expensive to build and/or maintain than their nonrenewable

counterparts. While this is an issue, it is quickly becoming a non-issue. With technological

advancements in the field being made every year, the sums of money it used to take to build and

operate these alternative energy sources has dropped significantly, especially in wind energy,

going from $6 million in operating fees in 2010 to only $1.65 million in late 2016 (Rozenblat).

Because enormous strides are being made in the science and business behind renewable energy,

we can expect these trends to continue, and see alternative energy sources become more

prevalent. Even if fossil fuels are cheaper to use and more effective, there is still something that

can be done to improve upon renewable energy technology. If we could bring down the cost of

production, or increase the energy output for the same price, renewable energy would become

even more viable, and could be taken seriously.

By no means are we currently capable of being totally dependent on renewable energy

sources. According to the Institute for Energy Research, as of today, fossil fuels meet 81

percent of U.S. energy demand (IER). However, due to their limited supply that is quickly

deteriorating, fossil fuels will not be in the spotlight much longer. Ecotricity, also known as

Britains Greenest Energy Company, has predicted that we only have enough fossil fuels left

to last our race until 2088, exclusively running on coal power after 2060, because oil and gas will

run our sooner (ecotricity). They also state, Some new reserves will be found which will help

extend this deadline slightly, but these cant last forever. New reserves of fossil fuels are

becoming harder to find, and those that are being discovered are significantly smaller than the

ones that have been found in the past (ecotricity). With our fossil fuel crutch slowly waning, a

change is in order, and one sooner rather than later is our best option, because right now, we

dont need to change our energy supply that drastically. If we wait around until the change is
 Jester 6

necessary, the odds will be against our efforts, and if our attempts fail, humanity will be in a dire

situation. To make an analogy, its almost like cramming for a test. Putting off studying until the

last minute will result in a lower grade, and waiting to start changing to renewable energy will

have a similar effect. The earlier we can implement more renewable energy into our energy

market, we absolutely should, so we can get ahead of the curve. The change wont be

instantaneous nor should it be. Ideally, we will gradually make the switch over many, many

years, but renewable energy dependency needs to be inevitable, and we need to begin with the

end in mind.

Another question that I researched and attempted to answer is why isnt renewable

energy more prevalent in todays society? We have all the technology for it to be, and

independent companies could take initiative to make it happen, so why is still so scarce? The

answer may lie in our inherent laziness as humans. We are genetically programmed to take the

path of least resistance (ScienceDaily), so could it be as simple as our instinctual nature to not

want to go against the grain? It is easier to utilize fossil fuels than it is for renewable energy

sources. The procedures used to make use of fossil fuels has been refined to a science over many

decades, while making use of renewable energy isnt as concrete. This makes the case that

someone who wanted to get into the energy market would start where it is easiest, with fossil

fuels. One way to kick that slothfulness is to incentivize people to make the switch. The main

and perhaps best way to do this is to provide government subsidies to renewable energy plants,

and to fund research aimed at improving costs and efficiency for renewable energy. Thankfully,

the U.S. Department of Energy has already thought of this, and seems to be pursuing a cleaner

energy narrative as of this year. In the U.S. DoEs 2017 Budget in Brief that has been proposed

to Congress, it lists out all the subsidies that are to be provided for research and development for
 Jester 7

all forms of energy generation, renewable or otherwise. The DoE is requesting a subsidy of 2.83

billion dollars to fund research and development to all kinds of renewable energy (U.S. DoE 34),

which is an extra 40 percent compared to last years subsidy of $2.06 billion. It doesnt end

there, either. The subsidy for research and development for fossil fuel is actually less than its

renewable competitor, only receiving 360 million dollars to fund research, which is a staggering

drop in funding compared to last years subsidy of $632 million, cutting 43 percent of its funds.

This has the potential to be even more effective than simply increasing funds for renewable

energy, because cutting funds to big oil and the likes will likely make them more reluctant to stay

on their current path, the one of fossil fuels. It appears that the government has begun to realize

that the only way forward is a green one, and if the corporations want to follow the money, and

be on the right side of history, the will quickly fall in suit behind their leaders.

The fix to our problem could simply be a matter of funding and motivation. If these

subsidies were to be passed, we would see a boom in the development of renewable energy,

which would in turn become cheaper to produce, paying dividends in the long run. The

resolution for our clean energy problem is not a quick one; it is a marathon rather than a sprint.

No instantaneous solution exists, and even if there was, it wouldnt be the best way forward. A

switch of this capacity isnt to be swallowed whole, its to be portioned out over a reasonable

timeframe. The subsidies provide a very hopeful outlook for our future a potential first step

towards the end goal a completely renewable energy market that will set up a prospering future

for humanity.
 Jester 8

Works Cited

DGL. Fossil Fuels Cheap, Available, Reliable & Convenient. Distgen. DGL, 22 Jan. 2010.
Web. 12 Apr. 2017

The End Of Fossil Fuels. Britains Leading Green Energy Supplier. Ecotricity, n.d. Web. 12
Apr. 2017 <https://www.ecotricity.co.uk/our-green-energy/energy-independence/the-end
-of-fossil-fuels>.

"Fossil Fuels." IER. Institute for Energy Research, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2017.

Humans Are Hard-Wired to Follow the Path of Least Resistance. ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily,
21 Feb. 2017. Web. 17 Apr. 2017. <https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170
221101016.htm>.

Long, Noah, and Kevin Steinberger. "Renewable Energy Is Key to Fighting Climate Change."
NRDC. Natural Resources Defense Council, 15 Dec. 2016. Web. 21 Feb. 2017.

Most Polluted Cities. American Lung Association | State of the Air 2015. American Lung
Association, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2017

"Renewable Energy - An Interview with Scientific Expert Tom Murphy." Interview by OilPrice.
28 Mar. 2012: n.d.: n. pag. Print.

Renewable Energy - Pros and Cons. SEAI Sustainable Energy Authority Ireland. SEAI, n.d.
Web. 12 Apr. 2017

Rozenblat, Lazar. "Your Guide to Renewable Energy." Renewable Energy Sources: Cost
Comparison. US DOE, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2017.

United States of America. U.S. Department of Energy. FY 2017 Budget in Brief. N.p.: n.p., n.d.
Print.