There
is a common consensus amongst everyone that the US is going to face an energy
crisis in the future. The world has increasingly sparse reserve of oil, prices
going up. Therefore, America went to find new alternatives, one of which is
natural gas.
Today,
let us talk about its advantages and its problems. Natural gas would seem to be
the best source of energy to rely on at the moment. It is much cheaper than the
current sources such as oil and coal. Its reserves are also in much greater
amounts than oil and coal, lasting until 2065.
However,
the process of obtaining and refining the gas has its own share of problems.
When trying to create wells for the extraction of natural gas, there has been
the problematic usage of chemicals. Chemicals such as methane and radiation
have the capability to harm the environment, and this harm does spread to the
rest of the country.
Furthermore,
we need to think in the long term, where the only real possibility is to depend
on renewable energy sources as a source of power, and this possibility is best
developed now, as we continually discover new technologies to be more efficient
and effective. This would ensure a smoother transition over to renewable
energies.
I
propose two solutions. First, I propose to redirect some of our funding in
areas of subsidies and incentives. The problem we face is that some 79% of our
subsidiary spending is used on non-clean measures such as oil, coal and gas
exploration, while it could have been better spent on investing in other forms
of renewable energy. When there is so much spending on the oil and gas, then
companies and corporations have lesser of an incentive to develop and place
funding in the other renewable energies. Evidently, the conservative doctrine
of “burn it if we’ve got it” is a roadblock for our future energy usage – we
simply cannot afford to discard the energy crisis as relevant just because we
have a supply of gas for the short term. In comparison, I still recognize that
citizens still largely depend on current non-renewable sources as of now, so we
should shift our funding from subsidies to tax incentives for them, such that
those companies who do their job get rewarded. At the same time, we should
slowly shift our energy focus to renewable sources by providing subsidies for the
technological developments in these areas. This would encourage more
corporations to start looking into the area of renewable energy because they
are generally profit-oriented.
Second,
America should close up the loopholes that are present, for instance the
Halliburton loophole in the 2005 Energy Policy Act. This means that we should
clear up the definition that encompasses the idea of developing our natural gas
systems. Despite this year’s change in the EPA, we need to recognize that
things such as water bodies are not discussed. Granted, corporations cannot
release their wastage into surface water sources such as lakes, oceans and
rivers, but there is no mention of the aquifers and underground sources. There
is a need to end the vagueness in the policies that we create that allow for
exploitation. At the same time, we should not be wasting the gas that we are
trying to get in the first place. Gas leakage at our extraction wells are
costing us 15 million a year – by minimalizing this amount, we maximize the
usage of our spending in the area because a short term expenditure on the
system has a great long term effect on the amount of gas we obtain.
0 comments:
Post a Comment