Findley 13

The Importance of Limiting Carbon EmissionsThe Earth is billions of years old with an atmosphere that protects a vibrant ecosystem maintaining a variety of life; however, in the last one hundred years the quality of the environment has been declining and living organisms are paying the price. The atmosphere is very important in not only protecting life on Earth but in the stability of the planet itself. In the last one hundred years, this stability has been compromised. The Earth has suffered sufficient damage due to carbon emissions. The industrial age ushered in changes that seemingly moved mankind forward in the name of technology but has been the result of increased carbon emissions and wasteful energy usage. Unfortunately, before the effects were noticed, the damage was done. However, the effects of carbon emissions are reversible if the correct solutions are taken seriously and implemented soon. Due to the many detrimental effects of carbon emissions, America should focus its efforts on alternative methods of energy obtainment as a pathway to a cleaner and more efficient future for all of humanity.A large contributor of carbon emissions is the use of fossil fuels in electricity production and vehicles. The United States consists of 5% of the human population, yet contributes to 25% of the world's carbon emissions (Carbon Nation). Carbon emissions come from household use of electricity, vehicles, factories and the burning of coal, gases and oil. The effects of such usage may not have been noticed for a long time; however, the planet is now experiencing changes that can only be explained by increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Throughout history humans have used many processes and machinery that contribute to increased carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. One of the most detrimental processes is hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking. Fracking is a method that is used to obtain natural gas and oil. Natural gas does produce less carbon than burning oil and coal; however, the method of obtaining natural gas is a problem. During hydraulic fracturing, thousands of chemicals are pumped into the ground and as a result landscapes are altered and homes can be exposed to contaminated groundwater. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, hydraulic fracturing is suspected to be the culprit of polluted drinking water in Arkansas, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming. The residents have reported changes in water quality soon after hydraulic fracturing had taken place (Risky Gas Drilling Threatens Health, Water Supplies). Julia Bonds, one of the last people to move from her Home in West Virginia, spoke of suffocating clouds of coal dust, dead fish and her grandson of seven years old even had an escape route planned. Mountain-top removal mining has since buried seven hundred miles of Appalachian streams (Nijhuis). The negative effects of coal mining and fracking for natural gas and oil are hardly worth the price of needing to evacuate entire regions and polluting natural water supplies. As a result of mankinds history of carbon overload, the eco-system is suffering as well. Oxygen levels in the ocean have dropped exponentially, resulting in what is referred to as a dead zone. Off the coast of Oregon is one such dead zone the size of New Jersey. Thousands of creatures have died due to the extremely low oxygen levels. Climate modeling predicted these occurrences in 2002 and scientists have no idea whether the effects are reversible (Carbon Nation). Many of these dead zones exist throughout the world. The prospect is quite frightening due to the fact that more than half of the world's oxygen comes from algae and phytoplankton within the ocean. Figure one shows areas off the coast of Oregon that are affected. The effects of carbon emissions are very apparent if one knows what they are looking at and understand how volatile the environment is. A perfect balance of compounds is required in order to maintain an atmosphere that is stable for maintaining all life forms within the ecosystem. As it stands, these compounds are not in balance and the planet is suffering the effects; melting polar ice caps, erratic weather and carbon dioxide levels that are alarmingly higher than what is considered to be safe parts per million (ppm) in the atmosphere. The safe zone for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is three hundred fifty ppm. NASA scientists were asked what they thought about the four hundred ppm mark the atmosphere has now reached. According to Dr. Michael Gunson, "Passing the four hundred mark reminds me that we are on an inexorable march to four hundred fifty ppm and much higher levels. The world is quickening the rate of accumulation of CO2, and has shown no signs of slowing this down. It should be a psychological tripwire for everyone." Dr. Erika Podest agrees with Dr. Gunson and states that the rise in CO2 levels in the last five decades should be a wakeup call. It is a threat to life on Earth and humans cannot afford to stand by and watch (NASA Scientists React to 400 Ppm Carbon Milestone). The devastating effects of carbon emissions can be seen and felt in the environment. The question is what can be done about it?Fortunately for mankind, there are many solutions that can easily be implemented to assist in limiting carbon emissions. Many of these solutions are beneficial for the environment, promote job growth and contribute to economic growth. George Johnson, a writer for National Geographic talks about solar energy and a company called Nevada Solar One. The company built solar panels in the desert in 2007. On a clear sunny day these panels harness 21% of the suns energy. Johnson states gas plants are more efficient; however, this energy is clean and free, powering 14,000 homes. In addition, wind power is one of the most lucrative of all renewable energies. A small town called Roscoe, Texas was near economic collapse. In this dying town, there were no jobs left and many people had moved away. The wind energy program brought new life to this ghost town. Residents who had left returned for jobs building turbines. Roscoe, Texas now boasts the largest wind farm in the world with over four hundred land owners sharing in the wind turbine project. Their wind farm powers over 250,000 homes and the owners make 15,000 dollars per turbine, per year (Carbon Nation). Roscoe has reaped many benefits as a community from the wind energy project and the wealth is spreading throughout all of Texas. As stated by Dr. Lester R. Brown, It is projected that by 2025, Texas will have 38,000 megawatts of wind energy capacity-the equivalent of 38 coal-fired power plants. This will satisfy ninety percent of the current residential electricity needs of the states 25 million people (118). The facts show that wind energy and solar energy are a powerful start for efficient and economical progress for the future. Furthermore, there are many jobs to be gained from resorting to renewable energy sources, further aiding in economic growth. Grid Alternatives is a non-profit company that installs solar panels with low interest loans provided by the city. In turn, these panels produce energy that can generate revenue for the participants. Not only does this company provide jobs for people, paroles included, it helps low income families generate their own income (Carbon Nation). Van Jones, a major advocate for green energy and bringing renewable energy to low income families was asked his thoughts about green energy jobs and whether they are a viable choice for average Americans. According to Mr. Jones, these jobs are readily available and a degree is not needed. He states that the National Renewable Energy Lab, an employer for green opportunities, cannot find enough workers to meet the requirements for all the projects they currently have underway (Ariel). This is great news for the environment and Americans, who suffer from a severe difference in socioeconomic status. Alternative energy can help bridge this gap by providing income for families via renewable energy and ensuring jobs for the American people.America isnt the only country that can profit from renewable energy opportunities. Germany also looks forward to profiting from the green energy movement. Deputy chancellor Sigmar Gabriel was interviewed about his thoughts on Germanys economic policies on renewable energy. He believes it is Germanys most important project for the future due to reducing reliance upon foreign oil, protecting their climate and transitioning into new technologies and job growth. He believes that Germany will be a leading example of renewable energy and its economic success (Orth). Germany has already benefitted from job growth and new technologies. Some days, so much wind and solar energy is produced in Germany that it needs to be given away. If every country were to implement renewable energy goals and meet them, there would be a wealth of energy, economic success and jobs for all. Green energy supporters also argue the importance of implementation of carbon control processes. Renewable energy is not the only way to control carbon output and certain measures need to be taken to control emissions. Figure two emphasizes the need for trees in order for life to thrive. Trees sequester carbon in the air as they grow. Home Depot funded the planting of three hundred thousand trees; unfortunately, a single medium coal plant operating for ten days completely negates the entirety of a tree farm this size (Carbon Nation). Deforestation is a vast contributor to carbon in the atmosphere, adding as much as burning fossil fuels itself. China, Thailand and the Philippines have all had to implement partial or complete bans on logging due to floods and mudslides as a result of deforestation. If deforestation is limited or eradicated and tree farms are relied upon as a primary source of wood products, this will assist in lowering carbon emissions. As it stands, 1.5 billion tons of carbon is released into the air each year from deforestation (Brown 137). Many people do not think about the effects of cutting down thousands of acres of forests; they assume that more trees will grow. Unfortunately, trees cannot be grown fast enough to replace the hundreds of years old trees being cut down. A little known fact is that a massive amount of carbon can be retained in the soil just by using grassland control methods. Soil holds large amount of carbon within the ground; when the ground is tilled this carbon is released from the soil and into the atmosphere. Furthermore, when farmers use pesticides, this kills a beneficial fungi called mychorrhizal fungi. Mychorrhizal fungi retains carbon in the soil, reaching much deeper than the roots of the crops they coexist with. When farmers use tillers to farm the land this rips up the fragile fungi and releases carbon into the air. Simple steps such as fewer pesticides, no tillage when planting and planting diverse amounts of plants in one soil area can reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by 50 ppm (Carbon Nation). With the vast amount of farming America does, especially in the Midwest, these practices could quickly and easily be put into place and begin the journey of lowering carbon emissions. While it is true that Americans could begin to utilize these processes themselves, it does not follow that all the changes can be made by the average Joe. Lawmakers play a key role in the future of the Earth. Whether leaders care to admit whether or not the environment is in danger, it is their duty to address such issues. They have the ability to require recycling bins in all neighborhoods, the authority to tax high carbon emitting companies and the duty of educating the general population of the importance of carbon control. As stated by Lester. R Brown, The key to restructuring the economy means putting a tax on carbon to reflect the full cost of burning fossil fuels. If the world is to move onto a sustainable path, we need economists who will calculate indirect costs and work with political leaders to incorporate them into market structures by restructuring taxes (184). In short, the companies creating the most carbon should be taxed based upon their carbon output, thus creating an incentive to look for other solutions. Lawmakers have the ability to begin to move America in this direction. Common sense seems to dictate that a clean environment requires clean processes and a culture fueled with knowledge. With solar, wind and geothermal energy sources as options, the need for hydraulic fracturing could be eliminated. Citizens would not have to worry about contaminated water sources or dirty air in coal mining areas if all possible renewable energies were utilized in areas they are prevalent to. Instead of waste merely being tossed into landfills, alternatively, said waste can be recycled to create energy. If recycling products were made a way of life, most of what is leftover would be considered biomass. At North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, Dr. Lijun Wang is in charge of researching the utilization of biomass to create energy. According to Dr. Wang, using biomass could turn expenses into a source of revenue and contribute to the reuse of waste (Harold). Waste conversion and recycling is a paramount step towards carbon control and a cleaner environment. Unfortunately, here in America recycling is not easily accessible to most citizens nor are they educated about the importance and impact it could have on them, the environment and future generations. Few people realize that buildings are one of the largest contributors to carbon emissions and usage of natural resources (Iwaro). They run on almost constant air conditioning or heating. Buildings need to be remodeled for energy conservation and new buildings need to be built with solar panels and other means of carbon control. Buildings account for more than forty percent of greenhouse gas emissions, due mostly to natural gas usage and nuclear power (Carbon Nation). Architect Bob Fox and Company worked with Bank of America to renovate their building; the effect was a building that ran at half the energy (Carbon Nation). A large amount of funds were used to make the building green friendly; however, due to the savings, the company made the money back in just a couple of years. Build it Green is a non-profit company that assists in constructing new buildings utilizing green energy or remodeling of existing buildings. In their disclaimer they go over the cost and benefits of constructing a green building. The company states the costs to remodel towards energy efficiency are almost always the equivalent of a standard remodeling. If the costs are higher, the benefits in the end result in energy savings (Home Remodeling: Green Building Guidelines). Building renovations and remodeling towards energy efficient businesses, malls and other structures is capable of generating thousands of jobs for people. Two deeds could be done with one cause, job creation and promoting a green environment. Alternatively, fossil fuel advocates often argue that renewable energy is not a feasible change and that fossil fuels are the future. Advocates for fossil fuels state that renewable energy cannot meet energy requirements and that there are no incentives for companies to implement such a costly expenditure. The opposition argues that not every area can utilize wind power, solar power or geothermal power. Fossil fuel advocates are correct in both categories; however, measures can be taken to add incentives and renewable energies should be harnessed that are prevalent to specific areas. For example, Texas is an ideal place for wind power, whereas the desert is ideal for solar power. All places on the Earth have access to at least one producer of renewable energy. Many towns across America that have already made the change to renewable energy. Roscoe, Texas is already a testament to the power and profitability of green energy. Another example is Burlington, Vermont, population forty two thousand; a town currently obtaining all their energy via wind, water and biomass. Ken Nolan, the manager of power resources, stated that the prices in Burlington are stable and not tied to fossil fuels at all (Largest City in Vermont Now Gets All Its Power From Wind, Water and Biomass). It is up to smaller government to create climate action plans. One such city in the United States that has done this is in Boulder, Colorado. Boulder has been producing their energy from renewable sources since 1985. They also have a three part renewable energy program (City of Boulder Colorado). These are just a few examples of successful cities within America that have utilized renewable energy and reaped the benefits.Also, arguably, incentives for advocating and utilizing renewable energy are easily implemented. Lawmakers hold the key for the first step. Incentives such as tax cuts for large businesses who utilize green energy can be put in place and businesses that produce more carbon can be taxed higher or penalized. Incentives for home owners could include waste pickup cutbacks. For example, a home that recycles most products will produce less waste and therefore their bill would be lower. The waste pick-up bill could be based upon gross weight of total waste picked up for each household. In reality the biggest changes will be made by policy holders. Ms. Janet Laughlin states in her dissertation, According to conventional economic theory, renewable energy will achieve greater market penetration once it is cost-competitive with conventional generation. This dissertation concludes, however, that government policy is the most significant causal variable in determining the development and diffusion of wind energy technology. There are already some incentives set in place by the local, state and federal government. Local incentives include property tax exemptions for renewable source installations. Some state incentives include net metering, which means homeowners receive credit for producing more energy than used. The federal government also offers tax credits towards renewable energy improvements (Office of Energy and Planning). It would appear that all levels of government are aware that renewable energy deserves incentives; however, these incentives must be strengthened. Green energy advocates universally agree that incentives are of the utmost importance in beginning the green energy front for businesses and that lawmakers must begin these initiatives with sound, clear laws.Supporters of fossil fuels claim that green energy implementation costs are too high and there is little, to no profit in it. Such supporters are Koch Industries and the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC for short. ALEC is an influential lobbying group often caught in the middle of clean energy arguments. ALEC themselves have stated that homeowners with solar panels are free riders on the system, thus emphasizing that there is, in fact, profit to be made from renewable energy (Phillips). Unfortunately, opposition such as ALEC and Koch are more interested in corporate profit, rather than the profit of the environment and the average Joe. There is at least one profit that is quite obvious and should be for all inhabitants of Earth; saving the environment from substantial degradation from carbon emissions. While the costs may be large, there are many success stories of businesses profiting from the green energy movement. Walt Disney Company has long been a supporter for environmental protection and lowering carbon emissions. This company has created an internal carbon tax, making all divisions pay for emitting carbon. It inspires employees to use less energy and create less carbon. In the process Disney has saved billions within their parks by utilizing green energy and conserving energy where it can. Dow chemicals has also spent one billion dollars on energy efficiency since 1994 and has profited nine billion dollars in energy savings (Carbon Nation). Another successful business story is Stony Field Farm, an organic yogurt company, who built a waste treatment plant due to surpassing the capacity of the local waste water systems. They trap gases created by the waste and use said gas to operate their facility. They took something that cost them money and turned it into a literal profit center. The savings of green energy might not be immediately apparent but many of these companies had been moving forward with plans for over a decade. In the end, profits have certainly been made and initially this is the end goal for all companies. These are all profits that can be made by the corporate giant; however, smaller businesses and homeowners can easily profit as well by utilizing solar and wind energy. Ultimately, what is at stake here is the very existence of mankind. Humans cannot continue on the path to carbon production without ensuring their inevitable demise. Nature takes in about half of the carbon humans produce, the other half continues to heat up the planet. If solutions are not implemented soon, humans could be looking at disappearing coral reefs, spreading deserts, and the chilling of the British Isles and Scandinavia, while the rest of the world heats up (Appenzeller). Adversely, mankind needs to become producers of energy, not consumers. It is very apparent that there are many issues with Americas current energy utilization; however, many companies are already setting the example and moving forward in the direction that will rectify these problems. The future holds many clean energy options full of promise for profit, the planet and large economic growth. Many of these solutions will cost a substantial amount of money to implement but the profits that can be generated down the road far surpass the cost now. Education is pertinent in beginning to make a cultural change that will convince citizens to join in and begin to recycle and knowingly reduce carbon emissions. The more households that are on board, the more the effects will be seen for future generations. In summarization, as what is considered to be one of the greatest countries in the world, America has the responsibility to set an example by beginning to make changes in the environment and implement laws that will ensure the future of the planet.

All of the sources in which I have used in my paper have been cited using MLA documentation. I understand that if SAFE ASSIGN identifies any sources that I used in my paper that I did not cite, I will receive a zero for this paper. Nancy Chenoah Findley 11/05/2014

Works CitedAllen, Dennis, et al. Build it Green. Home Remodeling Green Building Guidelines. March 2007. Print.Appenzeller, Tim. The Case of the Missing Carbon. National Geographic. Oct. 2011: n. pag. Print.Brown, Lester. World on Edge. New York: W. W Norton 7 Company, 2011. Print.Carbon Nation. Dir. Peter Byck. 2010. Earth School Education Foundation. DVD.City of Boulder Colorado. Bouldercolorado.gov. Web. 21 Nov 2014.ClimateProgress. Largest City in Vermont Now Gets All Its Power From Wind, Water and Biomass. Thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/09/15/3567307/Vermont-renewable-power/Web 5 Nov. 2014.Ford, Ariel. How and Why to Get (or Create) a Green Job: Q & A with Van Jones. Personal interview. Sep. 2012.Global Climate Change. "NASA Scientists React to 400 Ppm Carbon Milestone." climate.nasa.gov./400ppmquotes/ 29 Sep. 2014. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.Iwaro, Joseph. "An Integrated Approach for Sustainable Design and Assessment of Residential Building Envelope." International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies (2013): n. pag. Oxford Journals. Web. 4 April 2014.Johnson, George. Plugging into the Sun. National Geographic. Sep. 2009: n. pag. Print.Martin, Harold., et al Re:search. Converting Waste to Energy. Vol. 9, 2012. Print.Nijhuis, Michelle The Price of Power. National Geographic. Mar. 2009: n. pag. Print.NRDC. "Risky Gas Drilling Threatens Health, Water Supplies." Web. 20 Oct. 2014.Office of energy and Planning. Nh.gov. Web. 21 Nov 2014.Orth Martin. Completing the Energy Transition. Personal Interview. 21 Mar. 2014.Phillips, Ari. Koch Brothers and ALEC Expand Fight on Clean Energy Users. Apr. 25 2014. Web. Sawin, Janet Laughlin. The Role of Government in the Development and Diffusion of Renewable Energy technologies; Wind Power in the United States, California, Denmark, and Germany, 1970-2000. Fletcher school of Law and Diplomacy, 2001. Ann Arbor: UMI, 2001. Print.

. .