My choice for one of the free-pick “Room for Debates” articles was “Clean Coal, or a Dirty Shame.” I picked this article because it discussed a new capture-carbon plant that would basically take in carbon emissions from the air and store them in rock formations. This type of plant will prevent those emissions from getting trapped in the atmosphere, which creates global warming. However, there is much debate on whether or not the United States should continue building this plant. The pro-plant side argues that there are so many air pollutants and carbon emissions in the air caused by other plants that use fossil fuels as their source of energy. By having this plant, we can combat climate change, which is an issue that has been affecting our Earth for decades. However, the anti-plant side makes good claims for not building the plant. First, the plant costs 7 billion dollars to build and regulate, which is quite expensive, and the plant isn’t even finished yet. Second, the plant will release other air pollutants and cause harmful effects to our communities, such as ash ponds. Also, the corporations operating the carbon-capture plant will most likely sell the carbon dioxide back to oil companies to gain profits, allowing oil companies to extract more oil and release more carbon dioxide into the air. Finally, the process of storing the carbon dioxide in rock formations is yet to be proven safe, since there is only evidence that it is.
Personally, I believe that the US shouldn’t build the capture-carbon plant. There are other efficient ways to prevent global warming and climate change, such as solar energy, wind energy, and geothermal energy. I would really like to know where you stand on this subject, so let’s discuss!
I agree with your stance on the issue because, like you mentioned, there are definitely more efficient ways to combat climate change. It would be useless to build a carbon plant that would not only encourage oil companies to continue their harmful practices, but that would also contribute to the accumulation of new pollutants.
ReplyDeleteProfit should not be a motive involved when tackling climate change. Therefore, funding should not pose trouble, because despite attempts to belittle the issue, it is very serious problem that has only gotten worse in recent years. The US should adjust their funds to confront global warming and ensure the longevity of life on this planet. This could be done by investing in solar electricity and new methods of transportation. The general public's attitude towards eco friendly practices should also change, and this could be achieved by putting down investments that would make clean forms of energy more accessible, which would ultimately reduce carbon emissions.
I also agree with your perspective on this issue, it seems to be useless to invest in a plant that is not entirely proven safe for the environment. Why should corporations operating the carbon-capture plant continue to invest in this 7 billion dollar project when it hasn’t even been built completely, and could cause no difference in the amount of air pollution? Also what difference does it make to re-sell the carbon dioxide back to oil companies if the purpose of this plant is to prevent the continuation of global warming? By selling carbon dioxide to oil companies it helps to create more air pollution for the environment, and also allows these corporations to gain profit furthering global warming. In my opinion, this plant makes no difference towards global warming, but helps to create more air pollution.
ReplyDelete