ipl-logo

The Pros And Cons Of Coal And Natural Gas

754 Words4 Pages

Fossil fuels have been the primary source of energy for the United States for decades. Coal and natural gas have been used to generate electricity, power vehicles, and heat homes. However, these nonrenewable resources come at a cost. Coal and natural gas extraction and production have environmental and human health implications. Therefore, it is essential to compare the benefits and limitations of both resources and analyze their costs.
Coal has been a crucial resource for energy generation for centuries. Coal-fired power plants generate almost 21% of the energy in the United States. Coal is relatively cheap, making it a cost-effective energy source. However, coal has several limitations. Coal extraction is a dangerous and challenging process …show more content…

Natural gas is relatively inexpensive and has lower emissions than coal, making it an attractive alternative. Natural gas extraction is also less dangerous than coal mining, and it has fewer environmental impacts. However, natural gas has its limitations. While natural gas is cleaner than coal, it still releases greenhouse gasses and contributes to climate change. The extraction process of natural gas can also cause environmental harm, such as groundwater contamination and habitat disruption. The cost of natural gas-generated electricity is also higher than coal-generated electricity, although the difference has decreased in recent years.
A cost-benefit analysis can help determine which energy source is better. The benefits of coal include its low cost, abundance, and the availability of technology to extract it. However, the limitations of coal include its negative impact on the environment and human health. The benefits of natural gas include its low cost, lower emissions than coal, and less dangerous extraction process. However, the limitations of natural gas include its contribution to …show more content…

Investing in renewable energy sources like wind and solar is also essential to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and mitigate climate change.
In addition to the environmental and health impacts of coal and natural gas, it's also important to consider the economic implications of each energy source. Coal mining and natural gas extraction create jobs and support local economies in areas where these resources are abundant. However, the cost of these jobs may come at a price.
Coal mining, for example, can be dangerous and often requires workers to work in hazardous conditions. The risk of accidents and health issues such as black lung disease is high for coal miners. Natural gas extraction, on the other hand, has been associated with environmental issues such as water pollution and methane emissions. These issues have resulted in public concern and calls for stricter regulations, which can add to the cost of natural gas production.
Despite the challenges associated with coal and natural gas, they remain important sources of energy for the United States. It's up to policymakers, industry leaders, and consumers to weigh the costs and benefits of each energy source and work together to create a sustainable

Show More
Related
810 Words | 4 Pages

Fracking the Good and The Bad In the essay, “Hope It’s in Your Backyard,” by Neil deMause, he wrote about the positive and negative factors of fracking and its effect on the world. The ramifications of fracking could be devastating to the earth with regards to natural gas and oil. It is debated that fracking, in the United States, would stimulate economic growth, lower gas prices, create more jobs, and make our country independent for oil and natural gas. The effects of burning fossil fuels is negative to the earth’s climate and the cause of some pollution. Natural gas is cheaper, but its effect on our ecosystem may be devastating.

Read More
2076 Words | 9 Pages

The air quality improves by using natural gas to generate electricity instead of coal. The use of natural gas reduces carbon dioxide emissions causing a decrease in air pollution. Some argue that since fracking allows us to obtain more oil, our dependency on foreign oil will decrease. Since our dependency should decrease other foreign countries will lower their tax rates. They will lower taxes because they know we are not dependent of them and their oil.

Read More
1603 Words | 7 Pages

Another benefit from switching to clean-burning natural gas is a decrease in pollutants in the air, which will decrease airborne illnesses and premature deaths. He discusses the impact of energy independence for countries that rely on insecure regions for their energy needs. For example, the U.S. will rely less on the Middle East, Europe will rely less on Russia and India will rely less on Iran. By presenting fracking as the answer to the world’s problems, Pierce counters the arguments of critics who cite the environmental problems of fracking. His paper is one-sided because he leaves out the other side of the debate by ignoring any negative aspects of fracking.

Read More
731 Words | 3 Pages

Natural Gas and Fracking:Economic Realities of Alternative Natural gas is a cornerstone of the US economy,providing a quarter of the country’s total energy. However the negative externality is heavy . The increase of energy production brings us environment pollution and economic problems. All these are related to Hydraulic Fracking. Since Hydraulic Fracking was used as a new technique of energy exploitation in 1947, it has eventually accounted for nearly 70% of natural gas development in North America.

Read More
1308 Words | 6 Pages

This quote conveys that gas from fracking has been an alternative source of fuel better than coal due to burning less damaging substances into the air which contributes to less early deaths to thousands of people and saves lives. Though fracking may be a better alternative to coal, having less dangerous chemicals, obtaining natural gas from fracking has non-beneficial effects that may lead to events coal cause too.

Read More
721 Words | 3 Pages

By fracking for natural gas and shifting from coal to natural gas power generation plants, we could benefit economically, save our environment, and save millions of gallons of

Read More
1244 Words | 5 Pages

Coal is used to heat a boiler that turns a turbine. The turbine turns the centrifugal force into electricity. Oil uses a combustion engine to produce the centrifugal force. Both of these methods create greenhouse gasses, however from coal power plants ash is emitted. This ash can spread making the local environment a little more polluted, but according to the BBC coal ash can emit thorium, uranium, radon along with lead and mercury.

Read More
1086 Words | 5 Pages

To what extent should we sacrifice the environment to become energy independent? Today in America, fracking has become a popular mean to extract oil and gas as a new technology, but unfortunately the process poses as a controversial issue throughout the country. Various issues are debated upon the topic as some say it is a better source of alternative fuel, while others argue that hydraulic fracturing, also referred to as fracking, is detrimental to citizens’ health and the environment. Altogether, we should banned the new technology of fracking before it provides long term, detrimental damage -- economic, environmental, and health-wise.

Read More
181 Words | 1 Pages

(Fracking and Poverty) Furthermore, “The gas industry has chosen to voluntarily tell what additives are used at each well site through the Frack Focus database” (“EIA Kids Natural Gas Basics”) So there are some disadvantages, but the advantages of fracking are more

Read More
343 Words | 2 Pages

Besides these benefits, I feel that fracking has too many adverse effects on the environment and communities that lives within the vicinity of fracking sites. I am very shocked by how our society embraces technology without thinking about its unintended impacts on our environment. We rarely focus on better and sustainable alternatives, particularly when developing energy. I am disappointed

Read More
679 Words | 3 Pages

Using natural gas from fracking is a better and safer alternative than using coal because natural gas does not emit as much carbon dioxide into our atmosphere. The graphs presented on natfuel.com shows that the amount of carbon dioxide

Read More
835 Words | 4 Pages

Source 1 states, “Shale gas emits half the carbon dioxide per unit of energy as does coal, and coal burning also emits metals such as mercury into the atmosphere that eventually settle back into our soils and waters.”. Fracking does less damage to the atmosphere than coal mining but yet people are trying to put an end to fracking. If America is powers their homes, cars, etc. through natural gases, coal mining will no longer be necessary and America can slow down global warming a little bit more. People who live near fracking sites are worried about the possibilities of water contamination due to the chemicals used to break apart the bedrock. Source 2 says, “Because fracking involves pumping... chemicals into the ground to

Read More
676 Words | 3 Pages

Globally coal plants are in production to meet the energy demands in countries that have lower standards of living when compared to the fully developed European and North American countries. The United States has aligned itself with the strictest coal regulations to attempt to single handedly lower the emissions associated with fossil fuels. Coal fired power plants serve about one third of the global energy market and in the United Sate’s political perspective, associated with the largest pollutant emissions. While in other parts of the world are looking to coal to meet their growing energy demands, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and politicians aim to limit new power plants thru rules and regulations.

Read More
906 Words | 4 Pages

Lastly, decreasing the quantity of coal fired power plants and the usage of coal will absolutely benefit our environment and is the best solution. The ways we can do this is by removing coal fired plants and instead create geothermal power plants. To begin with, we must shut down the oldest and dirtiest coal plants that have been around for generations. To illustrate, removing those horrible plants and invest in Geothermal plants will be more green for the environment. A Geothermal power plant gets “heat from within the earth.

Read More
995 Words | 4 Pages

Conventional energy sources based on natural gas and oil has to be proven highly effective drivers of economic progress, but the same time damaging to human health and environment. They are cyclic in nature, due to the effects of oligopoly in production and distribution. A transition to renewables-based energy system is looking increasingly as the cost of solar and wind have dropped substantially in the past few years, and continue to decline, while the price of oil and gas continuously vary. In fact, fossil fuels and renewables prices, social and environmental costs are heading in opposite directions.

Read More

More about The Pros And Cons Of Coal And Natural Gas

Related Topics

Open Document