ipl-logo

The Pros And Cons Of US Energy Policy

793 Words4 Pages

U.S. energy policy is a patchwork of disconnected policies constructed for definite constituencies with no meaningful goal. The U.S. has need for fossil fuels, need for nuclear power, need for wind and solar, and subsidies for insulating and retrofitting buildings. The U.S. also have energy requirements for some instruments and fuel for automobiles. The question that is never asked and answered in the policy debate is this: What is the U.S. ultimate goal and when should the U.S. achieve it goal for energy? Here is main lines of thinking concerning the U.S. energy goals: 1 Seek the cheapest price for energy with the ramification that environmental aftermath should not be cataloged as part of the cost. 2 Complete a conversion to renewable energy as hastily as possible …show more content…

Goal 2 is the delusion views of every clean-tech executive and climate change activist. Goal 3 showed momentum before the accident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant and dashed hopes for a widespread nuclear renaissance. Goal 4 is being laud by the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

The current energy strategy is the de facto energy policy of the U.S., the disconnected energy policies are create for specific people with no coherent goal.
The U.S. energy policy would not matter barring for two things: 1 80 percent of the world’s energy is Fossil fuels. The U.S. cannot count on Fossil fuels to supply energy to the U.S. indefinitely. 2 Climate change consumes a large part of fossil fuels. No one knows the future, not President Obama, not the fossil scientists. But, the risks we face based on what is known today
About fossil fuel supplies two key things. Previously stated is that production of oil proper (leas condensate crude plus) has stalled since 2005. Second, the uncollected fossil fuels, notably natural gas and oil, will come from reserves that in general are less

Open Document