Energy at it Finest……Maybe
By: Jordan Fitting
BACKGROUND: Energy is essential to our
everyday lives. Anything you can think of requires energy, our cellphones,
computers, fans, televisions, and most anything else. These are all things we
use daily. Apart from these mainstream energy sources there are also some
technological energy sources around the world. Presidential candidate Hillary
Clinton has certain ideas and beliefs when it comes to how we get this everyday
energy, and how we should use it. Hillary Clinton is the Democratic candidate
in this election, and she has been the Secretary of State during both terms of
the Obama Administration. She has long
been known to support President Obama in all of his policies and ideals. Secretary Clinton believes that the United
States needs to invest in the research and implementation of renewable energy
sources such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric.
She is completely against drilling for oil in order to obtain fossil
fuels to power our nation. She feels
that it is a very invasive and destructive process that harms the environment
that is irreversible and unable to be fixed.
Not only is she against drilling for oil, but she is also an extreme
adversary of “fracking” or hydraulic fracturing. She demands that the Keystone XL pipeline
never receives enough funding in order to be completed. Mrs. Clinton is also an advocate of
redeveloping former coalmine sites for alternative uses.
PURPOSE: In this blog, I will be
discussing how different Hillary Clinton’s energy policies are. I will be discussing where the flaws and
discrepancies are in her ideas regarding renewable energy, oil drilling,
fracking, and the Keystone XL pipeline.
EVIDENCE: First, Mrs. Clinton’s renewable
energy plans call for a $60 billion “Clean Energy Challenge” in order to even
get off the ground. In order for her to
do this, however, she would have to increase taxes on the public. This tax will most likely be imposed on the
middle and lower class, as Clinton is know to support corporate elitists who
are a part of the top percentage in earners in the United States and even the
world. The tax increase on the middle
and lower classes will be at least a 5-10% increase in order to cover the
startup cost for the “Challenge,” and, therefore, would cause an even larger
separation between the upper and lower classes.
While the social class gap increases between the upper and lower class, the
middle class would continue to disappear.
Second, her ideas regarding oil
drilling are completely absurd. She is
quoted with saying that all oil drilling in the world should be stopped “at all
costs as it could…be detrimental to all of society.” Oil drilling does not harm the environment
to the extent that Mrs. Clinton believes, and the environment is constantly
being destroyed and rebuilt as a natural process. The environment changes drastically every
millennium, and the environment does not suffer “a large portion of the world’s
pollution.” If the United States would
to start drilling for oil domestically, then we would be able to lower the
price of gas; create jobs; and improve the overall economy due to the lowered
reliance on overpriced Saudi oil. Not
only does drilling not harm the environment in an extreme way, but also the
study that Clinton bases all of her renewable energy claims on was done by
Oceana, a nonprofit agency that was hired by the Clinton campaign to research
the issue. Clinton also believes that
fracking, hydraulic fracturing, is an inefficient and destructive process by
which oil is obtained. The process is
performed by injecting water into an oil deposit in the earth’s crust until the
deposit bursts into a capturing mechanism.
It is proven to be the most efficient method of obtaining oil. Not to mention that every other candidate has
a renewable energy plan, so Clinton is not using a “ground-breaking” idea with
this policy.
Clinton
does not support the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline because it “could
pose a threat to the local environment and water resources.” This is something that she has told to
America, and it can be put to rest by using the Trans-Alaska oil pipeline that
solved the energy crisis that Alaska was experiencing at the time of its conception. This pipeline would not only streamline oil
right into the United States, but it would also make it possible to stop
importing oil from the Saudis that are currently controlling the entire oil
market due to the vice grip they have over middle eastern oil fields. Canada would also be helping with the funding
of the $8 billion project (which is only a fraction of what it would save the
US in oil imports in the coming decade), and the US has not had a conflict with
the nation of Canada since the War of 1812 (unlike with Saudi Arabia).
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, Hillary Clinton
has extremely flawed ideas when it comes to the so-called “energy crisis” the
United States is experiencing right now.
She feels the need to raise taxes on the middle and lower classes by at
least 5% in order to start a $60 billion “Clean Energy Challenge,” which would
drive a larger gap between the social classes.
She also wants to completely rid the US of oil drilling and fracking
because they are “destructive and harmful.”
This is a completely absurd idea because if the United States increased
drilling and fracking, it would only boost the economy. Finally, she feels that a Trans-Canada oil pipeline
that is very similar to the Trans-Alaska pipeline would “harm the environment
and water sources” even though it would only create jobs and lower oil costs in
the US because it would no longer have to import it from the Middle East.
Sources
http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/07/analysis-here-are-7-big-problems-with-hillarys-green-energy-plans/
No comments:
Post a Comment