The Future Source of Energy
INTRO
How would the human race react to an environmental crisis where the air in the atmosphere is barely breathable? What would happen if there is an epidemic that could kill off animals, and even humans, all because the world would not switch to more of a harmless source of energy? Switching sources could also cause the economy to plumate mainly because of how expensive it will be. Also, it will depend on if all of the main countries throughout the world switch as well. At any point, an environmental disaster could happen caused by the overuse of fossil fuels, but is it worth switching to a safer source, but not as efficient and cost effective just to try to prevent a disaster that may never happen? The question still stands if the world will decide to go the safe route and risk going into a depression, continue using fossil fuels as a main source of energy.
BACKGROUND
Throughout history, people have used fossil fuels for heat, to run equipment such as trains with the use of coal, and various other things. Before technology, no one really knew too much about what consequences there could possibly be by using fossil fuels. As technology advanced, individuals started studying and learning different types of ways to produce energy. As time progressed, “pollution levels increased, and the world’s fossil fuel …show more content…
These include wind power, geothermal, tidal power, hydropower, and biofuels. One of the first times the United States tried to promote the change to a more safe form of power was during the 1970’s. President Jimmy Carter planned to develop solar energy as a large part of the nation 's energy by starting with putting solar panels on the White House. However, once Jimmy was out of office, big oil companies bought out most of the patents on solar technologies, and the Reagan administration took the solar panels off of the White House ("Renewable Energy
INTRO
How would the human race react to an environmental crisis where the air in the atmosphere is barely breathable? What would happen if there is an epidemic that could kill off animals, and even humans, all because the world would not switch to more of a harmless source of energy? Switching sources could also cause the economy to plumate mainly because of how expensive it will be. Also, it will depend on if all of the main countries throughout the world switch as well. At any point, an environmental disaster could happen caused by the overuse of fossil fuels, but is it worth switching to a safer source, but not as efficient and cost effective just to try to prevent a disaster that may never happen? The question still stands if the world will decide to go the safe route and risk going into a depression, continue using fossil fuels as a main source of energy.
BACKGROUND
Throughout history, people have used fossil fuels for heat, to run equipment such as trains with the use of coal, and various other things. Before technology, no one really knew too much about what consequences there could possibly be by using fossil fuels. As technology advanced, individuals started studying and learning different types of ways to produce energy. As time progressed, “pollution levels increased, and the world’s fossil fuel …show more content…
These include wind power, geothermal, tidal power, hydropower, and biofuels. One of the first times the United States tried to promote the change to a more safe form of power was during the 1970’s. President Jimmy Carter planned to develop solar energy as a large part of the nation 's energy by starting with putting solar panels on the White House. However, once Jimmy was out of office, big oil companies bought out most of the patents on solar technologies, and the Reagan administration took the solar panels off of the White House ("Renewable Energy