Summary:The BP oil spill was a clear indicator that we need to find safer and cleaner energy sources for our cars, homes, and businesses. An example of a clean alternative is biofuels. Biofuels are energy grown on the surface of the land, instead of deep underground. However, although there are many clean and safe biofuels, there are also some that are dangerous to the envioronment. One of these harmful biofuels is ethanol from corn. Ethanol is resposible for more global warming than the amount of oil it produces. That means the amount of global warming it causes is greater than the amount of oil it produces! Ethanol also contaminates our sources of water and causes the price of food to skyrocket. There are alternative biofuels, such as ones made from switchgrass and winter-cover crops. However, these biofuels are being left alone in the dirt while the ethanol biofuels are being used left and right. Worsening the issue, the EPA recently changed the amount of ethanol we may use in our gasoline from 10% to 15% for all vehicles made since 2007. The burning of ethanol from tailpipes of cars causes air pollution, and it is even more of pollutant now that there is 15% of ethanol in gasoline. All of this is being funded by taxpayers, so that means that the money we pay for taxes is going towards ethanol, a substance that harms our envioronment. With this being said, we should look for cleaner biofuels so we are putting our tax money towards something effective and environmentally safe.
Reflection:
I had no idea that ethanol was that bad for the environment. On top of that, I am even more shocked at the fact that the government continues to allow the use of ethanol in gasoline, knowing that it pollutes our air when cars drive. I do not like the fact that our tax money is going towards ethanol, because that basically means that we are paying to harm the environment. I think that we should find an alternative substance to put into our gasoline, something that is more environmentally friendly. That way, we would be paying for something that is helping the environment, not hurting it. In addition, I was also very surprised that the EPA contributed to this issue by allowing the amount of ethanol in gasoline to rise from 10% to 15%. This is awful, considering that the EPA is supposed to help our environment, not contribute to negative aspects that are harming it. I hope that the EPA lowers this percentage in the future and I also hope that one day we will be able to find an alternative biofuel for our gasoline, so global warming does not progressively get worse and worse. Using all of this ethanol worries me because it plays a major role in global warming, so if we continue to use more and more of it, our earth will get worse and worse, and will have a shorter lifespan. I think the government and EPA and other environmentalists need to work together and come up with an alternative.
Questions:
1. How do you feel about putting your money (from taxes) towards ethanol, which is contributing to air pollution and global warming?
2. What are your opinions on the EPA raising the amount of ethanol allowed in gasoline from 10% to 15%? How do you think this will affect the environment?
3. What do you think needs to be done to prevent further damage and pollution to our environment (in particular the air)?
Link:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/10/20/greene.ethanol.risk/index.html?eref=rss_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+%28RSS%3A+Top+Stories%29
I think that this is a really big problem, and I didn't know much about it until I read this article. I knew a little bit about pollution front energy sources, but I had no idea that corn produces bad pollution into the air. I actually thought that it was good for the earth since we were using crops. Also, other sources should be used because using corn just to make ethanol is going to result in a lot of food shortages.
ReplyDelete1) I feel pretty upset that I have to contribute money that my family earned to harming the environment. First of all, it's ridiculous that we should have to pay for something that is bad for the Earth. Second of all, since we are harming the environment, more money is going to come out of our pockets later to help fix this. It is completely unfair that we are being forced to pay for something that we're just going to have to pay to fix later.
2) The EPA's job is to protect the environment, hence the name "Environmental Protection Agency." By raising the use of a polluting substance like ethanol, they are showing that they don't really care about this issue very much. This is wrong, because instead they should be looking into the other alternative energy sources and how to use them. It doesn't make sense at all for them to completely contradict their name.
3) To prevent furtherdamage and pollution to our environment, I think we need to start looking more into the alternative energy sources. If we narrow our sources of energy down into a few renewable, environmental friendly ones, then we would be much better off. There needs to be a specific organization, or a branch within the EPA that deals with only this since it is a big enough problem.
Here is a link to another website:
http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/dennis-byrne-barbershop/2010/11/congressional-showdown-looms-on-corpulent-ethanol-subsidies.html
It has more information about ethanol, and dealing with congress and other enforcers to get laws to be passed.
I found this to be surprising. I know that gasoline blended with ethanol is cheaper, but I had no idea that it was harming the environment. It's kind of hard to believe that something made from corn is doing so much damage. I also remember hearing way back about scientists and the government trying to create a car that ran purely on ethanol. Just imagine, if every car on the road ran on ethanol, how much more pollution there would be. I'd guess that it would grow exponentially.
ReplyDeleteHere is a video of a news report about the ethanol powered car: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGAMouRy3_Q
They claim that ethanol is "clean energy" but they must not realize the damage that it's really doing.
First of I am very suprised to learn that corn when used as a biofuel is harmful to the enviornment. I am really subprised because we recently learned that using other biofuels can be good.
ReplyDeleteRight now I, myself, do not have to really worry about my money going to the pollution. It is my mom that pays the taxes; therefore, I know that she likes to do what she can to help the enviornment. So I know that she is not so happy about how her money is going to the pollution. When I do have to pay taxes I hope that I wont have to pay taxes that contribute to the air pollution. If and when I have to pay these taxes I would not be happy.
The EPA's job is to protect the enviornment not to harm it. I think that allowing the EPA to raise the percentage is not a helpful thing. I am curious as to understand why they raised the percentage? Also I would like to know what is the acceptable percentage amount of ethonal that is accepted in the enviornment? I think in the long run it could be bad for the enviornment.
The main way to help the enviornment is to limit the amount that we can use. Another way to help the enviornment is to put filters on the machines that make the ethonal. Another question I have is why has this been going on without anyone writeing an article until now?