To Drill or Not to Drill

To Drill or Not to Drill

Luz Rivera

HUM/111

5/18/2014

Martha Bodhnarain

The energy debate in the United States can be rather heated as both sides fully believe that the path they advocate is the right thing for the country to do for the future. On the one side, you have individuals that believe that the country must decrease the dependence the country has on oil, foreign and domestic, by investing in more alternative sources of renewable energy. The other side of the topic believes that the United States has enough oil supplies that could be domestically produced to reduce the dependence on foreign oil without spending a great deal of money on new technologies.

My position on the issue is that the country should look for every way possible to reduce the dependence we have on oil of any kind. Oil is a limited resource, and that while there is the possibility of hundreds of years of oil located in the United States, I believe that the damage that could occur to the environment is not worth continuing the oil exploration here. “According to the Renewable Energy Association (REA), solar power is the fastest-growing energy technology” (Hargreaves, 2012, p. 57). This is a great start, but it is important to continue exploring how to replace oil and other fossil fuels for a better energy policy. Over time, renewable energy sources will become able to produce as much energy as oil, but only if the time is taken now to start investing in these technologies. Scientists have even looked at how algae can be used to power our vehicles and be used for other energy purposes. According to Brune, Lundquist and Benemann (2009), “Harvest of algal biomass followed by anaerobic digestion for production of methane gas remains one of the more feasible energy recovery processes” (p. 1139).

My perceptual blocks and habits that hinder how I view the opposing side of this argument is that it seems as though they are not thinking of the long-term of impact that oil will have...