Pennington 1

Mason Pennington

Professor Waggoner

English Composition II

2 May 2021

Is Green Energy a Possibility in the Future?

About a month ago, I was at a friends house with a couple of other people. One of the

guys had gotten there late and was talking about his new car which happened to be a Tesla. For

those that do not know, Teslas are fully electric cars that rely on no gas or fossil fuels

whatsoever. Later that night, when all of us were leaving, he offered to give me a ride home in it.

I gladly accepted the offer and we began the drive back to my house. Although I was skeptical

about the performance of an all electric car, I was astonished. The car went 0 to 60 in less than 3

seconds, and had all sorts of capabilities to ensure safety, comfort, and efficiency. Not to

mention, the car got 300 miles of drive off of a 16 hour charge. All of this sounded amazing, and

it seemed ridiculous why people were still pouring money into cars that run off of gas and other

fossil fuels. This got me thinking, and I wondered why we have not converted other machines

into being electric since Tesla could make a car that does it. On an even bigger scale, how come

the world is not running off of other sources of energy since this car performs so well and is

much more efficient. However, just because a company can make a car that is fully electric does

not mean that other machines can work the same way. Obviously, converting to an all green

energy world is no easy task, and upon doing more research, it almost seems impossible. Despite

some sources of green energy being possible, it is almost impossible to convert to a totally green

nation because it costs too much, the transition is too difficult, and it just is not convenient

enough.
 Pennington 2

As many know, the pressing issue of renewable energy has been a point of contention for

years now. In recent years, the world has seen changes in climate, air quality, and decline in

natural resources. However, the world was not always like this, and renewable energy was not

always a concern. Dating back to the early and mid 1900’s, the entire world saw a boom in

industrial production. Factories and mills were popping up everywhere and new inventions like

the steam engine and burning coal for energy were used in abundance to fuel the society that

strived to always do more. Because of this, our nation built a reliance on fossil fuels and other

non-renewable resources. It was not until recently that we realized the effects of using fossil

fuels on the large scale we do today. In today's time, we have the ability to create forms of green

energy, so why don’t we?

Green energy is extremely difficult to transition to because the nation uses so many fossil

fuels now. Non renewable energy takes up the smallest sector in our total electricity generation

for the country. In fact, according to the Detroit News, Today in the U.S. 33 percent of electricity

generation is from coal, 33 percent from natural gas and 20 percent nuclear. While rising

steadily, only 13 percent is from renewable energy.” (Wolfram). Obviously, very little renewable

energy is utilized in the United States, and transitioning to it could be an extreme challenge.

However, this does not stop some countries from having lofty goals. Many countries in Europe

have banded together with a common goal to reduce emissions by a large margin by the year

2050. According to Teresa Pakulska, “The EU adopted a broad package of 2020 commitments: a

20% increase in energy efficiency, a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and a 20%

increase in renewable energy. The assumption is that in 2050 more than 80% of electricity will

come from renewable energy sources.” (Pakulska). Obviously, 80% is an astronomical increase.

It gets even more incredible when viewing what Europe’s energy situation looks like currently.
 Pennington 3

Despite these goals made in 2009, Europe has failed to reach any of them, and roughly 85% of

their energy comes from non-renewable sources. This is what would happen all across the globe.

The world is too industrialized and will struggle to stop using fossil fuels.

Another step of the transition process is the issue of the workforce. Oil and gas

companies are a massive market around the world, and they employ massive amounts of people

each year. In fact, the American Petroleum Institute claims that the industry employs almost 10

million people. (“How many…Created?”). That is 5.6 percent of employment in the United

States. This industry is nowhere close to shrinking each year. The number of people employed

each year increases by about 9.68% and is projected to grow exponentially by the year 2025.

With this in mind, how could someone stop this industry entirely when it has not even peaked.

Perhaps some of the people in the natural gas workforce could go to the green energy sector, but

it is really not that simple. Anyone that makes that transition would be in a totally different

environment then before, and they would need lots of training and possibly even schooling to

become a true beneficial member of the green industry. And even after that would happen, it

would take years for the green energy sector to get as big as the oil industry. For many of those

years, many would suffer the effects of layoffs and unemployment as the natural gas industry got

forced out.
 Pennington 4

Figure 1 shows a chart of how the world is fueled and its predictions for the future. It can be

seen that even by 2040, it is predicted that hydrocarbons (coal and natural gas) will still make

up 77% of all energy, while nuclear, hydro, wind, and solar only accommodate about 23%.

(Lutter)

Lastly, a change like this can not just happen overnight. To convert to an all green nation,

America would need a full mobilization across the country, bigger than any project ever done.

This would be years and years of constant construction to rid something that will ultimately be

ruined by other countries. This is because currently, the United States uses about 16 percent of

the total world energy. (Lutter). Although this may seem like a lot, other countries like China

make up a whopping 34 percent of the global energy consumption. So, even if the government

were to spend trillions of dollars to create a more green nation, other countries would be able to
 Pennington 5

stick to old means of energy and cancel out all of the grueling work and countless dollars poured

in.

Another reason that green energy can not be a main source of energy is because it is not

convenient enough. Although green energy can be just as efficient as non-renewable energy, it

may not be readily available. According to Clive Best, “Modern society depends on always

available power. If power goes down then society stops. There are no phones, no internet, no

ATMs, no refrigeration, no sewage pumps – nothing” (Best). When relying on different types of

green energy, a new variable is introduced which can limit the amount of energy that can be

produced. With solar energy, the amount of sunlight in a day can constrict the amount of energy

a town or city gets. With wind energy, no wind can put energy production at a total standstill.

And lastly, water energy can be limited by the amount of rainfall and other factors in the

environment. If one of these were to happen, cities would be left in turmoil. In the event of a

wide scale blackout, robbing and looting could occur until there was enough energy to get things

up and running again. The same goes for the transportation industry. If every vehicle was electric

or powered by a renewable energy source, time would have to be allotted for that vehicle to

recharge. Depending on the vehicle, it could take hours. For instance, imagine charging a

commercial plane with only electricity from a wind turbine. Today’s generation is one of instant

gratification. A need that only fossil fuels can provide. With our current system, there is no need

for a plane or a car to stop and charge. Just put fuel in it and it is good to go.

Also, there are forms of energy that are not as efficient as burning coal. While solar and

hydroelectric energy can keep up with burning coal, solar energy lacks on many levels.

According to Christopher Helman from Forbes, “So is the solar revolution finally here? Not

quite. Even after a decade of rampant growth solar energy still barely moves the needle in the
 Pennington 6

U.S. energy mix. In fact, solar merely equals the amount of electricity that the nation generates

by burning natural gas captured from landfills'' (Helman). Obviously, the main source of natural

gas energy is not contrived from landfills. In fact, only about 17.7 percent of it is. So if solar

energy can not even produce more energy than a small portion of electricity from natural gas,

then what makes anyone think that solar energy could power anything on a major scale. Many

might think that the sacrifice in energy is worth the cleaner form in energy, but the burning of

coal is really not as harmful as one might think. In today's generation, the world has found new

ways of producing energy with coal in a much more environment friendly fashion. Christopher

Helman speaks on this by saying “Coal has gotten immensely cleaner over the past generation.

And new and better ways will be found to extract energy from coal without sending its

dangerous byproducts into the environment. It’s scalable and reliable in ways that renewable

energy sources simply aren’t” (Helman). With this in mind, why does the United States pour so

much time into finding greener alternatives when they can try to perfect the form of energy used

now. Before making the huge jump to green energy, the logical approach would be to attempt to

find ways to reduce emissions to the nation’s main energy sources instead of scrapping them

altogether.

Lastly, green energy is just not very cost efficient in many ways. The first of these is

storage. It costs about a dollar to store a barrel of oil or natural gas for a couple of months. In

turn, the United States has about one to two months of any type of hydrocarbon stored at any

time. (Lutter). In contrast, it costs about 200 dollars to store the energy equivalent of 1 barrel of

oil with batteries. Also, instead of one to two months of energy storage, with electricity there is

only about 2 hours of energy storage for the whole nation. Obviously, these numbers do not look

great, and it is because there just is not a cost effective way to store energy on such a large scale.
 Pennington 7

It is one thing for a town to be fully powered by green energy but a nation is a whole different

story. It is just a dynamic that will not work.

When running a few calculations, the true cost of a zero emission nation is daunting.

According to Windustry, wind energy surpassed hydroelectric power as the largest contributor of

renewable energy. So how much would it really cost to create enough wind turbines to power

every part of America? According to Leda Zimmerman from MIT, it would take about 4,000 5

kilowatt wind turbines to produce enough energy to power New York City. According to

Windustry, a turbine costs 1.3 to 2.2 million per megawatt for each turbine. This means that to

fully power New York City it would cost 26- 44 billion dollars. Keep in mind, that is just New

York City. The whole nation would be a ridiculous cost. Not to mention how much it would cost

to install and transport all of these parts across the country. Illaria Antoncecchi talks about in one

of her journals how the grueling process of transportation is a mess. The entire process would

need so much man power and supplies that it would put the nation into a halt to focus on the

need for more green energy. On top of all of this, Where are you supposed to put all these pieces

of equipment? To find space for all of these turbines or solar farms there would have to be

massive clearances of forests, parks, and other aspects of nature. This would be very

counterintuitive for a movement to help the Earth. Also, by the time that manufacturing is done

with all of the equipment and it is all transported, it will be years of added greenhouse gas

emissions for the cause of making all of this equipment and installing it.

Many people might try to contradict the previous points by bringing up Alexandria

Ocasio cortez’s “Green New Deal.” However, the Green New Deal really is not as great as one

might think. For those that do not know, the goal of the Green New Deal is to be net zero carbon

by the year 2030. The term net zero refers to the amount of carbon and other emissions released
 Pennington 8

into the atmosphere. When net zero is reached, it means that the amount of greenhouse gases that

are released into the atmosphere are also taken out. This does sound like a good thing, but when

looking at the fine print, there are many serious issues. One of these is the cost. People predict

that the Green New Deal will cost about 5 trillion dollars. For the true scale of this number, many

do not know that a trillion is one thousand billions. Currently, the United States is about 28

trillion dollars in debt, so the last thing our country needs is a new plan that will not only cost a

fortune, but will also ruin industry in our country. America is a huge part of the world oil and

natural gas trade, and many businesses that run off that are huge role players in the national

economy. Introducing this would ruin an entire industry and leave the country in a state of

economic turmoil.

Another point that was earlier mentioned, is that if the country were to truly reach net

zero carbon by the end of 2030, what is going to stop countries from just ramping up production

or continuing to mismanage resources. In the grand scheme of things, if the Green New Deal

were to go through, by the end of the decade all of our hard work may amount to nothing

because of the carelessness of other countries.

Government regulation would also be a major issue in the Green New Deal. This new

policy would set limitations to how much is produced and regulate how much is used. For

starters, setting limitations is the worst thing to do coming out of a pandemic. Business and the

economy have been brought to a halt and haven’t been able to run at full capacity for about a

year. The nation needs time to recover from this drop in business and allow them to get back to

the way it used to be. Applying a regulation would just burden what's already been damaged

enough. Also, regulations will just cause other overseas buyers to find business elsewhere

instead of buying ours. This is because companies in the United States would only be able to
 Pennington 9

hold a certain amount at any given time. So when they run out, there will be no more to trade at a

global scale, and foreign nations will find different means of getting oil and natural gas.

Although it is not advisable for the country to convert to all green energy, there are

certainly ways that people can cut back on emissions. However, the biggest is in the electric and

transportation industry. Currently, in the total breakdown of greenhouse gas emissions:

1) Transportation-28%

2) Electricity- 27%

3) Industry-22%

4) Commercial and Residential- 12%

5) Agriculture- 10%

(“Sources of...Emissions). Together, electricity and transportation make up 55 percent of total

emissions in the nation. With new technology, there is a solution for these numbers. With many

new appliances, there are energy saving qualities that come with them to make sure they make

the most of the electricity they receive. As for automobiles, the future of cars is electric run cars.

Most large manufacturers have already made electric cars. Companies like Ford, Tesla, Nissan,

BMW, Kia, and many more have made cars that release very little emissions. With all of this

being said, the true solution is not reworking the whole country's infrastructure to fit a “New

Green Deal.” The solution lies in the innovations that can be made in the industries that already

exist. As a country, perfecting the energy department by pouring trillions of dollars into things

that are unfamiliar is just irrational. Instead, putting money into things familiar to us is the true

key to a greener America.

In conclusion, it is almost impossible and not advisable to convert to all green energy

throughout the nation. As I think back to the night when I rode in my friends Tesla, it is more
 Pennington 10

evident that efforts should be focused more on our efforts to other industries and rework them

with less emissions. Converting to a nation of all green nations is just too expensive, the

transition is too difficult, and green energy just is not readily available enough for our society.

Lastly, the most viable solution to green energy right now is Alexandria Ocasio Cortez’s Green

New Deal. Again, this “solution” runs into the problems previously mentioned. It costs too much

and promises unreasonable solutions. With all of this being said, the only true solution to a

greener America rests in perfecting existing industries, and a totally green nation is almost

impossible to achieve.
 Pennington 11

Works Cited

Antoncecchi, Ilaria, et al. “Research Hub for an Integrated Green Energy System Reusing
Sealines for H2 Storage and Transport.” Environmental Engineering & Management
Journal (EEMJ), vol. 19, no. 10, Oct. 2020, pp. 1647–1656. EBSCOhost,
search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eih&AN=147933608&site=eds-live.
Accessed 25 March 2021.

Helman, Christopher. “Solar Power Is Booming, But Will Never Replace Coal. Here's Why.”

Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 24 Apr. 2014,

www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2014/04/24/solar-is-booming-but-will-never-

replace-coal/?sh=7816c6876ebb. Accessed 25 March 2021.

“How Many Jobs Has the Oil and Natural Gas Industry Created?” Energy API, www.api.org/oil-

and-natural-gas/energy-primers/hydraulic-fracturing/how-many-jobs-has-the-oil-and-

natural-gas-industry-created. Accessed 25 March 2021.

“How Many Wind Turbines Would It Cost to Power All of New York City?” Mit Engineering,

engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/how-many-wind-turbines-would-it-take-to-

power-all-of-new-york-city/#:~:text=electricity%20from%20lightning%3F-,How

%20many%20wind%20turbines%20would%20it%20take,all%20of%20New%20York

%20City%3F&text=According%20to%20Paul%20Sclavounos%2C%20professor,City's

%20average%20annual%20electric%20consumption. Accessed 25 March 2021.

“How Much Do Wind Turbines Cost?” Windustry,

www.windustry.org/how_much_do_wind_turbines_cost#:~:text=The%20costs%20for

%20a%20utility,%243%2D%244%20million%20installed. Accessed 25 March 2021.

Pakulska, Teresa, and Nuno Carlos Leitão. “Green Energy in Central and Eastern
European (CEE) Countries: New Challenges on the Path to Sustainable Development.”
 Pennington 12

Energies (19961073), vol. 14, no. 4, Feb. 2021, p. 884. EBSCOhost,

“The Logical Fallacy of Renewable Energy.” Clive Best, 4 May 2016, clivebest.com/blog/?

p=7120. Accessed 25 March 2021.

Lutter, Randall, and Mark P. Mills. “The ‘New Energy Economy’: An Exercise in Magical

Thinking.” Manhattan Institute, 25 Nov. 2019, www.manhattan-institute.org/green-

energy-revolution-near-impossible. Accessed 25 March 2021.

“Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 4 Dec. 2020,

www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions#:~:text=In%202018%2C

%20greenhouse%20gas%20emissions,of%20U.S.%20greenhouse%20gas%20emissions.

Accessed 25 March 2021.

Wolfram, Gary. “Can We Replace Fossil Fuels by 2030?” The Detroit News, DetroitNews, 12

May 2016, www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2016/05/11/can-replace-fossil-

fuels/84254744/. Accessed 25 March 2021.