Improving Current Energy Use

Improving Current Energy Use

We all know that energy is expensive. In our technological world, it seems difficult to accomplish daily tasks without the use of fossil fuels. We rely heavily on electricity and gasoline. As you step inside your house, your first order of business is to turn on the light. Most people can’t make it to school or work without the use of gasoline. With the flick of a switch or the touch of a button, the room around you is filled with light, the temperature in your house is under control, and your television set is filled with entertainment. We are bombarded with reminders of the high costs of energy each time we fill up the tank in the car or pay a monthly utility bill. We hear stories about energy on the television and read articles about it in the newspaper. Fossil fuels can cost you a large chunk of your paycheck. For the planet and for our wallets, there must be a greener way to produce and use this energy.

Whether or not you are concerned with the consequences of greenhouse gases, we are all concerned with the green in our wallets. Efficiently used energy is less costly; by harnessing energy from natural resources, we can use that power to save money with renewable energy resources (El-Ashry). With fuel efficient vehicles and appliances, we can save money on energy and benefit the economy overall. As our society begins to realize that energy conservation is beneficial to everyone, there seems to be a movement towards alternative energy resources (El-Ashry). As we make this transition to renewable energy sources, we should take action to improve our current sources of energy to save money and improve the economy until we are able to completely rely on alternative energy resources.

It will take decades to completely convert from a society that uses primarily fossil fuels for energy to an environmentally friendly, renewable energy using society (El-Ashry). While we are in the process of transferring to renewable energy resources, there are many things that we can do to make the fossil fuels that we are using currently, more environmentally friendly. The benefits that come from making the environment cleaner will also benefit the economy.
By being aware of ways to limit carbon emissions, we can ensure that our environment is a healthy place to live. Many people believe that environmental conditions do not affect them directly or personally, but a healthy environment allows maintenance of personal health. It has taken decades to finally realize that breathing toxic chemicals from cigarette smoke is harmful; it only makes sense that breathing pollution from fossil fuels is also harmful to your health (Jenkins). Smoking is a personal choice, but large companies that emit toxic chemicals into the air that we breathe, make the decision for all of us to breathe toxic chemicals. Health is essential for working and earning a living. Healthcare bills heavily outweigh the lower cost of fossil fuels. The use of fossil fuels may be cheaper initially, but it is sure to cost you in the long run.

Do you know where the electricity from your house comes from? Ninety-five percent of the electricity used in Utah is powered by coal (Western Resource Advocates). Coal is an inexpensive energy source, but it may be more costly in the long run. Coal is used widely in Utah because it is a common resource in the state. Utah has two major coal mines and three active coal plants (Western Resource Advocates). With this fossil fuel so close in proximity, it only makes sense to use coal for energy, right? There are several reasons why someone would not want coal used as a primary source of energy in their state. If coal is cheap and easy to come by, what is the problem?
If you don’t have your health, then you don’t have anything. Many people are not concerned with the air quality within the state because they do not believe that it has any effect on their health or way of life. Coal emits carbon dioxide when it is converted to energy (Hong). Salt Lake City, Logan and Provo are ranked in the top 10 most polluted cities in the country, according to the American Lung Association; coal plants in Utah emitted approximately sixty-six percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the state in 2006 (Monech). For each person in Utah, the state emitted 25 tons of carbon dioxide (Moench). Utah could have improved air quality without coal plants in the state.
Coal plants in Utah emit tons of toxic chemicals; products of coal combustion including sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxide, mercury, arsenic, uranium, thorium, radium, polonium and lead are emitted into the air that we all must breathe (Karltorp). While you may not be concerned with global warming, you should be concerned with the health risks associated with coal. Carbon emissions from coal affect the air quality and the asthma rate (Karltorp). Air quality and asthma rates have a strong positive correlation (Karltorp). Consequences of health issues from the low quality of air should be factored into the price of using coal as an energy source. The use of coal and pollution from carbon emission thereof could cost billions of dollars in healthcare (Monerch). We don’t know all of the health consequences of carbon emissions now, but by looking to the past, it is apparent that we do not want to wait to find out what the consequences will be.
If only there was a way to have the best of both worlds. If only we find a greener way to use this inexpensive fossil fuel which is an abundant natural resource in Utah. As it turns out, scientists have discovered a way use coal and without emitting harmful chemicals (Biello). With a process call carbon dioxide capture and storage or CCS, carbon dioxide emitted from coal when used for energy, is captured and stored underground before it can be emitted into the atmosphere (Biello). Carbon capture and storage decreases pollution and prevents damage to the environment (Biello). Less pollution in the air leads to a healthier society; a healthier society leads to a thriving economy. Carbon capture and storage does increase the cost of coal powered energy, but this cost is significantly outweighed by environmental and health cost benefits (Karltorp). When you take a look at the big picture, carbon capture and storage is beneficial for your health, the environment and your wallet. Nothing is more valuable than your health. A healthy environment leads to healthy people. Healthy people pay less for healthcare. The economy would benefit greatly from a healthier society and less healthcare costs.
Whether or not you believe in global warming, we all believe in saving money. Energy conservation is about more than just keeping the Earth green, it’s also about keeping green in your wallet. The state of Utah is in a great position to take advantage of carbon capture and storage and other ways of limiting carbon emissions. In a state that uses coal energy for ninety five percent of its electricity, Utah has the power to change coal emissions drastically with carbon capture and storage (Western Resource Advocates). The state of Utah has the power to improve the health of the people, the environment and the economy.

Large companies are responsible for a majority of carbon emissions. People are often weary of government regulations, but consumers would benefit from a policy that set limits on commercial carbon output. A cap and trade policy would cost companies with a greater carbon output and benefit companies with fewer emissions. Companies would have a “cap” on the amount of carbon emissions that they could release into the atmosphere, and would have the option to “trade” carbon emission limits with other companies for a profit (Ott). A cap and trade policy benefits businesses that are responsible enough to limit their greenhouse gas emissions. It would also penalize companies that put consumer’s health at risk with pollution. Consumers would benefit from cleaner air, and therefore, better health. Cap and trade policies have been implemented in European countries (Ott). The pollution that is emitted into the atmosphere now, not only affects our environment and health, but it also affects the future generation’s quality of life.
Some people believe that a cap and trade policy would increase energy prices. President Obama is planning ahead for this increase in prices; profits made from this policy would be used to counteract energy cost increases for families (Carey). Energy costs would be paid for in part by the big companies that are carelessly emitting pollution without any concern for your family’s health.
The plans in Europe have not found complete success yet, but their cap and trade policies have only made it to phase one (Ott). It will take several attempts for any new policy to find success. It is worth the consistency that this plan will require to make the big companies responsible for their actions. It will be worth the economic and health benefits associated with cleaner air.
Automobiles are powered by gasoline; gasoline is another fossil fuel that emits carbon dioxide. By making your vehicle more fuel efficient, money can be saved each time you fill up at the pump. Fuel efficient vehicles use less gasoline and therefore emit less carbon dioxide (Fuel Emissions). Carbon dioxide in the air is not good for the environment or for your health (Karltorp). Just as health costs from carbon emissions from coal can outweigh the benefits of inexpensive energy, carbon emissions from gasoline can also cost your health and your wallet. The less fuel we use, the better our environment will be. Not just by taking the bus or a bike, but by understanding the consequences of carbon emissions, we can become better prepared to limit our carbon footprint. Carbon emissions are damaging to the environment, your health and your wallet.

Hybrid cars use two or more sources of energy; most hybrid cars include some form of electricity. Hybrid cars may be more expensive with the initial investment, but will save you money in the long run (Fuel Economy). Throughout the life of the vehicle, hybrid cars have a lower cost of ownership; maintaining a hybrid car is no more costly than maintaining a gasoline automobile (Fuel Economy). The 2010 Honda Insight Hybrid averages 43 miles per gallon, while the 2009 Honda S200 averages 25 miles per gallon (Fuel Economy). The money saved on gasoline alone is enough to make your hybrid purchase worth your money, along with health benefits from a cleaner environment.
Our economy does not thrive on money paid for with gasoline. Much of our gasoline is imported from overseas. Each time you fill up your tank, your hard earned money benefits a foreign economy. Saudi Arabia exports an average of 8,200,000 barrels of crude oil each day. Money spent in the United States benefits our economy. Our economy doesn’t benefit much from oil bought overseas.
The economy thrives when people are spending money. Many argue that whether it be paying for a utility bill or for traveling expenses, it is better for the economy for people to be spending money on something. With alternative energy resources, people would still spend money on energy, but consumers would have a little extra cash to invest in small businesses or to pay for other living expenses. The government assists citizens who cannot pay for utilities on their own (Carey). With lower costs of energy, the price of utilities paid for by the government would decrease, thus decreasing taxes for everyone (Western Resource Advocates). Energy conservation saves money so that you can buy the things that are most important to you.

In our society, we just can’t seem to survive without energy resources for our computers, lights and automobiles. As we rely on these resources, it is our responsibility to find the most economically efficient and healthy way to use and produce energy. As we move to renewable sources of energy, it is still our responsibility in the meantime, to find ways to improve our current sources of energy.