Research Prospectus and Bibliography (REVISED)

In 2009 85% of the worlds energy came from fossil fuels (Sustainable Table). These fossil fuels include oil, natural gas and coal. All of which are non-renewable, or at least they are being used at a rate much greater than that of which mother nature is producing them. Not, only the fact of the fossil fuel banks are being depleted, but the burning of these fuels emit large quantities of hazardous gases into the atmosphere and many natural habitats were destroyed to harvest these fuels. All of these factors I believe lead to the fact that a more efficient and less destructive form of alternative energy must be designed/utilized before too much damage is done by our current ways. There is many sources that can be utilized; Solar power, wind, water and geothermal for example. This all leads to the topic of my research prospectus; the use of solar power as an alternative form of energy. Solar power drives nearly all other forms of alternative energy. It creates thermal gradients which causes the shifting of barometric pressures and therefore causes wind. Also solar energy causes a thermal gradient in water, which causes currents and is a major player in the role in the movement of water. Then, lastly the solar power itself can be caught via solar panels and stored as energy to be used at a later time. This research prospectus will discuss the pros and cons of using solar power and the effects it would have on human beings, both economical and ecological.



Sustainable Energy. Retrieved Jan. 31, 2010, from Sustainable Table, INC., New York,
New York. website: http/www.sustainabletable.org/.


Solar Energy. Retrieved Jan. 31, 2010, from Solar Energy Initiatives, INC.,
Jacksonville, FL. website: http/www.solarenergy.com/.

Solar Energy Advantages and Disadvantages. Retrieved Jan. 31, 2010 from Solar
Energy Advantages., website: http/www.solarenergyadvantages.org/.

Solar Energy Revolution. Retrieved Jan. 31, 2010, from the American Solar Energy
Society., Boulder, CO. website: http/www.ases.org.

Solar and Renewable Energy. Retrieved Jan. 31, 2010, from Alternative Energy
Organization., website: http/www.altenergy.org.

Solar Energy. Retrieved Jan. 31, 2010, from Britannica Online Encyclopeadia., website:
http/www.britannica.com/solar-energy.

A Forest Returns Blog

After watching the movie in class today, I feel really good about what the government did in making natural forests. In living in NW West Virginia and SE Ohio all my life, I have been around national forests before, But had no idea how bad things were before they were created. I was always under the impression that they were just lands that the government bought and kept nearly original. I had no idea they were stripped, barren, used up farm land. Also, the other thing I really liked was how the government used it as a way to help out families during the depression. They could have took in a fraction of the workers and used mechanized machinery, but instead they used old-fashioned man/hand power. Which greatly helped out those individuals involved, but also helped the economies of local businesses and towns. Then, to finish I think it would be a good idea for the government to continue buying the land to keep it or let it go back to how mother originally intended it to be. I'm a fan of keeping nature in its natural state and only using what we need to.

Continuing Research

As I look more and more into my topic that I chose for the research assignment I find myself more and more interested in the subject. I think this is because of three different reasons, one being: the sun gives off enough energy to supply the entire earth for 27 years daily(www.altenergy.org) and it creates over 9 million jobs and makes $1 trillion dollars in revenue just in the US annually (www.ases.org/about). Then, the last being due to the fact that solar power is the starting point to all other forms of alternative energy. It causes the changes in temperature that causes wind, it's sunlight allows for biomass products to be produced.(www.altenergy.org) Then, finally it's radiating energy results in warmth on the planet and also that energy can be converted and used for nearly any form of energy that we would ever need as humans.(www.altenergy.org). The other thing that I've noticed throughout looking through more of my sources is that so far I have only found two negatives about it. One being the total amount of sunlight, which is a problem during stormy and cloudy days. Then, the other being the cost of initially putting in the equipment. Both of which seem pretty minuscule compared to the harm that the current mainstream sources of energy is doing to the environment. So to sum up the work since choosing the topic, I feel there is a lot of reputable information and that this subject will really open both my eyes, and others to the subject.

Research Prospectus

For my research project, I'm going to choose a topic under the umbrella of alternative energy. The bulk of our energy currently comes from fossil fuels (oil, natural gas and nuclear sources). All of these seem nice at first, but once you dig into the topic you find out how bad they really are. Yes, they are cheap, readily available and the use of them provides many jobs. But, they are very hazardous to the environment and all have a finite amount, we are using them faster than mother nature is producing them. Which means later on down the road, they will be no longer available. Also, with that the earth will be more polluted and may have already permanently lost many forms of plants or animals by the time they do run out. Therefore, I believe a new cleaner, safer and more efficient form of energy production should be utilized if we want to have a healthy and safe planet in the long term future. Which is why I'm choosing this topic.

Throughout this research assignment I will focus on two research questions. The first being: What can finding/utilizing alternative sources of energy do for the planet/environment (what are the consequences of not finding/utilizing an alternate sources of energy)? Then, the second: how will this effect human beings everyday lives?

After digging into the topic a little more, I now think that I will focus in more on solar energy as a source of alternative energy. I will touch on some others but since solar is the starting point of nearly all the other forms, it will be the main focus. Then, also without the sun (which produces solar energy) all other sources of energy would shortly thereafter cease to be viable also. My final goals of this project is to provide not only myself with more knowledge and awareness of the topic, but also to others as well.

LM Assignment 3

In the last section of the book Reece describes Wendell Berry's essay " Two Minds" Here Wendell talks about how there are two ways of thinking about nature and its resources. There is as "rational" mind which only intends to use nature to make gains. It's objective and analytical based and believes there is an individual profit to be made. Then, the other is a "sympathetic" mind which favors nature's organ wild side. This kind of mind set favors wholeness, a sustained long term source of resources. They don't believe in making a profit off the earth, just use enough to survive. One example of a rational mind set is the main focus of this entire book. The coal mines have no respect for the mountains that they are destroying, or the ecosystems that inhabit the mountains. They just want to make a profit, strip the mountain of its resources and move onto the next stripping site. Then, an example of a sympathetic mind set is when Robert Kennedy visited eastern Kentucky. During that time he saw how poor people were, and that for some all they had to eat was their gardens, and farm animals they had. They did all they could to get what they needed to survive from the land, and all the while putting effort back into keeping it healthy and fertile. This was all inhibited by the coal mines destroying the land that they used to survive off of, making them even poorer and hard off.

The quote choose is the following:

"Love the quick profit, the annual raise,

vacation with pay. Want more

of everything ready-made. Be afraid

to know your neighbors and to die.

And you will have a window in your head.

Not even your future will be a mystery

anymore. Your mind will be punched in a card

and shut away in a little drawer.

When they want you to buy something

they will call you. When they want you

to die for profit they will let you know."

(pg 223-224)

This quote stuck out the most to me mostly because I think is sums up everything the coal companies are wanting. They want the profit, the money and vacations. All the while not caring about the little people who make that all possible, and who's lives they are destroying. The little people work til they bleed knowing that's all they will do all their lives, hence why their future will not be a mystery. Then, the last really hits on the fact that the coal companies don't care about the workers, they just want to boss them around and make a profit off of them. Also, this quote hit me because I feel this relates to many things today. Most notably being the war in Iraq. Everyone knows that the "war" is little more than a war for oil and world economy. I personally feel the US government is playing the same cards that the coal companies did. There is little to no reason for our troops to be over there dying (they are soldiers if you send them there let them fight, not play baby sitter). But, that is a topic I could spend days on, just wanted to make that connection.

Flow Extra Credit

After watching "Flow" I was really suprised at how big and widespread of a problem there is dealing with clean water. Living in the society that we do I think we tend to take things like that for granted. We have clean water to drink, shower and play in and not have to think about it. where in some of the places in the film, their best was a creek or murky river. Another thing that stood out to me was the part about the herbicides and pesticides running off into the water supply. Especially, the one produced in Europe (don't remember the exact name) but it was banned in all European countries, but billions of pounds of it is sold to the US yearly. Another thing that stuck out to me was where nestle put the pump plants in Michigan. They sucked many creek and river beds dry, lost a lawsuit telling them to stop pumping. Then, through their money and power they go higher and won a lawsuit to let them pump again. (bought may be a better word than won) Then, The last thing that stuck out to me, which goes back to our bottles water discussion, was that just the US spends 5-10 times yearly on bottled water than what the UN quotes creating clean water sources for the entire planet that doesn't have it already. But to end on a positive note, I do think the film was well organized and had a good pitch. I also hope more people see this film, and others like it, and begin to start doing things to fix the problems.

Lost Mountain Assignment #2

After reading this section of the book, Honestly I feel more interested. Not that I wasn't in the first part, just this time Reece does something different that sparks my interest more. This section seemed to be more political and money driven, where as the first was more on the introduction and the environmental side. After reading the first part of the book I was kind of indifferent on the idea of mining the coal, but after reading this section I feel more opposed. When Reece went into talking about how the mines would sign contracts to buy houses and land to mine and start mining some of it. Then, they would file bankruptcy and get out of paying the full amount for the land and homes. That part stuck out to me and really bothered me by how self-centered they were just wanting the money and not caring about other human beings and their well-being. The other main part of the reading that really stood out to me was where Reece talked about the woman and her child. He went on to talk about how she was in fear of her child getting polluted water in his mouth while bathing or playing outside, because she doesn't know what it would do to him. It's horrible to have to live in that fear just so some big wig 10 miles up the ridge can make some cheap dollars off the land. Like I said before I was kind of on the fence post leaning towards the oppose mining coal side, but not I am walking further and further to the opposing mining side.

Lost Mountain Assignment #1

In Lost Mountain, Eric Reece really emphasizes on the importance of the variety of both plant and animal lives and the destruction of their environment is so harmful to their existence. He does a great job of showing his personal and emotional views and opinions on the topic of mountain top removal. He went through great stresses of going to places and seeing things first hand. Then, going back later after the "reclamation" of these lands. He did a great job of providing a argument for why the destruction of these environments to be so bad. These arguments being all of the animals and plants, whole ecosystems as wholes are being destroyed never to return to their original state.
Reece uses the destruction of the environment as his main argument. He spent a great deal of time writing about how the mountains were once lush, full of life and the water being blue and pristine. Then, shifting to how they were turned to flat and stripped of life by the mining of the coal. Then, he went on saying how the variety of plant and animal life will never be the same as they once were.
After reading the beginning of the book, by being from northwest West Virginia and seeing a taste of this first hand I feel very strongly about saving the environments of the mountains and keeping them as they are now. There has already been enough damage, and it needs to be stopped before there is nothing left. There are so many people who are worried about making a quick buck and using cheap energy. Which sounds great in theory, but the use of coal isn't really cheap. The destruction of the environment is a huge problem, and we are using up coal faster than mother nature is making it. So really it is not a reusable source of energy as fast as we are using it up.

Clean Coal Blog

Initially, after viewing both videos my opinion my opinion sided with the view of opposing the clean coal technology. Then, as I watched the video that was pro clean coal my opinion changed until I read who made the video and was conducting the research, ACCCE the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. This pointing out to me that it is not as credible and is certainly biased since the coal company is trying to make business off of the clean coal technology that isn't necessarily "clean."

What is at stake with the argument is two things; the economy and personal side (pro clean coal) and the destruction of the environment in the long run (con clean coal) The pro side is saying that the clean coal technology is the future, creating more energy more efficiently and all the while creating jobs in a time that the economy is below par. On the other hand the con side is saying that there is no such thing as a clean coal, that the technology does not even exist. The black smoke coming out of the chimneys at the coal plants is not clean, and it has to go somewhere. That somewhere being our environment and that the bi-products of using coal will slowly destroy it.

The audience of both is the general mass public. With both side's fighting the power struggle for the most support. I tend to believe that the pro side is trying to play on peoples good intentions by saying how it helps create jobs and boost's the economy but saying nothing unbiased and scientifically supported about the environment.

The pro clean coal site is supported by the coal companies. The con is supported more by the general public, people who don't have anything to gain economically wise by using the "technology." Those being non-profitable groups such as Sierra Club, National Wildlife Foundation, Alliance of Climate Protection, etc. I believe the con site has more credibly mostly due to the fact that they don't have anything to gain by using the clean coal "technology" they only have things to lose (healthy environment) Whereas the Pro site is sponsored by the coal companies, which have things to gain and is obviously biased.

Initially, the pathos of the pro clean coal site is appealing. Stating that it is harmless to the environment while being more efficient and creating jobs. Which appeals to the lesser informed public, especially with the economy how it is. Then as it goes on and on the legitimacy decreases in opinion. As for the con clean coal site the pathos there is more straight to the point. They come straight out saying there is no such thing as clean coal, the bi-products of using coal has to go somewhere. After viewing both sites I feel they are trying to save the environment, and the pro side is trying to sell an idea (clean coal technology).

Visual expressions on both are effective in stating their opinions. But as stated before even though the pro argument side sounds good on the surface, once you dig deeper it loses its luster to me personally.

Personally I find the con clean coal site to be more persuasive. Mostly because it has more credibility to it than the pro site does. I feel that the pro site, being supported and headed by various coal companies, is trying to sell business. Whereas the con side is looking out for the best of the long term environment.