NFHS Policy Debate Study Report and Topic Proposal: Energy / Environment

Submitted By

Larry McCarty

Introduction

US energy policy review reveals US doesn’t have an energy policy US oil and gas production have boomed, but the country still lacks a coherent energy strategy, according to an International Energy Agency review.1 Historically, the United States has embraced a proactive approach to energy issues. From the 1970’s “energy crisis” that resulted from an embargo on imports of oil to dramatic fluctuations of productions levels of the 1980s to the steadily increasing concerns regarding climate change during the late 1990s and beyond, the role of the federal government has been consistently inconsistent.

Americans typically consume energy for one of two purposes; electricity generation and transportation. Although data and statistics tend to vary somewhat, energy consumption is relatively equal in terms of the two. With respect to both of these areas, fossil fuels have historically accounted for a majority of both production and use. Significantly, the transportation sector continues to be almost completely dependent on petroleum, mostly gasoline.2 Although development of renewable energy resources has occurred over the past two decades, most of this development has been in the area of electricity generation while fossil fuels continue to serve as the mainstay of transportation. Even in situations involving transportation shifts from traditional fossil fuel vehicles, the alternative is generally some form of electricity-powered venue with no assurances that the original source of the electricity is fossil fuel or renewable. In short, expedience and, to a lesser degree, economics, tends to influence energy policy more than the environment. Yet, unfortunately, blasting air conditioners, revving gas guzzlers and pumping oil, Americans have long attracted censure for their wasteful ways. After all, they produce a disproportionately large share—15 %—of global carbon dioxide emissions.3

In addition to the vast amount of energy consumed within our borders, there is a corresponding contribution to the world’s CO2 emissions as well. The United States, with 4% of the world's population, produced about 17% of global carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels in 2011, the most recent year for which global data are available. The United States accounts for this share primarily because the U.S. economy is the largest in the world and meets 83% of its energy needs by burning fossil fuels.4

Today’s energy policy in the United States is once again problematic and characterized by elements of uncertainty. In recent years, with increased domestic production of both oil and natural gas, resulting from development of shale reserves, the energy sector has claimed an increasingly greater part of the nation’s economy. Predicting the future is always dicey, and predicting the energy future has been more often wrong than right.5 As prices fluctuate however, the ripple effect is felt throughout the economy, from Wall Street to Main Street. How will the government respond? As in the past, we will rely on a mix of regulation and markets, and we will not adopt a comprehensive energy policy aimed at coordinating energy industries.6 Making the situation even more problematic is the fact that, as was the case on several past occasions, the United States is at the mercy of the policies of other nations and various international organizations. Unfortunately, the international petroleum industry is characterized by a myriad of groups, many of which operate with differing sets of objectives. The fact that U.S. political leaders frequently express the need for the nation’s energy independence reflects both the interest and necessity of such policies. In reality, however, markets and economic factors tend to influence decisions made within the boardrooms of energy-related industry much more often than government policy and objectives. A comprehensive national energy policy makes sense both environmentally as well as economically.

2

Problem areas

Policy Fragmentation

Energy policy has been a recurring issue for Congress since the first major crises in the 1970s.7 In spite of the fact that a host of U.S. political leaders will attempt to address energy concerns during most Congressional sessions, the corresponding reality is that little is often accomplished. This hold true particularly in terms policy charting new directions for energy management in the nation. When policy is enacted or addressed, it is normally in response to some sort of event that has altered energy supply, production, distribution, demand or availability. Furthermore, energy policy frequently is a factor of a more broad based economic policy. An issue that cuts across all these factors is the role of government. How much does and should government policy affect energy markets? A fundamental dichotomy that lies beneath many individual policy debates, not only in energy issues, is between those who see government intervention as a positive force, and those who view it at best as a necessary evil to be restricted as much as possible.8

U.S. energy policy since the Arab oil embargo in the 1970s has been aimed at a long-term goal with three major dimensions: to assure a secure supply of energy, to keep energy costs low enough to meet the needs of a growing economy, and to protect the environment while producing and consuming that energy. A continuing theme during this period has been that dependence on imported oil for a large share of the U.S. energy mix, particularly in the transportation sector, impedes that aim in all three dimensions.9

Like the goals of energy policy, the means of achieving them have three dimensions: reducing consumption by increased energy efficiency; increasing domestic production of conventional energy sources, particularly oil and natural gas; and developing new sources of energy, particularly renewable energy and renewable fuels, that can replace oil and other fossil fuels.10 Pursuing the goals of energy policy has been complicated by the diversity of energy consumption and supply in the United States. On the consumption side, there are three major sectors: residential/commercial, industrial, and transportation. On the supply side, the primary sources have traditionally been fossil energy: petroleum, natural gas (and “natural gas liquids” such as propane and butane), and coal. Electricity, which is both an energy source and a consumer of energy, has replaced some fossil fuels: about 75% of the energy consumed by the residential/commercial sector is electricity, and industrial energy consumption is about 35% electricity. But in the transportation sector, petroleum has remained dominant. Only in the past few years has corn-derived ethanol become a significant transportation fuel, replacing around 10% of gasoline consumption.11

On the consumption side, there are three major sectors: residential/commercial, industrial, and transportation. On the supply side, the primary sources have traditionally been fossil energy: petroleum, natural gas (and “natural gas liquids” such as propane and butane), and coal. Electricity, which is both an energy source and a consumer of energy, has replaced some fossil fuels: about 75% of the energy consumed by the residential/commercial sector is electricity, and industrial energy consumption is about 35% electricity. But in the transportation sector, petroleum has remained dominant. Only in the past few years has corn-derived ethanol become a significant transportation fuel, replacing around 10% of gasoline consumption.

3

If the US is to emerge as a global energy superpower in the coming decade, shouldn’t it make sure it has its own house in order first? “Developments in the US energy sector have bolstered the country's energy security, sustainability, and economic competitiveness – but challenges remain,” IEA Executive Director Maria van der Hoeven said Thursday at an event with US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz. A chief obstacle in US energy policy a lack of clarity, the report says.12

Reliance on Fossil Fuels

In addition to policy fragmentation, another fundamental facet of U.S. energy policy is that, in spite of decades of attempts at addressing a host of concerns ranging from supply interruptions to environmental issues, the nation still relies heavily on fossil fuels. The historical trends show petroleum as the major source of primary energy, rising from about 38% in 1950 to 45% in 1975, and then declining to about 40% in response to the energy crises of the 1970s.13 A patchwork quilt of crosscutting federal and state policies govern oil, gas, coal, and renewables in the US. From the ban on oil exports, to New York’s ban on fracking, to the long delayed Keystone XL pipeline, energy cuts across myriad departments and agencies within the government, often with little coordination. “It’s seen as a very local, economic issue. The resources are in certain places, so that calls in a lot of local decision making,” says Deborah Gordon, director of the energy and climate program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. But collectively, Gordon says, it makes sense for the federal government to oversee issues at a higher level.14

The two basic factors that foster reliance on fossil fuels are two interrelated concepts, economics and availability of resources. Energy policy in the United States has focused on three major goals: assuring a secure supply of energy, keeping energy costs low, and protecting the environment. In pursuit of those goals, government programs have been developed to improve the efficiency with which energy is utilized, to promote the domestic production of conventional energy sources, and to develop new energy sources, particularly renewable sources.15 Typically the first two of these goals receives far more attention, at least currently, than the third. Oil prices, which had been low and stable throughout the 1990s, resumed the volatility they had shown in the 1970s and early 1980s. Starting in 2004, perceptions of impending inability of the industry to meet increasing world demand led to rapid increases in the prices of oil and gasoline. The continuing high prices stimulated development of nonconventional oil resources, first in Canadian oil sands, then in the United States in shale deposits.16

U.S. oil production, which had apparently peaked, showed a dramatic increase starting in 2009. U.S. imports of oil have also been decreasing over the same time period, and there are calls to allow more exports. Natural gas followed a long-term pattern of U.S. consumption similar to that of oil, at a lower level. Its share of total energy increased from about 17% in 1950 to more than 30% in 1970, then declined to about 20%.17 Recent developments of large deposits of shale gas in the United States have increased the outlook for U.S. natural gas supply and consumption in the near future, and imports have almost disappeared. The United States is projected to be a net natural gas exporter by 2018.18

Renewable energy sources (except hydropower) continue to offer more potential than actual energy production, although fuel ethanol has become a significant factor in transportation fuel. Wind power has recently grown rapidly, although it still contributes only a small percentage share of total electricity generation. Conservation and energy efficiency have shown significant gains U.S. Energy: Overview and Key Statistics Congressional Research Service over the past three decades and offer potential to relieve some of the dependence on oil imports and to hold down long-term growth in electric power demand.19 In the past, at least during the 1970s when the fear of a major supply 4

interruption surfaced, political leaders began to express concern regarding U.S. reliance on imported oil. Once again, policy was influenced by the conditions at hand and the result was long-term in nature. Implementing these programs has been controversial because of varying importance given to different aspects of energy policy. For some, dependence on imports of foreign oil, particularly from the Persian Gulf, is the primary concern; for others, the continued use of fossil fuels, whatever their origin, is most important.20 Ultimately, in spite of concerted efforts on the part of environmentalists and the renewable energy sector representatives, reliance on fossil fuels continues. U.S. power plants used renewable energy sources, including water, wind, biomass wood and waste, geothermal, and solar, to generate about 13% of the electricity produced in the United States during 2015.21

Environment Related Issues

As Congress is seemingly unable to provide a meaningful and substantive energy policy, disagreement among its members regarding environmental concerns is also a factor. The contribution of burning fossil fuels to global climate change is particularly controversial. Another dichotomy is between those who see government intervention as a positive force and those who view it as a necessary evil at best.22 In reality, the relationship between current energy consumption and environmental impact makes a compelling case for a substantive policy direction shift. Awareness of climate change is also beginning to spread. Despite the scientific consensus, a 2013 survey by the Yale PCCC found that only 63 percent of Americans “believe that global warming is happening.” A second, important question in the survey found that 49 percent of Americans believe global warming—if it is happening—is caused mostly by human activities and 30 percent believe it is due mostly to natural causes.23

How does energy use affect the environment? Greenhouse gases trap heat from the sun and warm the planet's surface. Most U.S. greenhouse gas emissions are related to energy production and consumption. Most of those emissions are carbon dioxide (CO2) from the burning of fossil fuels. From 1990 to 2014, energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in the United States increased on average by about 0.3% per year.24 What specific kinds of greenhouse gases does the United States emit? The major greenhouse gases the United States emits as a result of human activity and that are included in U.S. and international emissions estimates are:

Carbon dioxide (CO2) Methane (CH4) Nitrous oxide (N2O) High-global warming potential gases, which are:

Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) Perfluocarbons (PFCs) Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)25

Furthermore, the connection between energy use and emissions is evident. Of the total amount of U.S. greenhouse gases emitted in 2014, about 84% were energy related and 92% of those energy-related gases were CO2 emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels. In 2012 (the latest year complete country data is available), the United States was the second-largest contributor of energy-related CO2 emissions, after China, and was followed by India, Russia, Japan, and Germany.26

5

The electric power and transportation sectors are the two largest sources of energy-related CO2 emissions in the United States, accounting for 38% and 34%, respectively, of total energy-related CO2 emissions in 2014. Taken together, emissions in the electric power and transportation sectors increased at an average annual rate of 0.6% between 1990 and 2014. The remaining 28% of energy-related CO2 emissions are from the direct use of fossil fuels in homes, commercial buildings, and industry.27 The industrial, commercial, and residential sectors had combined energy-related CO2 emissions of 1.5 billion metric tons in 2014 from the direct consumption of fuels in manufacturing facilities, farms, office buildings, schools, houses, and apartments. Together, emissions from the three sectors declined at an average annual rate of 0.2% since 1990. Examined separately over this time period, the increased emissions from the commercial sector and the residential sector were offset by the industrial sector, which saw a drop in its emissions because of the decline in energy-intensive industries.28

In spite of political rhetoric supportive of renewable development and modest efforts aimed at promoting such development, use of alternatives continues to lag. The largest share of electricity generated by renewable sources in 2015 came from hydroelectric power (46%), followed by wind (35%), biomass wood (8%), solar (5%), biomass waste (3%), and geothermal (3%).29 In 2015, for the second year in a row, solar, wind, and other nonhydro renewable energy sources combined to generate more electricity on an annual basis than the amount of electricity generated by hydropower.30

The history of electricity generation provided by each renewable energy source in the United States is different. The generation capacity and availability of each resource has evolved over time.

Almost all hydroelectric capacity was built before the mid-1970s, and much of it is located at dams operated by federal agencies.

Biomass waste is mostly municipal solid waste or gases from landfills that are burned in waste-to-energy power plants.

Most electricity generation from wood biomass occurs at lumber and paper mills. These facilities use wood waste to provide much of their own steam and electricity needs.

The amount of electricity generated by wind has increased substantially in the past eight years. This increase is largely attributed to the construction of new wind turbines, which is encouraged by the availability of federal financial incentives and renewable portfolio standards (RPS) mandated by state governments.

Solar generation almost tripled from 2013 to 2015. But unlike other sources of renewable electricity generation, a significant amount of solar generation growth has occurred with small-scale installations, often solar panels located on residential and commercial rooftops that in 2015 totaled 12.1 billion kilowatthours.31

In spite of ambitious efforts on the part of some of the nation’s leaders, little progress is evident regarding reduction of harmful emissions. Petroleum use accounts for the largest contributor of CO2 emissions from energy consumption in the United States, followed by coal and natural gas. In 2014, the amount and share of total U.S. energy-related CO2 emissions from these fuels include:

Petroleum accounted for 2.3 billion metric tons (42%) Coal accounted for 1.7 billion metric tons (32%) Natural gas accounted for 1.4 billion metric tons (26%)32

6

Climate change

Clearly one of the more pressing, long-term, issues related to air quality and carbon emissions, is climate change. There is a scientific consensus that the global climate is changing and that humans, in part, are causing it.33 Today, both the United States and the global community are at a critical juncture of making decisions on both energy and environmental concerns. Joint consideration of the two interrelated issues is both timely and logical. In short, the scientific community has coalesced around an assessment articulated by the Joint Science Academics Statement: “Earth’s warming in recent decades has been caused primarily by human activities that have increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”34 Future emissions of CO2 from fossil energy combustion follow directly from overall trends in energy consumption, coupled with forecasts of the carbon intensity of the energy mix.35

Yet we cannot speak of energy policy without addressing carbon emissions and an alternative policy of clean, smart energy. A full transition appears unlikely largely because of how entrenched traditional energy policy interests have become, not only in U.S. corporate boardrooms, but also on the lending desks of major financial institutions and in the halls of Congress.36

What must happen, at least regarding U.S. policy, is that a shift in thought away from policy focused on supply of fossil fuels to a much broader framework must occur. But the importance given to import dependence varies. For some, import dependence is the primary concern; for others, particularly those focused on environmental issues, it is a symptom of a general crisis that arises from indiscriminate consumption of fossil fuels. A particularly controversial aspect of the debate is the issue of global climate change, because burning fossil fuels produces large amounts of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas.37 Unlike the past, though, we must redesign the regulatory/market mix to assure more flexible market-based regulations that promote competition, innovation, and environmental protection; we must promote a diversity of resources while downsizing producers; and we must diversify our energy portfolios with a greater investment in renewable and non-conventional energy resources.38

Without energy, there is no economy. Without climate, there is no environment. Without the economy and environment, there is no material well-being, no civilized society, and no personal or national security. The overriding problem associated with these realities, of course, is that the world has long been getting most of the energy its economies need from fossil fuels whose emissions are imperiling the climate that environment needs.39 Clearly the need for a dual approach to energy and the environment is warranted at the present time.

7

Debate Application

United States energy policy has served as the subject for policy resolutions during each of the past two decades. While specific details of the topic area have changed, at least marginally, over the past 25 years, many of the basic facets of the issue remain. This nation is still lacking, at least to some degree, a meaningful national energy policy and efforts by several presidential administrations, representing both major political parties, have fallen short of implementation of a broad-based, long term program. Energy policy, or the lack thereof, is a function of much more than merely partisan politics but an array of additional conditions as well. The list of such factors includes improved technology that enables more efficient and effective production of fossil fuels, newly discovered reserves, international economic factors as well as changes in the nation’s related environmental policy.

Affirmative teams will have the option of taking either a problem or solution approach to this subject area. They might opt to identify specific potential threats associated with such factors as climate change, economic disruption, trade wars and offer cases designed, by implementation of new energy policy directions, a means of solving one of these problems. A more advantage-based approach is also an option for the affirmative. Using this approach, the affirmative might simply offer one of several options for development of renewable or alternative energy reserves. Another option of this same approach would be to specifically introduce new emissions or climate standards for the nation forcing development or and a shift to renewable resources.

Negative teams, at the same time, have substantial ground for argumentation. Specifically, any particular kind of energy not directly advocated by the affirmative is a viable option for the negative to support. Further, negative teams always have the option of offering conservation as a means of addressing the nation’s current concerns regarding the environment and energy use. Among the myriad of potential positions for negative teams is nuclear energy. Depending on resolution wording, nuclear energy will be a possibility for consideration by either team and, as a potential energy resource, essentially offers a stand-alone issue well suited for debate. Today, the nation relies on nuclear energy for essentially 20 percent of our electricity supply but, while this is a relatively substantial amount, it is not the dominant source of electricity. Furthermore, questions regarding potential environmental impact, safety, and start-up costs have essentially kept nuclear energy use at the same level for decades in the United States.

Finally, few topics offers as much opportunity for critical arguments than those with ties to environmental issues. While there is always the option of posing such claims in debate situations, the fact that there is disagreement as well as conflicting data (or at least the interpretations of data) means that ground exists for critical arguments for both affirmative and negative alike.

8

Summary

In 2017 a new administration will lead the executive branch and changes in Congressional leadership will likely shift as well. These political realities, in addition to a myriad of additional issues support the importance of energy / environment as a potential area for policy debate. Ironically, this is a potential topic area that offers an appealing blend of both domestic and international issues as well. Governments elsewhere are more centralized and heavy handed with their energy policies – think Saudi Arabia, Russia, and the rest of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). These countries own most of their local oil and gas companies, set national levels of production to influence prices, and, they claim, promote market stability. But the excessive, state controlled policies of oil mega producers like Russia or Saudi Arabia are not exactly a preferable alternative to the more fragmented situation in the US. “It’s not very helpful to be a state owned oil enterprise in a global market,” Ms. Gordon [director of the energy and climate program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace] says. “When things are humming it might look okay, … but in a low market like this, it crashes.”40

US energy, despite the challenges, is in a relatively good position to take advantage of the low -price market. That might make now the perfect time to take a fresh look at US energy policy – instead of in the wake of a catastrophe like the Arab oil embargo, the Fukushima nuclear meltdown, or the BP oil spill. “Energy [policies] have tended to start with some sort of presidential proclamation, either around a crisis or because a president wants to tackle these things,” Gordon says. “This is the opposite of crisis. It’s opportunity.”41 The economic rationale for a shift in policy is clearly evident and likely to remain for the foreseeable future. As oil prices plummet, some question whether the US – with its piecemeal, disjointed federal energy policy – is ready for a new era of fossil fuel abundance and renewable energy innovation. The US oil and gas boom benefits the US, but lack of an overarching policy hamstrings US potential and poses environmental risks, according to a report released this week by the Paris based International Energy Agency (IEA).42 Low oil prices could divert attention from renewables, the IEA said, and cheap natural gas could discourage electric providers from pursuing lower carbon options like nuclear, solar, and wind. Calls for clearer US energy policy aren’t exactly new – Congress has long lamented a lack of purpose and coordination throughout the nation’s varied and expansive energy sector. But the issue is gaining new importance as the US finds itself at the center of a North American energy boom.43

Potential environmental aspects of this proposed policy area are equally compelling. Let’s assume for the moment that climate change is no threat, still a new, more efficient, more resource-protective, and more scaled-down energy system makes great sense as we move more rapidly into the twenty-first century.44 We can say with a high degree of confidence, that we know the following about the future: (1) climate change must be addressed; (2) fossil fuels will continue to be primary fuels at least for the midterm; (3) carbon reductions strategies must occur; and (4) new technologies and new investments in energy and renewable resources are central.45

This proposed topic area offers a high level of potential for debate consideration. Clearly the ground for affirmative and negative is equally divided. The lack of current policy and potential need is evident, while current system measures provide formidable negative ground to oppose a change. Finally, this is a topic that offers a wide range of choices for debaters wishing to take a more critical approach to the resolution.

9

Possible Resolutions

Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially increase incentives for reduction of CO2 emissions in the United States.

Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially increase incentives for reduction of fossil fuel use in the United States.

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its commitment to development of sustainable energy resources in the United States.

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase air quality standards in the United States.

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially limit oil imports into the United States.

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase incentives for development and/or use of renewable energy.

Resolved: The United States should substantially reduce its carbon footprint.

Resolved: The United States federal government should establish a policy substantially reducing the carbon footprint of the United States.

10

Definitions – alternative

Merriam – Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition, Frederick C. Mish, Editor in Chief, Merriam-Webster, Incorporated, Springfield, Massachusetts, 2000, p. 34.

alternative offering or expressing a choice

The American Heritage College Dictionary, Third Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 2000, p. 40.

alternative the choice between two mutually exclusive possibilities; existing outside traditional or established institutions or systems

The American Heritage College Dictionary, Second College Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1982, p. 99.

alternative the choice between two mutually exclusive possibilities

Webster’s New World College Dictionary, fourth edition, Michael Agnes, editor in chief, Macmillan publishing, New York, p. 41.

alternative providing a choice between two or among more than two things

Webster’s New World Dictionary of American English, Third College Edition, Victoria Neufeldt, editor in chief, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1988, p. 41.

alternative providing or being a choice between two or among more than two things

Encarta World Dictionary, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1999, p. 50.

alternative outside the establishment or mainstream

Definitions – alternative energy

Encarta World Dictionary, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1999, p. 50.

alternative energy any form of energy obtained from the sun, wind, waves, or another natural renewable source, in contrast to energy generated from fossil fuels

www.nrdc.org/reference/glossary/a.asp

11

alternative energy energy that is not popularly used and is usually environmentally sound, such as solar or wind energy (as opposed to fossil fuels).

www.iagreen.com/glossary.htm

alternative energy Energy from a source other than the conventional fossil-fuel sources of oil, natural gas and coal (ie, wind, running water, the sun). Also referred to as "alternative fuel."

www.geocities.com/Area51/Labyrinth/2985/diction.html

alternative energy sources of energy that do not depend of fossil fuels. alternative energy comes from nuclear reactors and renewable energy sources.

www.epa.gov/climatechange/glossary.html

alternative energy Energy derived from nontraditional sources (eg, compressed natural gas, solar, hydroelectric, wind).www.mms.gov/offshore/AlternativeEnergy/Definitions.htm

alternative energy Fuel sources that are other than those derived from fossil fuels. Typically used interchangeably for renewable energy. Examples include: wind, solar, biomass, wave and tidal energy.

www.vpl.ca/bcscienceclusters/glossary.html

alternative energy includes all energy sources and energy technologies that minimize environmental impacts relative to conventional hydrocarbon resources and technology.

www.dosomething.org/tipsheets/terms_energy_conservation

alternative energy Energy from sources that do not produce harmful emissions. For example, unconventional power from the sun, wind or running water. ([Click here] to learn more about alternative sources of energy.

www.environment.nelson.com/0176169040/glossary.html

alternative energy Renewable energy sources, such as wind, flowing water, solar energy and biomass, which create less environmental damage and pollution than fossil fuels, and offer an alternative to nonrenewable resources.

www.frontdoor.com/news/article/1547

alternative energy Energy from sources other than fossil fuels (coal, natural gas), such as renewable sources like wind, sun, or running water. Solar panels are a common way to collect the sun's energy.

s220352448.onlinehome.us/2008/04/10/greenspeak-glossary/

12

alternative energy Energy derived from sources that have little or no impact on the environment and produce no net greenhouse gas emissions in generating electricity. Such sources include wind and solar.

Definitions – energy

Merriam – Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition, Frederick C. Mish, Editor in Chief, Merriam-Webster, Incorporated, Springfield, Massachusetts, 2000, p. 382.

energy usable power; the resources for producing such power

The American Heritage College Dictionary, Third Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 2000, p. 455.

energy usable heat or power; a source of usable power, such as petroleum or coal

The American Heritage College Dictionary, Second College Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1982, p.453.

energy usable heat or electrical power

Webster’s New World College Dictionary, fourth edition, Michael Agnes, editor in chief, Macmillan publishing, New York, p. 471.

energy those resources , as petroleum, coal, gas, wind, nuclear fuel, and sunlight from which energy in the form of electricity, heat, etc. can be produced; the available supply of such usable resources

Webster’s New World Dictionary of American English, Third College Edition, Victoria Neufeldt, editor in chief, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1988, p. 449.

energy those resources, as petroleum, coal, gas, wind, nuclear fuel, and sunlight form which energy in the form of electricity, heat, etc. can be produced; the available supply of such usable resources

Encarta World Dictionary, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1999, p. 591.

energy supply or source of electrical, mechanical, or other form of power

13

Definitions – incentive

Merriam – Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition, Frederick C. Mish, Editor in Chief, Merriam-Webster, Incorporated, Springfield, Massachusetts, 2000, p. 586

incentive something that incites or has a tendency to incite to determination or action.

The American Heritage College Dictionary, Third Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 2000, p. 686.

incentive something such as a reward or punishment that induces action or motivates effort; serving to induce or motivate

The American Heritage College Dictionary, Second College Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1982, p. 650.

incentive something, as the fear of punishment or the expectation of reward that incites to action or effort.

Webster’s New World College Dictionary, fourth edition, Michael Agnes, editor in chief, Macmillan publishing, New York, p. 720.

incentive stimulating one to take action, to work harder, etc.; motivating, encouraging

Webster’s New World Dictionary of American English, Third College Edition, Victoria Neufeldt, editor in chief, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1988, p. 682.

incentive something that stimulates one to take action

Encarta World Dictionary, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1999, p. 909.

incentive something that encourages or motivates somebody to do something.

Definition – Renewable Energy

renewable energy any naturally occurring, theoretically inexhaustible source of energy, as biomass, solar, wind, tidal, wave, and hydroelectric power, that is not derived from fossil or nuclear fuel.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/renewable-energy

renewables Renewables include a variety of electricity sources—hydroelectric, biomass, wind, geothermal, solar—as well as biofuels and traditional non-marketed biomass and waste fuels.

14

http://www.eia.gov/

Renewable energy (sources) or RES capture their energy from existing flows of energy, from on-going natural processes, such as sunshine, wind, flowing water, biological processes, and geothermal heat flows. The most common definition is that renewable energy is from an energy resource that is replaced rapidly by a natural process such as power generated from the sun or from the wind. Most renewable forms of energy, other than geothermal and tidal power, ultimately come from the Sun.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/terms/renewable_energy.htm

renewable energy The most common definition is that renewable energy is from an energy resource that is replaced by a natural process at a rate that is equal to or faster than the rate at which that resource is being consumed. 

http://www.folkecenter.net/gb/overview/definitions/

Definitions – sustainable energy

sustainable energy any type of energy that can potentially be used well into the future without harming future generations

http://www.leonardo-energy.org/blog/sustainable-energy-definitions-focus-and-social-dimension

Sustainable energy is a form of energy that meet our today’s demand of energy without putting them in danger of getting expired or depleted and can be used over and over again. Sustainable energy should be widely encouraged as it do not cause any harm to the environment and is available widely free of cost.

http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/SustainableEnergy.php

Sustainable energy There are three basic demands an energy source must meet to be characterized as “sustainable:"

The long-term availability of the energy source that guarantees to meet any present or future consumption needs.

The energy source must be replenishable without human intervention. The amount of energy consumed to exploit the available resources should not exceed the amount of

energy these resources produce (ie, the energy efficiency of the source).

http://www.brighthub.com/environment/renewable-energy/articles/96796.aspx

15

Works Cited"America's Wind Industry Reaches Record Highs." N.p., n.d. Web.

Cusick, Daniel. "Renewables Boom Expected Thanks to Tax Credit." Climate Wire 21 Dec. 2015: n. pag. Scientific American. Web.

Dicker, Dan. Shale Boom, Shale Bust: The Myth of Saudi America. Place of Publication Not Identified: Author, 2015. Print.

Gaille, Scott. Shale Energy Development. N.p.: n.p., 2014. Print.

Gilmour, Jared. "US Energy Policy Review Reveals US Doesn't Have an Energy Policy." The Christian Science Monitor. The Christian Science Monitor, 20 Dec. 2014. Web. 18 May 2016.

Gold, Russell. The Boom: How Fracking Ignited the American Energy Revolution and Changed the World. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2015. Print.

Gold, Russell. Frackistan: The Promise and Peril of America's Energy Revolution. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

Hoffman, Andrew J. How Culture Shapes the Climate Change Debate. Stanford: Stanford Briefs, 2015. Print.

Kalicki, Jan H., and David L. Goldwyn. Energy and Security: Strategies for a World in Transition. Washington: Woodrow Wilson Center, 2013. Print.

Klein, Naomi. This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2014. Print.

Mann, Michael E., and Lee R. Kump. Dire Predictions, 2nd Edition: Understanding Climate Change. New York.: Dorling Kindersley, 2015. Print.

"The President Calls for a Greener America." Economist 3 Aug. 2015: n. pag. Web.

"President Obama's Plan to Fight Climate Change." N.p., n.d. Web.

Ratner, Michael, and Carol Glover. U.S. Energy: Overview and Key Statistics. Rep. Congressional Research Service, 27 June 2014. Web.

Rep. Congressional Research Service, n.d. Web.

Steven, David. The New Politics of Strategic Resources: Energy and Food Security Challenges in the 21st Century. Washington: Brookings INstitute, 2015. Print.

Tomain, Joseph P. Ending Dirty Energy Policy: Prelude to Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2011. Print.

"U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis." N.p., 20 Jan. 2016. Web.

Wagner, Gernot, and Martin L. Weitzman. Climate Shock: The Economic Consequences of a Hotter Planet. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2015. Print.

Yacobucci, Brent. Energy Policy: 114th Congress Issues. Rep. Congressional Research Service, 5 Jan. 2015. Web.

Yergin, Daniel. The Quest: Energy, Security and the Remaking of the Modern World. New York: Penguin, 2012. Print.

16

17

1 (Gilmour, 2014)2 (Ratner & Glover, 2014)3 (The president calls for a greener America, 2015)4 (What are the greenhouse gases and how much are emitted by the United States?, 2016)5 (Tomain, 2011)6 (Tomain, 2011)7 (Ratner & Glover, 2014)8 (Yacobucci, 2015)9 (Yacobucci, 2015)10 (Yacobucci, 2015)11 (Yacobucci, 2015)12 (Gilmour, 2014)13 (Ratner & Glover, 2014)14 (Gilmour, 2014)15 (Yacobucci, 2015)16 (Ratner & Glover, 2014)17 (Ratner & Glover, 2014)18 (Ratner & Glover, 2014)19 (Ratner & Glover, 2014)20 (Yacobucci, 2015)21 ( How much U.S. electricity is generated from renewable energy?, 2015)22 (Yacobucci, 2015)23 (Hoffman, 2015)24 (What are the greenhouse gases and how much are emitted by the United States?, 2016)25 (What are the greenhouse gases and how much are emitted by the United States?, 2016)26 (What are the greenhouse gases and how much are emitted by the United States?, 2016)27 (What are the greenhouse gases and how much are emitted by the United States?, 2016)28 (What are the greenhouse gases and how much are emitted by the United States?, 2016)29 ( How much U.S. electricity is generated from renewable energy?, 2015)30 ( How much U.S. electricity is generated from renewable energy?, 2015)31 ( How much U.S. electricity is generated from renewable energy?, 2015)32 (What are the greenhouse gases and how much are emitted by the United States?, 2016)33 (Hoffman, 2015)34 (Hoffman, 2015)35 (Iiler, 2013)36 (Tomain, 2011)37 (Yacobucci, 2015)38 (Tomain, 2011)39 (Tomain, 2011)40 (Gilmour, 2014)41 (Gilmour, 2014)42 (Gilmour, 2014)43 (Gilmour, 2014)44 (Tomain, 2011)45 (Tomain, 2011)