I have selected the topic “science and technology” and the main issue under debate is whether alternative energy such as solar, geothermal, or nuclear energy can properly exchange with coal and oil i.e. fossil fuels. It is my opinion that, it is easily replacing alternative fossil fuels because fossil fuels are environmentally destructive, unsustainable, and inefficient. Another cause is that a major contributor to global climate change is fossil fuels. The third and last reason is that it has viability in renewable energies that boost the American economy and decline the dependency on foreign sources of energy, which will also help the economy (Goel, 2005).
It goes without saying that, reducing oil drilling will reduce the availability of domestic energy for Americans in the future. It is my first point. By believing this, it could be available domestic energy to near future in Americans and it will possible if Congress could expand areas for active exploration. The second point is that alternative energies cannot able to create job opportunities that can deliver the country from environmental and economic wilderness. I can believe this contrary view because it only represents a small fraction of the country’s energy needs by the renewable energy and as such cannot deliver it from economic wilderness and environmental wilderness (Goel, 2005). The third and last proposition is that in the United States is not a solution enough of emergency to deliver the nation from energy crisis and upcoming serious energy crisis. I strongly believe that because the available energy alternatives can only be able to produce around 430,000 barrels, which is only 2% of American oil consumption, which is too low compare to the total energy demand.
The most important and first point in agreement with my position is that a country’s unavailability and thirty for oil is not good for the economy, environment and country’s security. In trying to doubt this point of view, I can argue that in the US there is no shortage of oil and energy since it has been found that there is enough oil offshore in non-park lands and non-wilderness and natural gas. So, USA is not thirsty for oil. Another point in my argument is that the solution to economic downturn and ecological collapse are mainly green jobs it will sure help recover and can able to boost the country’s economy. I have some confusion this point of view because it is not possible by renewable energy to provide approximately more than five million jobs in America and end American dependency on imported oil. The next point in agreement with my opinion is that the energy independency will come from alternative energy because of increasing in alternative fuel process. I tend to doubt this point of view because it has always strived to be energy independent in America but it will surely cannot able to solve the energy crisis in America (Sioshansi, 2011).
There are various types of biases I have experienced when I have read the premises for and against my position on the topic include self-interest bias, pattern-recognition bias, and stability bias. Pattern recognition bias involves spotting patterns where they never exist and giving more weight to most recent events. Paying more attention to memorable events involves here. (Szczecinski & Parker, 2003) For example, In America, people only pay attention to a recent announcement that introduction of renewable fuels would solve all the country’s energy needs into the near future. People only give more emphasis on this idea without understanding the fact that renewable fuels only form a small fraction of the country’s energy needs
Another bias is that of self-interest bias, it includes pay some incentives of rewarding the wrong behavior and not considering the bigger picture of the opinion of other stakeholders and a concept and. It states that people get motivated and inspiration to attain outcomes that favor them at the expense of the country or organization fully. The people of America want for the introduction of renewable energy sources in order to overcome the problem of employment. People do not think the larger picture of that source of energy solving the getting the country out of economic and environmental wilderness or the problem of energy crisis.
The third and last type of bias is stability bias; it includes people being comfortable with the existing status quo, it is in the case when there is no pressure of changing (Zillman, 2008). It expressed that the present state influences the result more than is logical. According to this bias to the topic of study, it is the fact that new energy sources have not been able to solve energy crisis in America, and we can conclude that renewable energy will not be able to solve energy crisis in America or even deliver the country from economic and environmental crisis at all.
It is my logic of supporting an alternative energy to effectively replace fossil fuels has changed and I am not supporting for that point of view because the country must overcome several technological hurdles before replacing fossil fuels with an alternative energy. From the above discussion point, it can be argued that in upcoming several year fossil fuels will still existent become increasingly efficient. Fossil fuels are also very cheap compared to other source of energy. It also insured the inefficiency condition in economy (Zillman, 2008).
Yale University, Economics