Rudy Hernandez

Emily Litle

Eng121

Choosing Energy that Best Benefits Humankind

Renewable energy is one of the most innovative ideas in the modern world. Imagine a

world powered by the sun and wind. Solar panels and wind turbines have been developed for

this very purpose. Yet for so many years fossil fuel use also a modern technology and just as

innovative as renewables also has been used by many to protect them from the harsh

conditions of the environment. Yet lately the debate between fossil fuel usage and renewables

has created a climate not of warmth but of a cold battle between opposing forces, bipartisan

bias and a global political agenda that most people have no idea is behind it all that create for

us a scenario filled with scare tactics and hysteria, lies, and propaganda. Billion dollar industries

hiring and promoting their side of the story pouring millions into media campaigns to win the

hearts and minds of the masses. But in this chaos of enmity and propaganda, McKibben author

and environmentalist writes, “My book The End of Nature, it was the first large scale reporting

about climate change, but it was also a philosophical essay. I took sides. I didn’t want the planet

to burn up.”(McKibben). The planet will burn up based on a philosophical essay McKibben

preaches. He’s not the only one with these philosophical and speculative predictions. I think we

have left the very values that make our world a world worth living in, like integrity, honesty,

and truth supported by evidence and facts. But rather an unbiased look at what’s best for

humankind without this kind of deceit and exaggeration. Instead we should pursue harmony,

happiness and human flourishing for the benefit of all humankind. That is why I believe in our
pursuit of energy, we should pursue the best energy. Whether it be renewables in small

increments as we see the technology improve, which keeps energy costs down and not use

government power to shut down businesses and tax carbon, which hurts many people who

depend on cheap reliable energy and jobs to support their families. What we all really want is

the use of common sense, rational thinking, and a good and honest heart to choose the best

energy for the benefit of humankind as the ultimate goal.

Environmentalists warn us of the harmful effects of C02 on the planet and increased

global population caused by human activity that has come to the point where carbon emissions

will have exceeded the rate of 400 parts per million within our atmosphere creating

greenhouse effect. This will cause global warming leading to the extinction of all life. Yet there

is evidence for the contrary as Robert Zubrin says, “but to ignore the fertilizer effect and to fail

to include it when discussing the impact of CO2 is dishonest and is used to advance an agenda

by not muddying it with inconvenient facts” (Epstein qtd in Zubrin). There are others with a

totally different perspective, with a host of scientists saying the exact opposite and being

labeled by the environmentalists as climate change deniers. They call them a bunch of bought

and paid for hands in their pocket, money hungry, fossil fuel burning billionaires. Political goals

and hidden agendas have corrupted our ability see the truth and use our best resources for the

best for humankind. It was Al Gore, a politician, who decades ago announced of this impending

doom called Global Warming. Since then many political parties and energy companies all have

campaigned to bring this heated debate all over the political arena to win over the hearts and

minds of the world’s citizens. What both these sides are missing is that Human benefit should

be the ultimate goal.

 Natural resources should be used for human benefit like always. We live in a world

where climate has always been a danger to humankind. We survived and developed all sorts of

technology to protect us from the harsh conditions of the climate. We used natural resources

to build shelters and clothing, cut trees and mined the earth, drank the water, and bred and ate

the cattle. We fought wildlife and climate all to secure a more protected and comfortable

lifestyle. We even learned how to create fossil fuel energy out of rocks. We used this energy to

save us from the backbreaking work that machines now do; we use this energy to drive our cars

to places that would have caused pain and injury to our feet and body. So now why do we

attack and demonize the very invention that has saved us from such misery and why do we

keep other poor and unindustrialized countries from enjoying those benefits. Zubrin quotes,

“The open secret of our relationship to climate is how good we are at living in different climates

thanks to technology. There is no climate that man is ideally adapted to.”(Zubrin qtd Epstein).

There is a new scientific discovery they call Global Warming now called Climate Change, which

outsmarts those who argue that it’s not getting warmer. This discovery of climate change was

first introduced by a politician named Al Gore, who claimed over 10 years ago, we would all be

dead in 10 years if we don’t reduce carbon emission and it has been campaigned as a global

threat to all humankind. Not to mention Al Gore has made millions in his global warming

agenda and the hysteria now gives birth to a worldwide movement that attacks and tears down

the industry that has produced so much good for all of us.

Not all scientist agree on the harmful effects of CO2 emissions. In addition, after some

research on both sides of the issue of the climate change debate, disagreements between

scientists continue. Even accusations of fraud. Yet the environmentalist agenda continues
without evidence, mere hypothesis. They say, 440 parts per million of carbon dioxide is the

number by which worldwide cataclysmic catastrophe will occur and yet scientists have

opposing arguments based on scientific tests and data. Zubrin explains, “experiments with

growing crops in the 700 parts per million C02 atmosphere saw striking positive plant effects of

CO2 are scientifically uncontroversial yet practically never mentioned.”(Zubrin qtd Epstein).

Where is the evidence of Global warming that was predicted? No global warming has happened

except for 3-degree change in all the years of crying wolf and for all accounts the counter

argument that carbon emissions is actually good for the plant and animal life on earth.

Research has found the flourishing of green plant life due to more carbon emissions. After all,

not all of us are scientists, so how can we argue against the scientists. Where is the evidence of

the harmful effects and how do we know scientists do not lie for an agenda or have fallen to a

corrupt political campaign?

Political goals have corrupted our pursuit of the best energy and the most good for

human flourishing. Democrats have claimed the environmental movement for themselves and

are using it for political agenda to spread Globalism and to align the world with the European

Union and United Nations political movements for Globalism. John Kerry has said, "You cannot

put the globalization genie back in the bottle. You have the ability to tame the worst parts of

it." He made an impassioned argument for capitalism that is "sensitive, thoughtful, progressive

and sustainable", as opposed to "robber baron capitalism.”(Michael O’Sullivan, credit Susie) But

we also have republicans who have latched on to fossil fuel protection for a small price.

Whether its corrupt politicians, or greedy corporations who all have their hands in the cookie

jar in this billion-dollar moneymaking industry we call the energy business. That’s another
reason why I say, who can we trust, who do we believe, why are the poor, the uneducated and

innocent hurt the most when all they want and need is safe, cheap reliable energy, no matter

where it comes from. Can our leaders and politicians be honest, rational, people of integrity

looking out for the welfare of humankind or have we all been sucked into this large-scale con

job.

So in conclusion, renewable energy is great, so are fossil fuels, but can we do what is

best for humankind in general and stop the madness, which is our world of political corruptness

today. Can we believe what they tell us on television, or have we all been victims to this huge

fiasco. Will we make the same mistakes as other countries, who have swallowed the bait and

were hooked on an agenda rushing into renewables at the peril of many. How many people will

be out of a job, or will pay much more for the cost of energy? Some will never see light or

warmth and cheap reliable energy because of the untrustworthiness of our world today. Will

we ever see the good we all want? Will we ever see the truth or forever wonder if we did the

right thing or not. We all can make a decision to decide what the best energy is for humankind.
 Works cited

Epstein, Alex. “The Moral Case For Fossil Fuels The Key to winning Hearts and Minds.” Center

For Industrial Progress. 2-11. Print.

“Union of Concerned Scientist.”

McKibben, Bill. "Bill McKibben: Actions speak lounder than words." Bulletin of the Atomic scientist

(2012): 1-8. print.

Scientists, Union of Concerned. Benefits of Renewable Energy Use. 20 December 2017. Web. 2 April

2018.