Carbon is the base for all life; every living being on Earth is made from some percentage of carbon, from the fish in the sea to the birds in the sky – but that very element carbon, necessary for all life on Earth, is now what is killing the planet. From the clothes we wear, to the cars we drive – even to the food we eat, we depend in some way on the use of carbon-based fuels such as coal or oil; fuels that are naturally derived from the breakdown of organic matter, or past living organisms. These fuels are better known as fossil fuels, hence the name “fossil” fuels. They are great in the sense that we can use them to power our factories, our cities, and transport us across the county, but that is also what makes them so dangerous. Because they are carbon-based, burning fossil releases harmful substances into the atmosphere, which pollute the air we breath, pollute our waters, and most importantly are the cause of the greenhouse effect, which has caused the Earth’s temperature to rise 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit since the industrial revolution. There are alternatives to burning fossil fuels to obtain energy though; some that have much smaller adverse affects on the environment, and some that have almost none. We need to decrease our dependence on the use of fossil fuels and transition to using more sustainable energy sources because the burning of fossil fuels negatively impacts the environment in many ways, one of which is releasing gasses into the atmosphere that contribute to the greenhouse effect. 

Because of their carbon composition, fossil fuels, when burned or combusted for the use for energy, release harmful greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere that contribute to the greenhouse effect. The greenhouse effect in simple terms is “the exchange of incoming and outgoing radiation that warms the Earth” (Lallanila, 6). Incoming powerful ultraviolet (UV) radiation penetrates the Earths atmosphere and is then reflected back off the Earths surface as much weaker infrared (IR) radiation. When there is a proper balance of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, approximately 30% of that IR radiation escapes back into space and the other 70% is trapped in the atmosphere, creating the Earths natural temperature and climate. When there is an increased amount of greenhouse gases, they create a barrier in the Earth’s upper atmosphere that traps more IR radiation in the Earth’s atmosphere, therefore increasing the temperature of the Earth, as is seen today with the process of Global Warming (Lallanila, 6-14). Greenhouse gases are, by definition, gases that contribute to the greenhouse effect by absorbing IR radiation. These gases include water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane (contains carbon), nitrous oxide, and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Earth’s natural processes create all water vapor, carbon dioxide, and methane, but since the industrial revolution the global concentration of these gases has been steadily increasing. As shown in Figure 1, since 1900, the concentration of Nitrous Oxide has increased from a concentration of approximately 260 parts per billion (ppb) to approximately 325 ppb. The concentration of Methane has increased from about 600 ppm to just under 2000 ppm, and the concentration of Carbon Dioxide has increased from about 275 ppb to almost 400 ppb. The concentrations of these gases has fluctuated over the past 2000 years but has remained ultimately steady at safe and natural rates (Thomas R. Karl, Jerry M. Melillo, and Thomas C. Peterson, 14). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an independent group of over 1,300 scientific experts from all over the world, determined in their Fifth Report from 2014 that there is a 95% probability that human activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet (Callery, 8), shown in Figure 2.

Atmospheric circulation processes and the moisture available in the air, which are directly related to temperature, influence precipitation around the globe. The United States has already seen an increase in precipitation from 1900, and is projected to see increased precipitation in winter and spring as time goes on. Not only will some areas see an increase in precipitation, but also other areas will experience more droughts and heat waves. The US Global Change Research Program says, “Changes have been observed in the amount, intensity, frequency, and type of precipitation. Pronounced increases in precipitation over the past 100 years have been observed in eastern North America, southern South America, and northern Europe. Decreases have been seen in the Mediterranean, most of Africa, and southern Asia. Changes in the geographical distribution of droughts and flooding have been complex. In some regions, there have been increases in the occurrences of both droughts and floods” (Thomas R. Karl, Jerry M. Melillo, and Thomas C. Peterson, 16). The southwest United States is projected to have stronger, longer, and more frequent heat waves, and increasing summer temperatures. Hurricanes will become more frequent and will be stronger. Based on the ACE index, which is a measurement of accumulated cyclone energy and takes into account the number, strength and duration of tropical storms and hurricanes in a given season, the eight of the ten strongest hurricane seasons have came after 1995 (Dolce). The 2017 hurricane season was hyperactive and resulted in over 188 Billion dollars in damages. Damages like this will only increase as time goes on and hurricanes not only become more frequent, but also become more powerful. Potentially the most catastrophic effect of global warming is that glaciers are currently melting and sea levels are projected to rise 1-4 feet by 2100 (Erdman). This would flood many coastal cities around the world, and would destroy their infrastructure and decimate the economies of each city. Since 1960, 2500 cubic miles of glacial ice has melted; Figure 3 shows the decline in glacial ice since 1950. After 2000 years of little change in sea level, the past century has seen an increase of 8 inches, and the rate at which levels are rising has doubled over the past 15 years compared to the previous 100 (Thomas R. Karl, Jerry M. Melillo, and Thomas C. Peterson, 18). Other more dire estimates show that the entire Greenland ice sheet could melt, this would raise sea level an entire 23 feet, enough to put the city of London entirely under water. If sea levels rose 10 feet, the United States would lose 28,880 square miles of land, home today to 12.3 million people (Strauss, 2). 

Since 1900, the global emission of carbon-based emissions due to the burning of fossil fuels has increased 10 fold (Boden, Marland, and Andres, 2). Of all the emissions from fossil fuels in 2010, 25% was from electricity and heat production, 21% was from industry, 24% was from agriculture, foresting, or other land use, 14% was from transportation, 6% was from buildings and the last 10% was from various other sources. Therefore there needs to be an initiative to bring change to the industrial, electricity, and agriculture sectors and to use more sustainable resources that do not release carbon-based emissions into the atmosphere.

There are many ways to supply the world’s energy needs without depending so heavily on fossil fuels like coal or oil. From using hydroelectric power, to using the power of fusion for electricity, the more creative the thinking, the more possibilities there are. The most feasible alternatives to fossil fuels include nuclear energy, solar power, wind power, biomass, geothermal, fusion power, and hydroelectric power. Harnessing power from wind is one of the cleanest ways to produce energy; it produces no harmful emissions and is abundant, inexhaustible, and affordable. Wind power is produced using large wind turbines; wind spins the turbines large propellers, which then spins a turbine that produces energy. According to the European Wind Energy Association, “An average onshore wind turbine with a capacity of 2.5–3 MW can produce more than 6 million kWh in a year – enough to supply 1,500 average EU households with electricity. An average offshore wind turbine of 3.6 MW can power more than 3,312 average EU households” (European Wind Energy Association). The downfall of using wind turbines is that wind farms need occupy a large amount land to work properly. Each turbine must be spaced out eight to ten rotor diameters apart, so the turbines themselves only account for a small portion of the land used, but the wind facility requires a significant portion of land. “A survey by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory of large wind facilities in the United States found that they use between 30 and 141 acres per megawatt of power output capacity (a typical new utility-scale wind turbine is about 2 megawatts). However, less than 1 acre per megawatt is disturbed permanently and less than 3.5 acres per megawatt are disturbed temporarily during construction” (Union of Concerned Scientists, 4). The remaining space can be used for a variety of things, like raising livestock, agriculture, and highways. Wind farms can also be built on land that is currently occupied by vacant or underused industrial facilities, so that they do not occupy any new space. Solar power is also another great clean recourse. Solar energy is a resource with incredible potential, just 18 days of the Sun’s energy on Earth is equivalent to all of the coal, natural gas, and oil reserves on the planet – it is just a matter of harnessing this energy. Solar power works by using Solar Photovoltaic (PV) cells arranged into panels to convert the suns powerful and abundant energy into electricity that we can use. Solar power gives off no toxic pollution, and has no global warming related emissions. After the installations made around the globe in 2014, solar power has a global annual capacity of 177 gigawatts. Solar energy is also economically beneficial to families and companies compared to traditional energy prices from coal and fossil fuels. As the technology is being researched and improved, it is becoming a more cost effective way to supply energy to a home or building. From 2010 to 2014, the price of solar panels decreased by 45%; also the federal government gives a 30% refund of the initial solar panel purchase to buyers as a tax credit.  Hydroelectric power plants use the Earths natural hydrologic cycle and harness the power of flowing water to create electricity. These plants use the flow of water to spin and turbine and create energy, very simple yet very effective. Although these plants do not give off any emissions, there are some negative consequences and environmental impacts of these plants. In order to harness the power in flowing water, rivers must be dammed, which can degrade water quality, disrupt migratory fish patterns, effect animal’s habitats, and displace local communities. Before a hydroelectric plant is built, the positives and negatives must be weighed– well placed, constructed, and thought plants have more benefits then consequences. Hydroelectric power has great potential to replace a large portion of electricity from fossil fuels: “In 2011, hydropower provided 16 percent of the world’s electricity, second only to fossil fuels. Worldwide capacity in 2011 was 950 gigawatts (GW), with 24 percent in the China, eight percent in the United States, and nine percent in Brazil” (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2). Geothermal energy taps into the energy contained underneath the Earth’s surface. Molten rock, or magma, under the Earths crust gives off an immense amount of heat; the amount of heat within 10,000 feet of the Earth’s surface is enough to provide 50,000 times that of all the coal, natural gas, and oil reserves on the planet. Geothermal plants use this heat to produce steam, which then turns a turbine to produce electricity. There are two types of geothermal plants, open loop, and closed loop. Open loop gives off emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and sulfur dioxide, which are all harmful to the environment, and two of which contribute to the greenhouse effect. Closed loop systems on the other hand, inject the gas used after the heat is extracted back into the crust so there are no harmful emissions; this system is a great way to produce clean energy. Iceland and El Salvador already produce 25% of their energy using geothermal power. In 2013 globally, geothermal plants produced 68 billion kWh or electricity, enough to power 6 million American homes (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2). Other more creative processes to harness clean power include biomass and fusion power. Biomass energy uses animal waste and plant matter to create energy. By 2030 it is estimated that 680 million dry tons of biomass resources could be made available in the US alone, equivalent to 732 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity or 19 percent of total U.S. power consumption in 2010. Fusion power is not currently being used, but is being research on will hopefully be implemented within the next ten to fifteen years. It produces power by superheating deuterium and tritium gas particles, so that the molecules fuse and produce a helium molecule, a neutron, and a lot of energy (Schwemmer, min 1-5). With the many sustainable options to provide the worlds power and electricity needs, with much less negative environmental impacts compared to fossil fuels, industry can move away from burning fossil fuels for power, to create a cleaner environment and stop climate change. 

It is often said that producing electricity from sustainable resources is significantly more expensive than obtaining it from fossil fuels. Renewable energy sources have no fuel costs though, so they can produce stable and predictable long-term energy costs. The major barrier for renewable energy is upfront capitol cost to build wind turbines, solar fields, hydroelectric plants, and other sustainable energy sources. The price per Kilowatt Hour (kWh) in the United States ranges from 6.92 to 27.05 cents per kWh, but the average price is 12 cents per kWh. As an initiative to switch to renewable energy, the federal government provides subsidies from research and production of renewable energy. The subsidies given for coal, natural gas, biomass, geothermal, and hydroelectric are all 50 cents to one dollar per megawatt hour (mWh). The subsidies given for solar and wind power are 24.34 cents per mWh and 23.37 cents per mWh respectively. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, solar, wind, and hydroelectric power are the energy sources that have the greatest potential to replace a significant amount of power obtained from fossil fuels. 

Transitioning to using sustainable resources as an alternate to producing energy by burning fossil fuels comes with challenges, but the benefits much outweigh the drawbacks. Currently, producing energy with solar and wind power, among other sustainable methods is more expensive than burning fossil fuels. With government subsidies promoting the use and research of these sustainable resources, they will become more affordable over time. The energy sources come with very few drawbacks compared to fossil fuels. Burning fossil fuels is the cause of the greenhouse effect, which is increasing the temperature of the Earth at a detrimental rate if it does not stop. The rate at which the temperature of the Earth is rising will only increase over time and will have many negative consequences, some of which are already taking place, on not only the environment, but also society as a whole. We need to move away from burning fossil fuels and transition to using sustainable energy sources to stop the warming of the Earth, and save the environment as we know it. 
