Alternative Energy Sources The Nonrenewable Energy

Alternative Energy Sources Telescope to Microscope Sheldon Fogle Gwynedd Mercy University Abstract The term nonrenewable energy is pretty self-exclamatory. This can bring us a huge problem in the future .The demand for energy is more popular than ever, while the sources for energy are quickly vanishing. The earth is filled with numerous renewable resources such as wind, nuclear, hydroelectric, and solar energy that can eventually solve the problem. The following will list the advantages with the disadvantages for all the types of alternative energy. Non- Renewable Energy These energy sources are very effective in the way they work and provide us to live for our everyday needs. Unfortunately, there are two†¦show more content†¦Alternative energy resources have the advantage of being available very often with no risk of depletion. Nuclear, Solar, Wind, and Hydroelectric energy sources are considered to be the four major resources that can replace fossil fuels. â€Å"There are currently approximately 7 billion people in the world and given current trends, the population is expected to be around 9 billion in 2050, and over 10 billion by 2100† (Fred Magdoff 2013). Alternative energy sources are termed renewable because they can be continually replenished throughout time (The National Atlas of the United States of America, 2013). The world s modern day energy demands are still met largely from fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas. Regarding total energy demand, the share of fossil-fuel derived energy is around 80%. The remainder is supplied by nuclear and renewable energy of around 20% (Rahim, M., Yoshino, J., Yasuda, T. (2012, September 1). If these resources are expected to replace our current energy sources they will be expected to produce the same amount of energy if not more. Nuclear Nuclear energy is an alternative energy resource and its popularity differs among countries. â€Å"In the two years since the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accidents, countries around the world have responded to the Japanese catastrophe in a variety of ways (M.V. Ramana 2013). Nuclear power is a touchy topic when it comes to some countries. Some

The Martial Conflict Within Cathedral - 1071 Words

The Martial Conflict within â€Å"Cathedral† In the short story â€Å"Cathedral,† written by Raymond Carver, reveals an engagement among an unnamed narrator, his wife and his wife’s blind friend, Robert. The story offers a glimpses of each characters and events, which are more or less questionable in the sense of truth. Though the story is quite aesthetic, many would agree that the author tends to refer readers to their own imagination, especially at the ending. â€Å"Cathedral† is central on the encounter between the unnamed narrator and Robert, who the narrator view as a provoking to his insecurities. It’s understood that Robert, is an invasion of not only his home but, also his private feelings. The story provides a generous amount misleading†¦show more content†¦Ã¢â‚¬Å"Cathedral† allows readers to focus on different aspects that are the cause of the martial friction of the main couple. First, the everlasting friendship between the narrator’s wife and the blind man, Robert, u psets the narrator which cause his to be judgmental and rude occasionally. Not forgetting jealousy towards his wife’s ex-husband, who isn’t given a name because â€Å"why should he have a name?† (356). Indeed he is jealous of the wife’s ex-husband but he is arrogant on his current position in her life. The countless exchange of tapes amid by his wife and Robert, create a feeling of being unimportant. He addresses his patience on waiting for his wife to say his name, â€Å"‘And then my dear husband came into my life’- something like that† (361), but of course, such wish is left unanswered. Ongoing, it is interesting to see that the narrator long for a relevant connection with his wife, however, because of his character, he voluntary makes no attempt to accomplish it. Withdrawal, avoiding a partner, or refusing to communicate to your partner, often leads to invariably bickering when engaged in some oral activity, explains Linda Kay (2). More than usual, the couple shut down one another by passing harsh truth or giving the silent treatment. Although they don’t communicate effectively, the silence is not uncomfortable. Another displeasing problem in their relationship are the barriers. Whether or not their insecurity derived

An Argument for the Legalization of Drugs, Based o Essay Example For Students

An Argument for the Legalization of Drugs, Based o Essay n John Stuart Mills RevisedHarm PrincipleThe question of whether or not to legalize certain drugs has beendebated for decades. Although opponents have thus far been successful inpreventing this, there are nonetheless a substantial number of people whobelieve that legalization should be given a chance. Their arguments range fromthe seeming ineffectiveness of current drug laws to the simple premise that thegovernment has no right to prohibit its citizens from using drugs if theychoose to do so. This essay will address the issue from the standpoint of JohnStuart Mills Revised Harm Principle, which asserts that people should befree to do what they want unless they threaten the vital interests (i.e.,security or autonomy) of others. We will write a custom essay on An Argument for the Legalization of Drugs, Based o specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now Using Mills principle as a litmus test for this issue leads one to comedown on the side of legalization. Since Mills is concerned not with individualrights, but with the consequences of ones actions on other people, the questionbecomes: Is drug use an action that, although performed by an individual,threatens the vital interests of others? Using the example of a casual,responsible drug user who is a contributing (or non-detracting) member ofsociety, it is clear that more harm is done to others if the user must resort toillegal methods to obtain his drugs. The very act of buying drugs isintrinsically illegal and carries the threat of establishing a criminal recordfor the buyer. This can have a devastating effect on his family, his lifestyle,and his career. The effects on society as a whole include more crowded jailcells (prompting politicians to demand more jails be built), higher taxes tosupport these jails, and the loss, or at least diminution, of a productivecitizen. In order to bu y drugs illegally, the user may be forced to exposehimself to the fringes of the criminal worldsomething he would never do underany other circumstances. If drugs were legalized, the criminal stigma would beremoved from their purchase, possession, and use. The government would collecttaxes on drug sales and, conversely, would not be spending millions of dollarsto stem the flow of illegal drugs. This increase in tax dollars could be put touse in drug education and treatment programs for those individuals who areunable to moderate their intake and subsequently become addicts. Then thegovernment would be intervening with its citizens lives in a benevolent manner(and only when asked) rather than in a forceful, punitive way. Many opponents to legalization point out that drug use leads to spousaland child abuse, random criminal acts precipitated by the effects of drugs on ausers inhibitions, and crimes committed to support drug habits. This argumentis fundamentally defective because it addresses the abuse of drugs, which is notthe issue here. When an individuals use of drugs leads him to harm others, itbecomes a behavioral problem. That is, the issue is no longer drugs, but thebehavior of the individual. If that behavior breaks a law, the individualshould be punished for that specific conductnot for drug use. In its pureform, drug use affects only the user, and the government is therefore actingpaternally when it regulates this behavior. This government regulation violatesMills Revised Harm Principle as blatantly as would regulations againstsunbathing or overeating or masturbation. A RebuttalWhen using John Stuart Mills Revised Harm Principle to argue for thelegalization of drugs, it is necessary to exami ne that principle (that peopleshould be free to do what they want unless they threaten the vital interests,i.e., security or autonomy, of others) and define its terms. Proponents oflegalization argue that drug use is a self-regarding act and has no effect onanyone other than the user. But drug use affects every aspect of society: itaffects the security of nonusers, and it affects the autonomy of the user. .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc , .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc .postImageUrl , .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc , .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc:hover , .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc:visited , .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc:active { border:0!important; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc:active , .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u2cb918ed124cb460ae58d575e48ffbdc:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Salem Witch Trials EssayIf drugs were made legal and easily obtainable in this country, thegovernment would be relinquishing its role as protector of those citizens whoare unable to control their excesses. These people surrender their autonomy todrug addiction, thus selling themselves into a type of slavery. It is truethat the decriminalization of drugs would remove much of the stigma associatedwith them, but this would not be a positive change. It is that stigma thatkeeps many law-abiding citizens from using illegal drugs, and thus keeps thenumber of addicts at a minimum. Also, if drugs were legalized, the governmentwould not be legally able to force addicts into treatmen t programs, and thenumber of addicts would grow exponentially. This scenario leads to the problem of security, both economic andpersonal, for the vast number of Americans who probably would not becomeaddicted to drugs if they were legalized. Drug use would become as prolific asalcohol consumption, and the number of societal and health-related problemswould be as numerous as those associated with alcohol. More working days wouldbe lost by people unable to control their drug habits, and insurance costs wouldsoar in order to cover expensive treatment required to rehabilitate addicts andto deal with the health problems caused by addiction. These consequences wouldhave a direct effect on people other than the drug users, thus negating theconcept that drug use is a self-regarding act. Regarding personal security, legalization advocates try to draw a linebetween drug use and drug abuse. As it is impossible to predict who would usedrugs responsibly and who would succumb to addiction, the government has aright and a duty to do everything in its powers to limit the availability ofharmful substances, even though the majority of its citizens might never makethe transition from use to abuse. Proponents of legalization maintain that legalizing drugs would removegovernment control from a private area of our lives. This is a faultyassumption because the governments role would only shift, not disappear. Therewould be taxes, quality control, and distribution issues to deal with, and thegovernment would be at the helm. Therefore, Mills Principle would still beviolated, and the country would have a slew of new problems to deal with dueto the availability of legal drugs and lack of recourse with which to addressthem. Category: Philosophy

Native Son Essays (927 words) - Literature, American Literature

Native Son Richard Wright The Theme of fate and free will Prof J Mkhize ECL310 E Kyle Keens 201400329 Plot Summary Bigger Thomas, an African American who lives in an impoverished neighborhood , is employed by a prosperous white family , the Dalton's, who live in the suburbs of a major city. The money Bigger makes at his new job will be used to supplement his mother's income. As a chauffeur, he is directed by the father of the family to take Mary, the daughter, to the university. Instead, Mary decides to pick up her Communist boyfriend, Jan, and to spend the time drinking and partying . Afterward Bigger takes a very drunk Mary home and while attempting to sneak out the house passed a blind Mrs Dalton he accidently smothers Mary and kills her. In his panic he disposes of her body in the house furnace and attempts to frame her boyfriend Jan. Bigger is found out and captured by the police. Mr. Boris Max, a lawyer friend of Jan and also a communist, tries to help Bigger and agrees to defend him claiming that Bigger is a product of his environment. Bigger is ultimately fo und guilty but he is able to view white people as individuals and equals as opposed to how he viewed them as a singular force of oppression before. The Theme of Fate and Free will Wright portrays a character that is bound by fate. Although bigger is given the illusion of choices he is ultimately on a set path. This path is as a result of the racist capitalist society in which he lives. The purpose of the novel is revealed when Mr. Max delivers his speech to the court while defending Bigger's actions. Bigger is said to be a product of his environment, a "native son" who as a result of the oppression of rich whites in America is left with no other choice than to steal or kill. Bigger's murder of Mary Dalton can then be seen as not entirely his fault. It is the fault of society, a society that has pushed American black people so far that their free will is limited to such an extent that it would appear non-existent. This lack of free will is shown in the interaction between Mary, Jan and Bigger. The two force Bigger to take them to a "black" neighbourhood and although he feels incredibly uncomfortable Bigger feels he canno t object to their wishes. Later when Bigger attempts to leave a drunk Mary at her home he is trapped by her blind mother. The racist society and the fact of the situation leaves Bigger to assume he will be in serious trouble if he is caught. This leads to him smothering Mary to keep her from giving him away and accidentally kills her. With no other choice he is left to accept this and try to get away. Bigger is made a murderer by the society in which he lives and that is the argument Wright makes with this novel. Wright being a Marxist argues that capitalist society seeks to impoverish those it can to make others rich and successful. In the novel the city of Chicago is run by a group of white business men who in order to keep black people poor make sure that they cannot live in the predominantly white neighbourhoods and are forced to live in overpriced neighbourhoods that they own including Bigger's apartment building which is owned by his employer Mr Dalton . The capitalist system allows only a few to succeed in life and Wright makes a point to show a character who has been disillusioned by this system and now believes that there is no hope for anything better in their life and so his free will has in a sense been taken away leaving him with little options in life and as Wright believes the inevitability of becoming a murderer. Criticisms Wright has been criticised as writing native son only to promote communism. Wright , at the time of writing the novel , was a member of the communist party and many including Kinnamon believe that Mr. Max's speech in the novel had no