Running head: CONFLICTING VIEWPOINTS

Conflicting Viewpoints
Name
Institution

CONFLICTING VIEWPOINTS

2
Part 1

I chose the topic science and technology and the main issue under debate is whether
alternative energy such as hydrogen, solar, geothermal, or nuclear energy can effectively replace
fossil fuels such as coal and oil. I am of the opinion that alternative energy can replace fossil
fuels because fossil fuels are unsustainable, inefficient, and environmentally destructive. The
second reason is that fossil fuels are a major contributor to global climate change. The last reason
is that renewable energies are viable and therefore need to boost the American economy and
reduce overreliance on foreign sources of energy (Goel, 2005).
Part 2
The first point opposed to my position is that reducing oil drilling will reduce the
availability of domestic energy for Americans in the future. In trying to believe this point of
view, domestic energy could be available to Americans in the future if Congress could expand
areas for active exploration. The second point is that alternative energies alone are not able to
offer job opportunities that can deliver the country from environmental and economic wilderness.
I can believe this contrary opinion because renewable energy only represents a small fraction of
the countrys energy needs and as such cannot deliver it from environmental and economic
wilderness (Goel, 2005). The third premise is that energy independence in the United States is
not a solution enough to deliver the nation from energy crisis. I believe this premise because the
available energy alternatives can only produce around 430,000 barrels, which is only 2% of
American oil consumption.
Part 3
The first point in agreement with my position is that a countrys thirst for oil is not good
for the economy, national security, and the environment. In trying to doubt this point of view, I

CONFLICTING VIEWPOINTS

can argue that there is no shortage of oil in the US since it is estimated that there is enough
natural gas and oil offshore in non-park lands and non-wilderness. Therefore, the country is not
thirsty for oil. The second point in agreement with my opinion is that the solution to ecological
collapse and economic downturn are green jobs that will help recover the economy. I tend to
doubt this point of view because renewable energy alone is not able to provide approximately
five million jobs and end American reliance on imported oil. The last point in agreement with my
opinion is that the alternative energy will bring about energy independence due to increase in
alternative fuel process. I tend to doubt this point of view because America has always strived to
be energy independent but this has never solved the problem of energy crisis (Sioshansi, 2011).
Part 4
The types of biases I experienced when reading the premises for and against my position
on the topic include pattern-recognition bias, self-interest bias, and stability bias. Pattern
recognition bias involves spotting patterns where they never exist and giving more weight to
most recent events. It involves paying more attention to memorable events (Szczecinski &
Parker, 2003). For, example, American citizens only pay attention to a recent announcement that
introduction of renewable fuels would solve all the countrys energy needs into the future. They
give more weight to this idea without understanding the fact that renewable fuels only form a
small fraction of the countrys energy needs and as such cannot lead the country out of
environmental and economic wilderness.
The second bias is that of self-interest bias, which involves incentives of rewarding the
wrong behavior and not considering the bigger picture of a concept and the opinion of other
stakeholders. The bias states that people get motivated to attain outcomes that favor them at the
expense of the country or organization as a whole. Americans desire for the introduction of

CONFLICTING VIEWPOINTS

renewable energy sources to solve their employment needs. They do not consider the bigger
picture of that source of energy solving the problem of energy crisis or getting the country out of
economic and environmental wilderness. The last type of bias is stability bias, which involves
people being comfortable with the existing status quo when there is no pressure of changing
(Zillman, 2008). It states that the present state influences the result more than is logical. Relating
this bias to the topic of study, the fact that new energy sources have not been able to solve
energy crisis in America could have been reason enough to conclude that renewable energy will
not be able to solve energy crisis in America or even deliver the country from economic and
environmental crisis.
Part 5
My position of supporting an alternative energy to effectively replace fossil fuels has
changed and I no longer advocate for that point of view because before replacing fossil fuels
with an alternative energy, the country must overcome several technological hurdles. From the
points discussed above, it can be argued that fossil fuels will still exist for several years to come
and become increasingly efficient. Fossil fuels are also very economical compared to other
energy sources, which are also inefficient (Zillman, 2008).

CONFLICTING VIEWPOINTS

5
References

Goel, M. (2005). Energy sources and global warming. New Delhi [u.a.: Allied Publishers.
Sioshansi, F. P. (2011). Energy, Sustainability and the Environment: Technology, Incentives,
Behavior. Burlington: Elsevier Science.
Szczecinski, S., & Parker, M. (2003). Our environment. Greenwood, W.A: Ready-Ed
Publications.
Zillman, D. N. (2008). Beyond the carbon economy: Energy law in transition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.