Article Critique: It Will Pay to Save the Planet by Bryan Walsh - Essay Example

The author writes of "millions of new jobs" and "a demand for green jobs, which could provide meaningful work", but offers no specifics or details. The author was further challenged by the topic as he could not even offer a definition for the term green job. Explain the research you would do to verify the findings of the article. Due to the immense scope of the topic, and the relative of the issue in the national spotlight, it would be impractical to devise any research based on empirical data or a quantitative study.

Research could best be accomplished by a review of the existing literature on the topic and consulting the writings of industry experts. I would examine the experiences that other countries have had with green technology and how it has impacted their employment and economic outlook. In addition, I would make some conjectures and predictions on the impact of energy on the economy if we do nothing. Describe two divergent positions on the existing law and state your own position. Divergent position #1 Solar panel technology for residential housing is an area of green technology that has vast potential.

At the current cost of solar cells, they are economically impractical without a government subsidy. Currently, the federal subsidy is 30 percent, with some states adding an additional amount ("Northern Arizona Wind & Sun"). If the subsidy were 70 percent, it would take the homeowner just 6 years to recover the cost of a system that has a life span of 20 years ("Northern Arizona Wind & Sun"). As the technology gets more developed and manufacturing reaches scale, the price will drop dramatically and the subsidies could be cut back.

The long-term effect would be to significantly lower the cost of utilities in America and there would be more money in the economy to spend on cars and houses. Divergent Position #2Closing the coal-fired electric plants and replacing them with nuclear facilities would greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and create a significant number of jobs. In the meantime, General Motors (and other automakers) could take this period to restructure their financing and products based around electric vehicles.

The nuclear plants could produce inexpensive fuel for GM's new line of electric vehicles. GM could eliminate their losing divisions and concentrate on making fewer, but better, products based on the EV1 design that was terminated a decade ago ("Now," 2006). The question of what to do with nuclear waste is still to be answered. France, which has much more experience with nuclear reactors, has an excellent safety record in regard to transportation and storage (Godoy, 2008).