Your city has been warned by the EPA to cut sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions or you will lose substantial federal funds. One citizen's group has advocated drastically reducing electricity use. A second group advocates reduced use of automobiles within city limits. Choose one or the other position to support. Develop a series of logical arguments to support your position.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 25, 2018, 8:27 am ad1c9bdddf
Firstly, consider how sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide is actually formed. Both of these compounds are by-products of combustion, specifically that of fossil fuels which contain both sulfur elements and various nitrogen-fixed elements which recombine with oxygen to create nitrogen oxides. As a result, the common theme for both of these proposals is the source: combustion of fossil fuels. Therefore, the argument quickly becomes - which of the two: electricity use vs. automobile use - uses more fossil fuels (and what kind? Since different fuels may release different amounts) and therefore releases more sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide?
Many cities use fossil fuel power plants to provide electricity for their citizens. It is fairly cheap to implement and maintain, ...
The solution discusses the series of logical arguments on cutting emissions.
What might we do to work toward sustainability, and what are the major roadblocks to achieving it? How would your life be different in a sustainable society?
Some organizations, such as the Ecological Society of America, are starting to envision a sustainable society, one in which each generation inherits sufficient natural and economic resources and a relatively stable environment. The Worldwatch Institute estimates that to reach sustainability by 2030, we must begin shaping a sustainable society during the next 10 years or so. What might we do to work toward sustainability, and what are the major roadblocks to achieving it? How would your life be different in a sustainable society?View Full Posting Details