Case in Point Articles The cases in point for chapter 11 through 13 focus on different energy resources and how there are two sides to every type of energy-based need. Chapter 11 informs of us about how increasing oil exploration could destroy fragile habitats. Chapter 12 explains about the complications involved in storing dangerous radioactive wastes. Chapter 13 tells us about how even an ‘eco-friendly’ energy source can hurt the environment due to poor planning. The chapter 11 Case in point analyzes the debate upon whether or not the U.S should drill for oil at the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The article provides information on why groups are for and against opening the refuge for oil exploration, a conflict that goes back to 1980. On one side are those who seek to protect rare and fragile natural environments; on the other side are those whose higher priority is the development of some of the last major U.S. oil supplies (Raven, P., Berg, L., & Hassenzahl, D., 2010). The stakeholders in this debate are people who support oil exploration and those who seek to conserve the refuge. Supporters stand by the belief that oil exploration is important because oil has been found in nearby locations, the U.S. spends a great amount of the energy budget on importing oil, and by locating and using oil from our own soil we would be less dependent on foreign countries. On the other hand, conservationists say that oil exploration poses permanent threats to the Alaskan ecosystem. They also believe that oil, because it is a fossil fuel, is an inefficient resource. They say that the U.S. should spend more effort into developing renewable energy resources that can be reused thus eliminating the need for trade. The chapter 12 case in point is about Yucca Mountain and the storage of nuclear waste. Yucca Mountain in Nevada is the only candidate being formally considered as a permanent
References: Raven, P., Berg, L., & Hassenzahl, D. (2010). Environment. (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.