Annotated Bibliography

Still Searching...      


        In the article “Academic Inflation”, (2010) Sir Ken Robinson implies the importance of going the extra mile when aiming for a college degree because your standard bachelor's degree isn't going to cut it nowadays. He explains that 20 years ago a bachelor degree could get you a well paid and respectable vocation, but now day's there is an inflation of degree's and a bachelor degrees seems to be a dime a dozen. The purpose of his article is to inform his reader's how rigorous it is to obtain a respected job in today's workforce, not to discourage them but in order to encourage them to reach for an mba to set them aside from the inflation of bachelor degree's. His article is essentially targeting high school kids and people currently enrolled in college.


Citation:


"Academic inflation" The Problem of Academic Inflation.Web. 18 Apr. 2011. http://www.degreesinbusiness.org/resources/economy-education/Academic-Inflation.aspx.




In the article "The Dangerous Myth of Grade Inflation", (2002) Alfie Kohn clarifies grade inflation has been going on since the 60's and 70's his definition of it is "upward shift in students' grade point averages without a similiar rise in achievement--exist, and that is a bad thing". Kohn supports his claims through credible information from researcher's gathering grade results from over 3,000 institutions in the past 30 years. The purpose of his article is to make fellow reader's understand that there has been an extreme lack of performance in classrooms but seemingly the grades are getting higher in order show them our college's curriculum's are softening and need to be reformed.
Kohn targets any person who is dubious about colleges.


Citation:
Kohn, Alfie. ""The Dangerous Myth of Grade Inflation"." "The Chronicle of Higher Education. N.p., 8 Nov. 2002. Web. 12 Apr. 2011. <http://www.jmu.edu/stem/outreach/documents/2002--Kohn--Dangerous%20Myth%20of%20Grade%20Inflation.pdf>.

Thesis

Through our countries past two centuries the United States has gradually lost its empowering ethics. Once we were an economically thriving coutnry, who had precedence above all, we were the template for an ideal coutnry. But through time we evolved from hard working and ambitious americans who had absolute faith in our government to a new aged american who has lost near all patriotism and scavenges to find any way to do the bare minmum and be financially well off. American education has completely paralled these ineptidtudes. There are many reasons for decline which attribute to the quality of education, but the bottom line is our education systems needs to be completely reformed. We can no longer use teaching techniques that were implemented 100's of years ago. We need to be innovative and creative in order to grabbed our students attention whereas they will be fond of learning and utilize ever bit of information that has given to them. Along with this reformation the difficulty of curriculum needs to be raised. Your degree shall be earned not given to you

World Cafe

This blog's purpose is to dial in on our MWP3 concerning education and grasp a sense ofwhat our peers feel about current education and future education. Reading some of my classmates blogs i have mostly read about the negative aspects of education, I must agree. I feel the college institute has become a depository for money and has lost focus on productivity and functionality. Anyone is able to recieve a bachelor degree with just minimal work. A bachelor degree isnt as prestigious as it use to be, students are now able to obtain a degree with just studying little as 5 hours a week, thats cake! But what it does is cause inflation and the value tremendously deappreciates. For instance my cousin went to the university of utah got his degree in socialology, which once he got out there were no jobs that needed his abilities. And just the other day he applied for a miniumum wage maintence job, finding out their were 23 applicants that had a college degree, its crazy. This is where the college and advisors need to step in and stop saying "well what are your interest, what do you like to do?" If you say art then your going to be an art major. They need to ask well what do you like to do and lets see if there is any demand for that vocation. I feel with our current technology our society should be more intelligent then ever. We have such quick access to an infinite amount of prudent information. Creativity and Intelligence should be thriving.

College the Easy Way: Weekend Blog

                This article is great because I think many Americans feel college is mandatory for young people to succeed in life but when they hear about kids not expanding their knowledge nor really gaining anything from college it is solely blamed on the students not the institute. But essentially it is both sides fault because if students aren’t willing to put the effort to obtain a college degree they should be failed because it is a reality check when they have to apply themselves in the real world’s network of jobs. College was such a cruise for the kids that when they actually have to do work they are aggrivated and they aren’t use to having to critically think or be held accountable. Therefore it is hard not to just look at a college as a depository for money. College is suppose to prepare you for life and create the work ethic and knowledge in order to be successful in the workplace. Yet today’s college seems to be a social kick for kids, enabling them to party every night and still achieve a B OR B+. I’m sure you could ask several adults if that is similar to what their job envirorment is like and it would be an irate no. So seems college is just a system to pump kids in out as quickly as possible so they can get the next batch and make money. Through personal experience I feel high school prepared me more for the real world then college is teaching me right now. In my history class I literally have not learned one thing this semester entire semester. Luckily not all my classes are like that but it definitely is time for a reformation in the college system. Your degree should be earned not handed to you.

Precis on Race to the Top

            In the articles "Grading the Education President", (2011) debater's assert the importance of a innovated and reformed american educational system, which some back Obama's intuitions but others feel his motives wont prevail. The debater's support their claims through referencing the state of the union address and past movements that intended to reform american education but miserably failed. Their purpose is to provide their reader's with different points of views on the topic and intel the ramifications that will have to be taken in order to create a powerful movement to bring back innovation, creativity, and excitment to schools. The debater's tone's are indicative and target America in a whole.

Reflection on MWP2

Writing this paper on the proposal of a nuclear power plant in Pueblo was fairly enjoyable because  i was passionate about there needing to be a policy against the plant eventhough i had no prior knowledge. Its always easier writing a paper about something that has meaning or value to you and I just feel Pueblo is becoming too industrialized. Luckily i have been passionate about my last two  papers. I feel this paper isn't as good as my last one due to time management. I think I had some good thoughts but i really didnt extrapolate on them nor state a policy. Because if there is a policy for nuclear energy it would either be a policy that states there shall be no nuclear plants ever built in pueblo or there is going to be a nuclear pant. So my policy really underlied in my opinion. I think something else that would have added to the impact of my paper to the reader would have been to include more quotes throughout the paper from different people versus one. Additionally have a couple more precis sources and discuss perhaps the nuclear energy: how it is created and compare it to other energies. My conclusion really didnt feel like a conclusion but felt right.

MWP2 Final

Landon Williams

DiPrince English 102

Policy Essay

24 March 2011

Nuclear Energy

Imagine in 2020 Pueblo, Colorado, once a thriving region for agriculture now nothing but a desolate landscape, overly congested by industrial entities. Cement Plant, wind tower plan, two power plants, chemical depot, along with a newly built nuclear plant finalizing the devastation. What was thought to be an impeccable idea stimulating local economies and providing 1,000 jobs, didn’t work out so well. The Nuclear plant consumed all of Pueblo county's water causing soil to dry up and the idea of 1,000 jobs was great but it took away the same amount, causing farmers who have farmed their entire lives to now be unemployed.

As in any controversy there is always opposition and there are key factors that lead people to take a specific side.  In the article “Nuclear plant proposed for Pueblo County”(2011), Chris Woodka asserts that Don Banner local Puebloan lawyer has strong aspirations to erect a nuclear plant southeast of Pueblo, which could produce 3,000 megawatt’s of energy, his attempt to fill the nation’s energy gap and to financially stimulate the community’s economy. Woodka supports his claims with more current and past history of Banner’s campaigns for the construction of various entities and provides the reader with effective statistics and facts pertaining to the nuclear plant such as; it creating 400-700 job energy, plant would provide roughly $31 million in property tax revenue, and being a safe alternative to mass produce energy. He writes to educate his reader’s about the proponents in order to let people know how positive the plant could be for Pueblo. Further in, an article on the contrary title “Pueblo Co. Closer To Getting Nuclear Plant”, (2011) Lindsay Watts states that Pueblo, Colorado is one step closer to constructing a nuclear plant, after the county commission met last month and voted 5 to 3 in approval of the plant but locals are worried that it will put Puebloans in danger and do away with our pristine agriculture. She supports her claims with statistics and quotes from locals expressing their uneasy  feeling’s on the plant. Watt’s purpose is to inform and provide the community of Pueblo with current news in order to have  them keep in mind that the plant could be wonderful financially but is it worth it to endanger local history and our health. Matthew L. Wald in “Nuclear Energy”, (2011)  asserts a neutral opinion on nuclear energy while giving an overview of the industry itself showing that It is a clean source of creating energy but being extremely costly to build a plant, he gives great explanation about the physics behind nuclear energy, and the potential affects it serves. Wald supports his claims through showing great knowledge of nuclear energy, discussing the when the idea of nuclear energy came around, the first plants ever built, disasters they created, along with its advantages and disadvantages comparably to other energies. His purpose is to educate his reader in a concise manner in order to catch them up on the topic of nuclear energy so they can have a logical opinion rather then an opinion created by feelings.

         Every now and then justice has to be served and people need to sit back and realize the direction in which our country is heading towards. The city of Pueblo is so unique because of its history and authentic people but through greed and industrialization we are losing pieces of culture day by day. Now with the proposal of a nuclear plant we could potentially have a large sentimental aspect of Pueblo taken away and potentially put our lives in danger. Some people believe constructing this plant is vital for future electric energy growth and microeconomics for Pueblo (Woodka). This proposal was devised by local Puebloan lawyer Don Banner who envisions a nuclear power plant being built southeast of pueblo, which would be on 24,000 acres between the towns of Avondale and Fowler, south of Highway 50 (Watts). Along with a nuclear plant, the plan is for solar power and wind power. The facility is being proposed by a group called Puebloans For Energizing Our Community. The site would create 2,500-5,000 construction jobs over the course of about five years when the plant was being built; 400 to 700 permanent jobs at power site; and up to 1,000 jobs off-site for the community (Woodka). Don Banner believes the facility would also boost area property values. So people who are in support of the plant feel that it could significantly stimulate the Pueblo economy and create a substantial number of jobs in a dire time. It all sounds great but on contrary many Puebloans including myself feel differently. The nuclear plant poses great threat to local agriculture (a part of what makes a great city) and our health. Pueblo Native Suzanne Morgan said "Once the farm economy is compromised it will be impossible to re-establish. We need long-term strategic thinking and policies to protect local agriculture and our food supply." Pueblo's farmlands are in an ideal region, with rich soil, good water, long growing season made for successful farming. If built the nuclear plant would be constructed very close to these farms causing deprivation of water (Hobbs). Nuclear energy consumes huge amounts of water and the Arkansas River is already over used. Locals feel it unreasonable and a poor use of resources to locate a nuclear power plant in an arid region could potentially dry up the farmlands (Hobbs). Farming is a big part of Pueblo culture, to take it away would be like taking down the statue of liberty to build a hilton. There comes a point where our society needs to stop and think why we are here and how our country became one of the most prestigious countries to ever take rule. United States was founded on a compilation of ethics and morals but greed has diminished the meanings of these virtues.

  I feel the nuclear plant proposal isn’t for the people of Pueblo but a plan to comfort them so big money people can further their life of opulence. Why couldn’t this nuclear plant be built somewhere that isn’t near a dense population and rich agriculture. For instance in the deserts of Nevada where a nuclear bomb could explode and no one would know about it. If people solely believe in the plant because it will bring more jobs we should look at other avenues. A historical city is being overwhelmingly broken up by industrial entities. Enough is enough.

Annotated Bibliography

Citation:  Hobbs, Dan. ""Nuclear is Incompatible"." www.pueblochieftain.com. pueblo chieftain, 6 Mar. 2011. Web. 13 Mar. 2011. <http://www.chieftain.com/opinion/tell_it_to_the_chieftain/nuclear-is-incompatible/article_14dcc2fc-46c7-11e0-9598-001cc4c03286.html>.

In an article “Nuclear is Incompatible”(2011) Dan Hobbs argues that nuclear proposal poses a major threat to agricultural economy of Pueblo. Hobbs supports his claims by discussing the richness of Pueblo County’s farmlands, their relevance to Pueblo, and how if the Nuclear Plant is built it could potentially do away with the meaningful cultivations. He writes to his reader’s so they can think about this controversy with an emotional perspective in order to make them understand how badly the plant could affect Pueblo. His tone is empathetic and targets any adult.

Citation: Woodka, Chris. ""Nuclear Plant Proposed for Pueblo County"." Chieftain. Pueblo Chieftain, 15 July 2010. Web. 10 Mar. 2011. http://www.chieftain.com/nuclear-plant-proposed-for-pueblo-county/article_09764ac4-8fd3-11df-82c7-001cc4c03286.html

In his article “Nuclear plant proposed for Pueblo County”(2011), Chris Woodka asserts that Don Banner local Puebloan lawyer has strong aspirations to erect a nuclear plant southeast of Pueblo, which could produce 3,000 megawatt’s of energy, his attempt to fill the nation’s energy gap and help the community as well. Woodka supports his claims with more current and past history of Banner’s campaigns for the construction of various entities and provides the reader with effective statistics and facts pertaining to the nuclear plant such as; it creating 400-700 jobs, using less water than fossil energy, being a safe mass production of energy. His purpose is to educate his reader’s about this proposal in order to give them knowledge so they can decide what their feelings are towards the subject, since it really is a serious one. His targeted audience is mainly the community of Pueblo but also Colorado in whole.

Citation: Watts, Lindsay. ""Pueblo CO. Closer To Getting Nuclear Plant"." KRDO. N.p., 22 Feb. 2011. Web. 10 Mar. 2011. http://www.krdo.com/news/26961763/detail.html.

               In her article “Pueblo Co. Closer To Getting Nuclear Plant”, (2011) Lindsay Watts states that Pueblo, Colorado is one step closer to constructing a nuclear plant, after the county commission met last month and voted 5 to 3 in approval of the plant. She supports her claims with interesting statistics about plant productivity, employing 400-700 people, but also providing quotes from Don Banner, the facet of this proposal. Watt’s purpose is to inform and provide the community of Pueblo with current news in order to keep them fresh on the topic because this is a seriously concerned subject. Her article is directed towards the people Pueblo and the State of Colorado.

Citation: Wald, Matthew L. ""Nuclear Energy"." NY Times. N.p., 1 Feb. 2011. Web. 11 Mar. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/info/nuclear-energy/?scp=1-spot&sq=%20nuclear%20energy&st=cse>

                In his article “Nuclear Energy”, (2011) Matthew L. Wald asserts a neutral opinion on nuclear energy while giving an overview of the industry itself showing that It is a clean source of creating energy but being extremely costly to build a plant, he gives great explanation about the physics behind nuclear energy, and the potential affects it serves. Wald supports his claims through showing great knowledge of nuclear energy, discussing the when the idea of nuclear energy came around, the first plants ever built, disasters they created, along with its advantages and disadvantages comparably to other energies. His purpose is to educate his reader in a concise manner in order to catch them up on the topic of nuclear energy so they can have a logical opinion rather then an opinion created by feelings. His targeted audience would be fellow Americans and he conveys his message in a concerned and serious tone.

MWP 2 First Draft

 

Landon Williams

MWP 2 First Draft

DiPrince English 10

Mar. 14 2011

            Imagine in 2020 Pueblo, Co once a thriving region for argiculture now a residing desolate plataeu landscaped with industrial entities. Cement Plant, two  power plants, chemical depot, along with a newly built nuclear plant finalizing the devastation. What was thought to be an impeccable idea stimulating local economies and providing a 1,000 jobs it didn’t work so well after all. The Nuclear plant consumed all of Pueblo county's water causing soil to dry and the idea of a 1,000 jobs was great but it took away the same amount and farmers who have farmed their entire lives now have no way of making living. 

          Through research I have found significant information on the opposing sides pertaining to the proposal of a Nuclear Power Plant in Pueblo, Co. People who are for the construction of this plant believe it is vital for future electric energy growth and microeconomics for Pueblo. This proposal devised by local Puebloan lawyer Don Banner envisions a nuclear powerplant being built southeast of pueblo, which would be on 24,000 acres between the towns of Avondale and Fowler, south of Highway 50. In an article I read titled “Nuclear plant proposed for Pueblo County”(2011), Chris Woodka asserted that Don Banner has strong aspirations to erect a nuclear plant southeast of Pueblo, which could produce 3,000 megawatt’s of energy, his attempt to fill the nation’s energy gap and help the community as well. Along with a nuclear plant, the plan is for solar power and wind power. The facility is being proposed by a group called Puebloans For Energizing Our Community. The site would create 2,500-5,000 construction jobs over about five years when the plant was being built; 400 to 700 permanent jobs at power site; and up to 1,000 jobs off-site for the community. He said the facility would also boost area property values. So their feelings are that this nuclear plant could significantly stimulate the Pueblo economy and create a substantial number of jobs in a dire time. It all sounds great but opposer's feel differently. The nuclear plant poses great threat to local  agriculture. Pueblo Native Suzanne Morgan said "Once the farm economy is compromised it will be impossible to re-establish. We need long-term strategic thinking and policies to protect local agriculture and our food supply." Pueblo's farmlands are in an ideal region, with rich soil, good water, long growing season made for sucessful farming. If built the nuclear plant would be constructed very close to these farms causing deprivation of water. Nuclear energy consumes huge amounts of water and the Arkansas River is already over used. Locals feel it unreasonable and a poor use of resources to locate a nuclear power plant in an arid region. It could potentially dry up the region. Farming is a big part of Pueblo culture, to take it away would be like taking down the statue of liberty to build a hilton. There comes a point where our society needs to stop and think why we are here and how are country is one of the most prestigous countries to ever take rule. United states was founded on a compilation of ethics and morales but greed has diminished the meanings of these virtues.

Annonated Bibliography

In his article “Nuclear plant proposed for Pueblo County”(2011), Chris Woodka asserts that Don Banner local Puebloan lawyer has strong aspirations to erect a nuclear plant southeast of Pueblo, which could produce 3,000 megawatt’s of energy, his attempt to fill the nation’s energy gap and help the community as well. Woodka supports his claims with more current and past history of Banner’s campaigns for the construction of various entities and provides the reader with effective statistics and facts pertaining to the nuclear plant such as; it creating 400-700 jobs, using less water than fossil energy, being a safe mass production of energy. His purpose is to educate his reader’s about this proposal in order to give them knowledge so they can decide what their feelings are towards the subject, since it really is a serious one. His targeted audience is mainly the community of Pueblo but also Colorado in whole.

Woodka, Chris. ""Nuclear Plant Proposed for Pueblo County"." Chieftain. Pueblo Chieftain, 15 July 2010. Web. 10 Mar. 2011. http://www.chieftain.com/nuclear-plant-proposed-for-pueblo-county/article_09764ac4-8fd3-11df-82c7-001cc4c03286.html.

               In her article “Pueblo Co. Closer To Getting Nuclear Plant”, (2011) Lindsay Watts states that Pueblo, Colorado is one step closer to constructing a nuclear plant, after the county commission met last month and voted 5 to 3 in approval of the plant. She supports her claims with interesting statistics about plant productivity, employing 400-700 people, but also providing quotes from Don Banner, the facet of this proposal. Watt’s purpose is to inform and provide the community of Pueblo with current news in order to keep them fresh on the topic because this is a seriously concerned subject. Her article is directed towards the people Pueblo and the State of Colorado.

 

Watts, Lindsay. ""Pueblo CO. Closer To Getting Nuclear Plant"." KRDO. N.p., 22 Feb. 2011. Web. 10 Mar. 2011. http://www.krdo.com/news/26961763/detail.html.

                In his article “Nuclear Energy”, (2011) Matthew L. Wald asserts a neutral opinion on nuclear energy while giving an overview of the industry itself showing that It is a clean source of creating energy but being extremely costly to build a plant, he gives great explanation about the physics behind nuclear energy, and the potential affects it serves. Wald supports his claims through showing great knowledge of nuclear energy, discussing the when the idea of nuclear energy came around, the first plants ever built, disasters they created, along with its advantages and disadvantages comparably to other energies. His purpose is to educate his reader in a concise manner in order to catch them up on the topic of nuclear energy so they can have a logical opinion rather then an opinion created by feelings. His targeted audience would be fellow Americans and he conveys his message in a concerned and serious tone.

Wald, Matthew L. ""Nuclear Energy"." NY Times. N.p., 1 Feb. 2011. Web. 11 Mar. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/info/nuclear-energy/?scp=1-spot&sq=%20nuclear%20energy&st=cse>.

Nuclear Plant Outline

Thesis: State policy and give brief explanation of opposing sides. Talk about American values and greed



Summary:

Discuss opposing sides so the reader's get the jist of the proposal in whole.

Pro's of plant; 400-700 local jobs, 2,500 construction during the course of 5 years, 1,000 jobs on the outside for the community, stimulation of pueblo economy, and being leaders of energy.

Con's; Native's health at risk, re occurence of cherylnobyl, foremost using up to much water and creating obsoletion of farmlands

Quotes:

"Yes, energy is important, but we are already flush with power generation plants in our region and food security and preserving our ability to produce food and forage indefinitely are more important."

"Once the farm economy is compromised it will be impossible to re-establish. We need long-term strategic thinking and policies to protect local agriculture and our food supply."

Argument:


Conclusion:

Pueblo Nuclear Power Plant Summary

Through research i have found significant information on the opposing sides pertaining to the proposal of a Nuclear Power Plant in Pueblo, Co. People who are for the construction of this plant believe it is vital for future electric energy growth and microeconomics for Pueblo. This proposal devised by local Puebloan lawyer Don Banner envisions a nuclear powerplant being built southeast of pueblo, whichwould be on 24,000 acres between the towns of Avondale and Fowler, south of Highway 50. Along with a nuclear plant, the plan is for solar power and wind power. The facility is being proposed by a group called Puebloans For Energizing Our Community. The site would create 2,500-5,000 construction jobs over about five years when the plant was being built; 400 to 700 permanent jobs at power site; and up to 1,000 jobs off-site for the community. He said the facility would also boost area property values. So their feelings are that this nuclear plant could significantly stimulate the Pueblo economy and create a substantial number of jobs in a dire time. It all sounds great but opposer's feel differently. The nuclear plant poses great threat to local argriculture. Pueblo's farmlands are in an ideal region, with rich soil, good water, long growing season made for sucessful farming. If built the nuclear plant would be constructed very close to these farms causing depriviation of water. Nuclear energy consumes huge amounts of water and the Arkansas River is already over used. Locals feel it unreasonable and a poor use of resources to locate a nuclear power plant in an arid region. It could potentially dry up the region. Farming is a big part of Pueblo culture, to take it away would be like taking down the statue of liberty to build a hilton. There comes a point where our society needs to stop and think why we are here and how are country is one of the most prestigous countries to ever take rule. United states was founded on a compilation of ethics and morales but greed has diminished the meanings of these virtues.

3 Civic Issues Precis'

In his article “Nuclear plant proposed for Pueblo County”(2011), Chris Woodka asserts that Don Banner local Puebloan lawyer has strong aspirations to erect a nuclear plant southeast of Pueblo, which could produce 3,000 megawatt’s of energy, his attempt to fill the nation’s energy gap and help the community as well. Woodka supports his claims with more current and past history of Banner’s campaigns for the construction of various entities and provides the reader with effective statistics and facts pertaining to the nuclear plant such as; it creating 400-700 jobs, using less water than fossil energy, being a safe mass production of energy. His purpose is to educate his reader’s about this proposal in order to give them knowledge so they can decide what their feelings are towards the subject, since it really is a serious one. His targeted audience is mainly the community of Pueblo but also Colorado in whole.

Woodka, Chris. ""Nuclear Plant Proposed for Pueblo County"." Chieftain. Pueblo Chieftain, 15 July 2010. Web. 10 Mar. 2011. http://www.chieftain.com/nuclear-plant-proposed-for-pueblo-county/article_09764ac4-8fd3-11df-82c7-001cc4c03286.html.

               In her article “Pueblo Co. Closer To Getting Nuclear Plant”, (2011) Lindsay Watts states that Pueblo, Colorado is one step closer to constructing a nuclear plant, after the county commission met last month and voted 5 to 3 in approval of the plant. She supports her claims with interesting statistics about plant productivity, employing 400-700 people, but also providing quotes from Don Banner, the facet of this proposal. Watt’s purpose is to inform and provide the community of Pueblo with current news in order to keep them fresh on the topic because this is a seriously concerned subject. Her article is directed towards the people Pueblo and the State of Colorado.

Watts, Lindsay. ""Pueblo CO. Closer To Getting Nuclear Plant"." KRDO. N.p., 22 Feb. 2011. Web. 10 Mar. 2011. http://www.krdo.com/news/26961763/detail.html.

                In his article “Nuclear Energy”, (2011) Matthew L. Wald asserts a neutral opinion on nuclear energy while giving an overview of the industry itself showing that It is a clean source of creating energy but being extremely costly to build a plant, he gives great explanation about the physics behind nuclear energy, and the potential affects it serves. Wald supports his claims through showing great knowledge of nuclear energy, discussing the when the idea of nuclear energy came around, the first plants ever built, disasters they created, along with its advantages and disadvantages comparably to other energies. His purpose is to educate his reader in a concise manner in order to catch them up on the topic of nuclear energy so they can have a logical opinion rather then an opinion created by feelings. His targeted audience would be fellow Americans and he conveys his message in a concerned and serious tone.

Wald, Matthew L. ""Nuclear Energy"." NY Times. N.p., 1 Feb. 2011. Web. 11 Mar. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/info/nuclear-energy/?scp=1-spot&sq=%20nuclear%20energy&st=cse>.

Rheotorical Precis Choices Chapter 13

            In their article, “Proposal Arguments”, (2009) Lester Faigley and Jack Selzer assert that there are 4 main components to writing a strong proposal argument, which is very beneficial to easily constructing a sound proposal argument, but the bottom line is you have to a sense of what people care about, their views on the topic, and the ability to find obscure credible information to potentially alter their thoughts and side with you. Faigley and Selzer support their claims about proposal arguments through proper structure and  user friendly explanations of the four components, which are understand how proposal arguments work, recognize components of proposal arguments, build a proposal argument, and a case study done by Thomas Homer-Dixon and S. Julio Freidmann. Their purpose is to provide novice writers with fundamental ammunition in order help them successfully write a proposal argument that will support their claims and alter the minds of opposing people. The targeted audience would be college students that are in a lower composition type of class or any person that wants to widen their knowledge on proposal arguments.

First Draft

        For decades amongst decades, politically the talk about oil and energy independence has been a significant topic for Americans, and a very heartfelt one at that. A lot of people in the U.S. find themselves asking this one particular question, "Why don't we take advantage of the oil resources we have in America and exclude ourselves from this middle east reliance, which will presumably hurt us with outrageously high prices of gas". It is a very good question but it generally is an uneducated one. Our society has obtained such an intolerance for patience, it has evolved to an "act now" attitude and we exclude ourselves from researching the facts and it causes us to end up making irrational decisions. So we leave out the pieces in which this controversy is created by, including: OPEC, volatility of oil, and the cost of retrieving domestic oil. When you finally have conception of these three topics it proposes that domestic oil might not be the best solution to obtain energy independence, but to look towards bio-fuels and better fuel economy. 

          OPEC is an acronym for Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries is a coalition of 12 countries, which coordinates and unifies the petroleum policies of its Member Countries and ensures the stabilization of oil markets in order to benefit the supplier and consumer somewhat equally. It is control of 75% of the world's oil. Embargo: is the partial or complete prohibition of commerce and trade with a particular country, in order to isolate it, which in this case would be oil.

        When the first automotive vehicle was built in the early 20th century it had a great impact on mankind. It was an innovative and much quicker way of traveling but it did only give us these life changing accomodations but it caused petroleum to become the most eminent resource of resources. With time petroleum's importance and demand proliferated. Seemingly through history man is never able to control mediation their interests are fueled by envy of power and wealth. Thats why today fuel suppliers are more concerned about their profits other then the consumer's needs. This has driven this commodity to be corrupt and caused fuel wars. Beginning in the early stages of the oil market countrie's were in dispute constantly with their prices of fuel. One would lower the price so it would be more marketable then it's competitor would lower their price where virtually neither one would be making money. Subsequently in the 1960's Venezuela and Saudi Arabia came together and basically said "Whether then continually making little profit and being arch enemies, why dont we come together, form an organization so we can increase our prices of crude oil and create a stabilized market. This was the birth of OPEC which now controls 75% of the worlds oil and is a big reason for our high prices oil.

           Many people in America, mostly those who are both conservative and republican feel that the United States needs to take advantage of our domestic oil resources, including formations such as ANWR and Bakken in South Dakota and cut ties from the middle east. With global conflict and middle east corruption arise this idea makes a lot of sense. If we could export and utilize our own oil it seems our energy security would be much stronger and it would stimulate the economy. But they're are a few major bumps in which that path leads. A lot of our oil isn't as accessible as the oil in the middle east or the gulf coast. It is located much deeper and even though drilling technology is very advanced, retrieving this oil is so expensive it becomes unprofitable. In order for American Oil Companies to make even a measly profit they  would have to charge around $5 a gallon, which is obviously to high in today's market. In addition to the high cost to create output we have OPEC

        In an article titled "International Oil Security: Problems and Policies", from the website Resources For the Future, Michael A Toman states that In 2000, the United States imported almost 60% of its total petroleum consumption, though imports from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) were only about one-quarter of consumption (45% of total U.S. imports). So this shows almost 50% of our oil is imported from foreign countries which the U.S. goes through 7 billion barrels of oil a year. That is a good portion of fuel coming from unstable countries. But what is demoralizing is even if America could export oil and make a reasonable profit, OPEC is such a dominant force in the world market, being that it controls 75% of the world's oil they're capable of lowering their price of gas under ours. This would presumably cause a large shock in the world's oil market and possibly cause embargo, because countries wouldn't be making as much money as they want to, so they just restrict their output, creating a bigger problem.

         This is where we ask ourselves "Does domestic oil sound very appealing anymore or should we be innovators and alternatively resolve our high prices of energy by better fuel economy and bio fuels?" We should probably chose better fuel economy and bio fuels and stop looking at this solution as it being only liberal powered movement but the right solution. In a blog called "Gas Prices and Smart Policies" dicusses credible propositions that would substantially lower gas prices for us in a different manner. Their sourcesThe National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), show statistics for what the requirements will be in 2025 including emissions and fuel economy for American vehicles, which if automotive companies increase their efficiency jsut 3% each year, in 2025 every single car will be getting 42 mpg needless to say what will cars like diesel jetta's be getting miles per gallon if they are already getting 50. In an article "Proposal Pending on Mileage for Heavy-Duty Vehicles" by Mathew L. Wald proves that our government is already tightening down on mileage standards for all small vehicles, but it is now preparing to make heavy duty vehicles much more efficient.

          These are they types of steps we need to be taking towards energy independence. They might be part of a very minute movement but they are afforable and with time they become incredibly efficient. And while steps like these are progressing our countries drilling technology will be advancing, so amidst the fuel economy we will be able to drill very cheap oil.

Blog on research

 Doing research on energy independence has really broadened my knowledge in general because it has made me delve into things including oil markets, energy, and the world economy. Prior to this paper I really didn’t have any conception of the entities I stated above, along with always hearing people talk about OPEC and why gas prices were going up because of this organization. So before recent research I had never gotten into stocks and commodities as far as how they work and who controls them, so hearing about this organization having this unprecedented power was kind of perplexing.  But through research I feel I have a much better grasp on things that concern oil markets and energy. OPEC which is an acronym for Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries is essentially a coalition of 12 countries, which coordinates and unifies the petroleum policies of its Member Countries and ensures the stabilization of oil markets in order to benefit the supplier and consumer somewhat equally.  This is why OPEC has such a great power because they control a vast majority of the world's oil and are able to provide somewhat stable prices when global conflicts arise, much more successfully than a macroeconomic economy. Ends up being an efficient and regular supply of petroleum to consuming nations, and a fair return on their capital to those investing in the petroleum industry. Another thing I didn’t know is that OPEC was instituted by Dwight Eisenhower in 1960 to provide security and access to our oil during war regarding Mexico and Canada interests as well.  

The deeper I got into my research and obtained conception of OPEC and the world market for oil, I eventually came to the decision that utilizing domestic oil might not be the best alternative for cheap gas prices. Domestic Oil that is being drilled in America currently is unprofitable. Our technology isnt advanced enough for certain deep oil wells, so price of retrieving it is too expensive in order to make even a measly profit. We would  be charging much more then 4 dollars to break even, which is obviously way to high in today’s market. And with the dominance of OPEC even if we could drill for cheaper, they are such a large operation they could lower their prices where it wouldn’t worth it for American Oil companies. This is why I have found we should turn to bio fuels and better fuel economy in current vehicles and stop looking at it as a liberal movement but as a great solution. I learned from a blog called "Gas Prices and Smart Policies" that their are actually requirements for automotive companies and fuel economy for vehicles in the future are projected to be much more efficient.sThe National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), showed statistics for what the requirements will be in 2025 including emissions and fuel economy for American vehicles, which if automotive companies increase their efficiency jsut 3% each year, in 2025 every single car will be getting 42 mpg. These are the types of steps we need to be taking towards the future. Cost effective movements

Summary of Energy Independence

       For decades amongst decades, politically the talk about oil and energy independence has been a significant topic for Americans, and a very heartfelt one at that. A lot of people in the U.S. find themselves asking this one particular question, "Why don't we take advantage of the oil resources we have in America and exclude ourselves from this middle east reliance, which will presumably hurt us with outrageously high prices of gas". It is a very good question but it generally is an uneducated one. Our society has obtain such an intolerance for patience, it has evolved to an "act now" attitude and we exclude ourselves from researching the facts and we end up making an irrational decision. So we leave out the pieces in which this controversy is created by, including: OPEC, volatility of oil, and the cost of retrieving domestic oil. In an article I read titled "International Oil Security: Problems and Policies" the Author Michael Toman talks statistics and shows that 60% of the United States oil is imported and 45% of it comes from OPEC." Many Americans have of OPEC but really don't have a solid understanding. OPEC is essentially a collusion of several countries, which coordinates and unifies the petroleum policies of its Member Countries and ensures the stabilization of oil markets  in order to benefit the supplier and consumer somewhat equally. Before OPEC, countries would duke it out with fuel prices. They would continually lower their price until they were almost making zilch profit, so finally  they were like "Hey, enough is enough, lets cometogether". This is why OPEC has such a great power because they control the majority of the world's oil and are able to sustain a relatively low price compareably to an indvidual market. Another problem with energy independence is the cost retrieving of domestic oil. Let's say america had an unlimited amount of oil it wouldnt have any value becasue right now we're seeing in ANWR and the Bakken formation, that for these deep wells of oil our technology isnt advanced enough yet for domestic oil to be profitable. Primarily for the U.S. to make any money on it our prices would have to be around $4.50. A price which is obviously to high for today's market and even if we could sale for a much more reasonable price, OPEC has such a dominance in the oil market that they will just lower their price and push us away from production. So a lot people think that if we just rigorously drilled our oil reserves it would create cheaper gas prices, but they don't take the other components into consideration, they just toil. So the question is if we cant do that then what do we do. We definitely need to pursue fuel economy and alternative fuels and not at it as a transcendental or liberal movement, but for the best of interests for our country and our financial needs. Really try to be an innovator in the sense of utilizing bio fuels, hybrid vehichles, but also making vehicles in general more economic. In a blog called "Gas Prices and Smart Policies" dicusses credible propositions that would substantially lower gas prices for us in a different manner. Their sourcesThe National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), show statistics for what the requirements will be in 2025 including emissions and fuel economy for American vehicles, which if automotive companies increase their efficiency jsut 3% each year, in 2025 every single car will be getting 42 mpg. These are the types of steps we need to be taking towards the future.

Thesis Statement

         Amidst the global conflict and the dominance of OPEC, energy alternatives and oil seem to  be a problem for everyone. So much of our world is powered by greed anymore, which never use to be a bad thing because self interest and motivation fuels capitalism but we have now reached the extent where it is corrupting the entire world. These corruptions all tie into oil, seemingly the most powerful and precious resource of our time and unfortunately these resources lie in the heart of the middle east and the instability of these countries eventually affects our welfare tremendously. So we find ourselves trying to resolve these high gas prices by becoming energy independent and people have a lot of different ideas about it. Some believe we should delve deep into drilling oil out of ANWAR and the Bakken formation others feel we should seek efficient fuel economy systems such as; biofuels and hybrid.

8 Sources cited and precis

• In his article "Proposal Pending on Mileage for Heavy-Duty Vehicles", (2010) Matthew L. Wald asserts that in the past 3 decades our Federal government has tightened mileage standards for all small vehicles, but it is now preparing to make heavy duty vehicles much more efficient. Matthew L. Wald supports his article by including studies done by Scientist's on fuel consumption and emissions, along with Obama's Administration aggressive interests o make a proposal by the end of this week. His purpose is to inform readers about our Government's valiant efforts to make heavy duty vehicles more efficient, in order to show American's it is in the Governments best of interest to cut down our countries fuel consumption and gas emissions. His tone is serious and informative, targeting an audience of people that in an industry that use heavy duty vehicles ad people who are concerned of consumption and high gas prices.

Citation:  Wald, Matthew L. "Proposal Pending on Mileage for Heavy-Duty Vehicles." www.nytimes.com. N.p., 29 Sept. 2010. Web. 19 Jan. 2011.

•      In the blog "Gas Prices and Smart Policies", (2011) Energy Independence Now asserts that with the price of oil going up this week it goes to show how susceptible the United States really is to the instability of corrupt foreign countries that import our oil and how greatly affects our wallet, therefore we need to be innovators and start a new trend: hybrid, bio fuel transportation. The site supports its claims by using credible sources such as; The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), showing statistics what the requirements will be in 2025 including emissions and fuel economy for American vehicles, which if automotive companies increase their efficiency jsut 3% each year, in 2025 every single car will be getting 42 mpg. Their purpose is to show that even if gas goes up 5 dollars a gallon we won't fret because our cars will be so efficient it will be compareable to $2.50 a gallon in order to cause fellow americans to think about other things then ANWAR but to be supportive of hybrid and biofuel cars because thats what the future foreholds. The tone of the blog is passionate and is directed towards anyone who is willing to think of ways to be energy independent rather then onshore drilling.

• Citation:Energy Indepedence Now. "Gas Prices and Smart Policy." www.einnow.org. N.p., 17 Feb. 2011. Web. 18 Feb. 2011. <http://www.einow.org/index.php?option=com_wordpress&p=357&Itemid=5>.

• In the article "Improved Horizontal Well Stimulation in The Bakken Formation", (2004) Charles Wiley and Bob Barree et al assert that certain basins in the formation have been rejuvenated through an improvement with horizontal drilling versus hydraulic drilling, which horizontal has been in evolving in the past years but has now finally reached optimum productivity. They support their claims through describing the dimensions of various basins, along with the basin's density's and the amount of hydrocarbon they bear. Their purpose is to give researchers and people who are interested in this specific topic an in depth analysis of each basin in order to provide specifics of what is acutally going scientifically versus just stating how many barrels each basin could produce. The Authors' tone's are serious and very informational.

Citation: Wiley, Charles , Bob Barree, Eberhard Mike , and Tom Lantz."Improved Horizontal Well Stimulation in The Bakken Formation." Google Scholar. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2004. Web. 11 Feb. 2011. <http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/app/Preview.do?paperNumber=00090697&societyCode=SPE>.

•        In his article "International Oil Security: Problems and Policies", (2002) Michael A. Toman asserts that energy independence for the United States considering oil might not be perhaps the best solution to lower our high gas prices and potentially higher ones. He supports his claims through a great knowledge of understanding how the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries operates and past history of the United States trying this independent method use of energy subsequently raising prices even higher. His purpose is to make his reader's understand how OPEC uses supply and demand to its favor and that Oil companies in America are all about the money not the interests of Americans, in order to show that we need to pursue other options such as fuel economy because energy independence will just lead to extremely high gas prices. Toman uses a serious tone and directs his article to anyone that pays for their own gas or is quizzical why we don't use our own oil.

• 
  Quotes:
   "Since the release of the administration's energy policy plan, the terrorist attacks, and heightened international tensions in the Middle East and elsewhere during the fall of 2001, rarely has a week gone by without a statement in the press by some pundit for increased energy security – and even "energy independence" or freedom from imported oil."
  
  "World oil prices rose from about $10/barrel in 1998 to over $30/barrel in late 2000, though they have since eroded to below $20/barrel. In 2000, the United States imported almost 60% of its total petroleum consumption, though imports from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) were only about one-quarter of consumption (45% of total U.S. imports)."
  
  "If one wants to accelerate the pace of energy diversification, then what is needed are more public expenditure on a much more concerted effort to overcome technical hurdles and a change in the current economic condition of energy markets wherein low fossil fuel prices make advanced technology development and diffusion unprofitable."
  
  "Even if we could magically and costlessly raise domestic output tomorrow to eliminate our imports, a shock in world oil markets would still affect domestic prices and threaten macroeconomic distress. This is because U.S. petroleum suppliers would charge the same price as other suppliers charge internationally."
   
  
  Citation:
   Toman, Michael A. "International Oil Security: Problems and Policies." www.rff.org. Resources For The Future, Jan. 2002. Web. 15 Feb. 2011. <http://www.rff.org/Search/Results.aspx?k=michael%20a%20toman>.
   

•         In his article "Journey to Energy Independence", (        ) Steven Chu asserts that the most effective way to reduce our dependency on foreign oil is to simply use less of it and seek potential bio fuels in the meantime. He supports his claims statistically through showing how many barrels of oil Americans use daily and what percentages with personal or commercial use. His purpose is to tell Americans that oil will not be obsolete for a long time to come but we need to continue to research and study different types of bio fuels and methods of energy in order to create energy security for use and stop depending on foreign countries. His tone is serioua and his article is primarily directed towards anyone because in general any business is affected by the ebb and flow prices of oil.                      

Citation:
 Chu, Steven . "Journey to Energy Independence." www.americanenergyindependence.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2011.

Precis on Video

          In her video “The Political Chemistry of Oil”, (2010) Lisa Margonelli first asserts the importance of oil’s actual chemistry and later on links it to the political chemistry of oil and states how important the molecules of oil are relatively to the economics of it. She supports her claims through great research and physically being a apart of the topic, traveling all over the World to get to the bottom of this problematic issue. Her purpose is to make Americans aware of the fact that the rising prices of fuel isn’t all linked to the feeder and OPEC but to the actual molecules of oil in order to make Americans willingly reduce their usage of oil because in the end it will cost them more. Her tone is serious but with a burning passion about her topic.


Link: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/lisa_margonelli_the_political_chemistry_of_oil.html

Citation:
Margonelli, Lisa. "The Political Chemistry of Oil." Ted.com. Ted.com, Aug. 2010. Web. 9 Feb. 2011.

Here are some questions that I think will be prudent to completely understand my topic and create a good argument.

1. How certain is it that there are actually 530 Billions barrels of oil in the formation?

2. What is OPEC?

3. What is stopping us from becoming independent from world oil and producing our own?

4. When was the formation found?

5. How much power would the United States gain from having this vast amount of oil?

6. Would it create problems globally?

7. Is this project stimulating the economy?

8. How big are the cities that are being built around the formation?

9. How many barrels could be produced daily?

10. Who is running the operation?

11. Is OPEC funding envirormentalist to keep our country from onshore drilling in order to make more money?

12. How many years could this formation supply the United States with oil?

13. How many jobs has this formation created?

14. Is this formation larger than ANWAR?

15. How many drilling sites are their?