Energy Crisis is TRUTH!

After I read the article called, “Energy Crisis Not so much about Energy,” published by Elaine Posluszny, I have been thinking about how to make some people change their minds respect to the relationship between energy and environment. Most of the people are just thinking on themselves and on their generation, but what about the future generations? What are we doing to guarantee that next generation enjoy the same benefits that we already have? In the article, “Energy Crisis Not so much about Energy,” the author gives the reader several facts related to energy and environment which deny the existence of the energy crisis and indirectly accuse environmentalists for exaggerating the reality of the oil. I disagree with some of these ideas for the reasons that I will explain in the next paragraphs.

First of all, the article begins with the next question, “How can the United States have a crisis over energy when we have more coal reserves than any other nation in the world?” Although this fact is true, the author does not take into an account that population and coal consumption are increasing, and it well known that coal is a fossil fuel and that one day it will be over. In addition, in paragraph one, the author says that environment “should be considered separate from the claim of an "Energy Crisis." In my opinion, these two issues are much related. Then, they cannot be separated. Due to the high dependence of fossil fuels, mankind releases to the atmosphere large amount of greenhouse gases, which are contributing to the global warming. In addition, the article makes an interesting statement. “To be clear, America is not lacking in fossil fuel deposits. The reservoirs in parts of Colorado and Utah could hold "upwards of 1 trillion barrels of oil"- more than 3 times the proven reserves in Saudi Arabia.” I totally disagree with this statement. It is well known that there is a fossil crisis in America and in the rest of the world. According to a study made by the Central Intelligence Agency CIA, in January 2008, “the world oil reserve is 1,332,000,000,000, from which Saudi Arabia is the country number one with more reserves, 266,800,000,000, and the U.S. is the country N. 13 with 20,970,000,000.” In order to understand this, it is necessary to explain briefly how oil is formed. According to the Energy Information Administration, “Oil was formed from the remains of animals and plants that lived millions of years ago in a marine (water) environment before the dinosaurs. Over the years, the remains were covered by layers of mud. Heat and pressure from these layers helped the remains turn into what we today call crude oil.” With this explanation, it is very clear that oil is a nonrenewable source. It means that one day, it will be over, and it will take millions of years to be formed again. But the real problem with the fossil fuels like oil is that while it is decreasing, oil consumption is increasing. Today, the world has approximately 6.8 billion people, and it is expected by 2050 to have 9.3 billion people which will increase the oil consumption. According to the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, “From now to 2020, world oil consumption will rise by about 60%. Transportation will be the fastest growing oil-consuming sector. By 2025, the number of cars will increase to well over 1.25 billion from approximately 700 million today.” Then, there is not balance between oil offer and demand, which is already producing an energy crisis.

Moreover, it is important to have into account that some countries such as India, Brazil and China are growing very fast, and they are demanding a lot of energy, which make the oil scarcer and more expensive. According to the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, “In the next two decades, China's oil consumption is expected to grow at a rate of 7.5% per year and India’s 5.5%. (Compare to a 1% growth for the industrialized countries). It will be strategically imperative for these countries to secure their access to oil.” Again, oil dependence is growing up, but the source is shortening. Furthermore, the article, “Energy Crisis Not so much about Energy,” also makes another interesting comment about environment. It says that Energy Crisis “should be labeled the Environmentalists Anxiety Crisis.” With this statement, it could be inferred the point of view of the author respect to environment. It seems that the author does not believe the connection between fossil fuels, and their impact on the environment. But fortunately, scientists have showed that fossil fuels like oil, coal or natural gas have been affecting the environment killing many animals, plants and species and also depleting the habitats. In addition, fossil fuels are the first contributor to the global warming by releasing large amount of Carbon Dioxide and other greenhouse gases. According to the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, “The United States continues to be the largest single national source of fossil fuel-related CO2 emissions with emissions of 1577 million metric tons of carbon in 2005.” The U.S. is the top contributor of carbon dioxide, and the reason is the Americans high dependence on fossil fuels. Finally, the author makes another interesting comment when she says “It is dangerous for a country to be dependent on another for any reason, political or economic, and it is even more dangerous when a country to dependent on another who's political nature differs so greatly, as America and Saudi Arabia's do. So we should lessen that dependence and dig into the great gift of oil beneath our own surface.” I agree with the first part of this statement that talks about that a country should not depend on another country’s resources. Each country should work harder to find its own sources of energy that substitute fossil fuels. Although I agree with the first part, I totally disagree with the second part that says that encourages oil consumption.

In conclusion, I think that scientist community should work harder to find a renewable source of energy that substitutes fossil fuels. Governments should invest more money to support universities and scientists research to find renewable and environmentally friendlier sources of energy, and finally, people should save the scarce fossil fuel energy that we have today.

ORGAN DONATIONS SHOULD BE MANDATORY BY GOVERNMENT

Organ donations should be mandatory by governments as in the United States as in the rest of the world. Just in the United States, according to National Geographic, “more than 80,000 people are waiting for a transplant,” and according to Matching Donors Organization, “In the United States, 19 people die each day waiting for an organ transplant—most of them waiting for kidneys.” Usually organ donations come from a person who has recently died, or from a living donor. However, there is a shortage of organs, and many people are dying waiting for an organ transplant. The solution for this problem would be that government creates a law that makes people donate at least one organ after they die. In my opinion, this law is necessary for two reasons: to help others to live and stop human organ trade.

The first reason to create one-organ mandatory donation after death is that helping others’ lives should be considered as social justice. Every single individual has the opportunity to save others’ lives just by donating an organ during lifetime or after his or her death. However, there are few people who want to help others. Probably people do not donate an organ during lifetime because they are afraid of jeopardizing their own lives and suffering physical pain. Fortunately, there is another way to donate an organ without being worried about these things, donate organs after death. This could be the best option for everybody. In order to do that, people should authorize it in live, and as soon as they die, their organs would be removed and transplanted into somebody else. According to Matching Donor Organization, Texans can sign up to be organ donors by signing the back of their driver’s license upon renewal. Although this option sounds simply and painless, people still are not donating. There are a lot of organizations to encourage people to donate, but these efforts are not enough. Then, people who are waiting for a transplant they have three options: one is waiting until somebody with a good heart donates it (the hardest one); second, dying without having found a donor, or third, buying it from somebody in a poor country. The shortage of organ donors, the politics of organ donation, the people’s suffering and desperation, extreme poverty and corruption are the perfect features for human organ trade and organ black market around the world be successful.

The second reason to create one-organ mandatory donation after death is to stop human organ trade and human organ black market. The fact that organ donations depend on the people willing makes the process to find a donor very difficult. Then people have to find another ways to get an organ such as buy it. In addition, many people from developed countries are traveling to poor countries such as China, India or Mexico among other places to get an organ and transplant it in clandestine clinics. The biggest problem when people buy illegally an organ is that they really do not know where it is coming from, how it was founded, and even, they do not know if is really healthy. The terrible true is that organs in the black market come from people who were killed to trade with their organs, or from people who is extremely poor and have to sell them for a little money. These organs are being sold especially to rich people who can pay for these expends. For example, MSN News Published on June 16, 2007, an articled called, “Guatemala mob kills suspected organ thieves.” This article talks about in Camotan, Guatemala, a woman killed a nine-year-old girl to extract and sell her organs. Another example can be seen in the article “The Corruptive Influence of the Dollar: The Shameful Trade in Mexican Baby Organs!” published by La Voz de Aztlan. According to them, "there are many children in the United States waiting for organs in order to survive. Therefore, dozens of Mexican midwives, nurses, doctors, lawyers, judges and even clerics, participate as accomplices in the theft of children from whom organs are extracted at clandestine clinics on the U.S.-Mexico border." These are two clear examples of how people are being killed to extract their organs. In addition, there are other examples related to corruption of governments and organ trade. For example, BBC news published on June 28, 2001, an article called “Global demand fuels human organ trade." It says that in China, “Chinese prisoners may be being killed to order, so that their organs can be sold to rich foreigners.” Another example can be seen in an article called “Organ Shortage Fuels Illicit Trade in Human Parts” published by National Geographic on January 16, 2004. It says that “Brazilian police reported that dozens of willing donors were flown from that nation's destitute neighborhoods to South Africa where transplant surgery was performed on patients. Recipients may have paid as much as U.S. $100,000 for their ill-gotten organs. Donors received a fraction of that amount.” India is another example of human organ trade. BBC News published on October 15, 2002, an articled called “Indians selling human organs.” It says that “one area of the Indian city of Madras has been nicknamed 'kidney district' because so many people have sold their kidney.” These people are jeopardizing their lives for a little money, and their organs are being sold to some rich people from developed countries for a large amount of money. Generally, the organs obtained by these ways have bad quality because of the non-hygienic procedures used. Also, inside the U.S. organs are being sold. According to the article called, “The Organ Black Market,” published by How Stuff Work. In the U.S., "a black market for human tissue exists. It usually involves bodies about to be cremated. A black market broker may enter into a financial arrangement with a criminally minded funeral home director and carve up the bodies before they're cremated. Falsified papers -- such as consent forms and death certificates -- are produced, and the tissue can then be sold to an American research facility." These examples show clearly how the lack of voluntary donors has developed a black market of human organs which is making a lot of money and jeopardizing donors’ and patients’ lives.

In conclusion, organ black market is an immoral, terrible way to traffic with human parts. This can be reduced or stopped if organs are more accessible. In the only way that they could be accessible is creating a law that makes people donate at least one organ after they die. With this law, government could save a lot of lives, finish people’s suffering, save money in medical treatment and also, stop the organ human trade.