Why Burning Fossil Fuels Is Bad

Why burning fossil fuels is bad

The world is dependent on oil as its main source of energy.

Although oil is plentiful right now, the supply will eventually run out, and even worse, burning oil is very damaging to the environment. What alternatives can help us use less oil and how can we protect the environment?

Read and find out! Children's Literature For years, the books in the "Let's Read and Find Out" series have been mainstay references for young children thirsty for information.

In this case, Rockwell begins with the ordinary experience of a trip to the local gas station, and then goes on to explore where the gas that fills the tank and keeps the car moving came from. After explaining its origin in prehistoric time, we are given some information about why petroleum was known but not valued until the late nineteenth century. The next section of the book goes on to look at how the excessive use of this resource now threatens the environment.

The text is accompanied by illustrations that are labeled and captioned to help children understand the concepts. While this book is targeted for primary grades, first- and second-graders are likely to need an adult with whom they can read and discuss the information page by page. Like others of this series, this is a good classroom resource. A stage 2 "Let's Read and Find Out" book.

Are humans the leading cause of global warming? Why is fossil fuel bad? Fossil fuels produce large quantities of carbon dioxide when burned. Carbon emissions trap heat in the atmosphere and lead to climate change. In the United States, the burning of fossil fuels, particularly for the power and transportation sectors, accounts for about three-quarters of our carbon emissions.

Why burning fossil fuels is bad - not understand

Even though all scientists adhere to scientific skepticism as an inherent part of the process, by mid November the word "skeptic" was being used specifically for the minority who publicized views contrary to the scientific consensus. This small group of scientists presented their views in public statements and the media, rather than to the scientific community. In academic literature and journalism, the terms "climate change denial" and "climate change deniers" have well-established usage as descriptive terms without any pejorative intent. Weart recognize that either option is problematic, but have decided to use "climate change denial" rather than "skepticism". They contrasted scientific skepticism—which is "foundational to the scientific method"—with denial—"the a priori rejection of ideas without objective consideration"—and the behavior of those involved in political attempts to undermine climate science.