abcnews.go.com
Trump Administration Unexpectedly Prioritizes Geothermal Energy
On his first day in office, President Trump reversed many of the country's energy policies, prioritizing oil, gas, and coal, yet surprisingly also supported geothermal energy, which is expected to provide 90 gigawatts of electricity by 2050 and reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
- How does the administration's support for geothermal energy relate to its broader energy policy goals and the ongoing climate change debate?
- The support for geothermal energy connects to broader climate change mitigation efforts. Geothermal energy, unlike solar and wind, generates electricity consistently, reducing reliance on fossil fuels. This aligns with the administration's stated goal of ensuring a reliable energy supply while also supporting a domestic energy resource that does not cause climate change.
- What are the immediate implications of the Trump administration's unexpected support for geothermal energy, given its focus on fossil fuels?
- President Trump's administration, while largely favoring oil, gas, and coal, surprisingly prioritized geothermal energy due to its 24/7 electricity generation, use of oil and gas industry expertise, and bipartisan congressional support. This decision, while seemingly contradictory to the administration's overall energy stance, signals a potential shift towards reliable and clean energy sources.
- What are the potential long-term impacts of this policy decision on the development, deployment, and cost of geothermal energy in the United States?
- The future implications of this policy shift include increased investment in geothermal technology, potentially accelerating its development and deployment. Streamlined permitting, federal research funding, and tax credits could significantly lower costs and increase accessibility, making geothermal a more prominent player in the U.S. energy mix. This could lead to a substantial reduction in carbon emissions by 2050, as projected by the Energy Department.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames Trump's energy policy as primarily favoring oil, gas, and coal, but then emphasizes the administration's support for geothermal. The headline or introduction could have focused on this surprising exception to showcase broader energy policy. The article highlights positive statements and projections related to geothermal from industry representatives, creating a positive bias towards this energy source. The inclusion of numerous quotes supporting geothermal and the placement of criticisms of other energy sources later in the piece creates a more favorable perception of geothermal than might otherwise be the case.
Language Bias
The article uses loaded language when describing Trump's view of wind energy, quoting him as saying wind turbines are "horrible" and "many, many times" more expensive than natural gas. These are subjective and inflammatory terms and should be replaced with more neutral descriptions, such as "criticized" or "asserted to be more expensive." The frequent use of positive adjectives to describe geothermal (reliable, efficient, abundant) without similar qualifying adjectives applied to other energy sources creates a subtle bias.
Bias by Omission
The article omits discussion of the environmental impact of geothermal energy, including potential drawbacks like land use and water usage. It also omits a balanced perspective on the costs of different energy sources, focusing heavily on Trump's claims about wind energy's expense without presenting counterarguments or data from independent sources. The significant growth of solar energy in the US is mentioned but not explored in detail, creating an unbalanced view of the renewable energy landscape. The omission of negative aspects of geothermal and positive aspects of other renewable sources creates a skewed understanding of the energy situation.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy between Trump's support for oil, gas, and coal versus his support for geothermal. It suggests that geothermal is the *only* renewable energy favored by the administration, ignoring other renewable possibilities or potentially nuanced positions on other sources. This creates a simplified view of the administration's energy policy, obscuring potential complexities or internal conflicts.
Gender Bias
While the article features several women in leadership positions in the geothermal industry (Cindy Taff and Terra Rogers), their contributions are presented within the context of a story primarily focused on the Trump administration's energy policy. Their voices are not unduly minimized but neither are they central to the narrative. There is no overt gender bias detectable in the language used.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the Trump administration's support for geothermal energy, a clean energy source that reduces reliance on fossil fuels and contributes to climate change mitigation. This policy directly supports the access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all (SDG 7). The administration's actions, including streamlining permitting and promoting research and tax credits, aim to increase geothermal energy production, furthering progress towards SDG 7. The potential to power 65 million homes by 2050 demonstrates significant progress towards this goal. The support also extends to nuclear power and hydropower, which are also low-carbon energy sources.