that other movie

Proposed solution

This movie proposed a combination of solutions. They explained an analogy where the gap or triangle of where we need to be in order to keep the world healthy with our emissions was taken and broken into sections that represent the amount of each sustainable energy that needs to be implemented in the future. They proposed that scrubbers be inserted into waste pipes to capture carbon dioxide. The move also proposed that we need to focus more on switching to solar energy so that the US can be at the forefront of the technological race. This movie also touched on the importance of biofuel and how scientists are working on switching to plant based fuels, as well as a process that involves yeast converting plant matter into alcohol that can be used to power cars. T A chinese company was the first to cheapen solar panels and mass produce them. There was a chinese city lined and powered by solar panels. What this movie proved is that the US is not the most advanced in alternative technology. 

I do not agree with the analogy they used. I think it was oversimplified and did not take into account the financial gains and losses of each type of technology, as well as who would be able to afford it. Different alternative technologies work best for specific climates and geographic settings, this was not taken into account. They also did not touch on hydroelectric, they barely touched on wind, and they talked about only the basic technology, not the new advancements. It was too basic and broad to be useful. It said that efficiency was enough to remove 1/3 of the carbon we produce now, but this sounds inaccurate, and this was not well supported. It did touch on how nuclear energy is now stable and is a good method because it does not release CO2, but they really did not go into detail on how the waste would be stored, or how long it would take us to use up all of our storage after implanting more nuclear centers. Also I feel like this movie praised the method of carbon sequestration, when really, carbon sequestration could possibly affect water sources, or soil, which are also limited resources.

The term environment, society and economy, is really broad and this question is really irrelevant to the topics addressed the movie. Yes, the movie touched on ESE but not as well as they should. There honestly were no details on economic plans, or how we were going to be able to afford the switch to alternative energy. The movie did mention that all of our transportation infrastructure in the US is built based on fossil fuel filled cars, and it would cost an outrageous amount of money to rework the system all of the roads, gas stations and transportation routes to fit a new alternative energy. So in addition to finding an alternative fuel source that is cheap, reliable, and efficient at greatly reducing carbon emissions, we need a source that will work with minimal changes to the infrastructure we already have in place.