Steve Traylor
Travis Mullen
ENGL 102, Section 14
November 21, 2016
Annotated Bibliography
The topic of my paper is about the importance of increasing the practice of harnessing electrical energy with hydropower. The Earth is made up of over 70% water, making it the most abundant natural resource. If we were to use this to our advantage more often, there would be more places in the world that could have the luxury of electricity be a part of their everyday lives. It is also important to acknowledge the need for alternative energy because we are relying too much on other countries to help us power our own. Capitalizing on potential hydroelectric sites can create clean American energy for hundreds or thousands of homes and business. Hydropower can be created from dams, small pipeline turbines, ocean/wave movement, and from many more forms. All it takes is movement of water or water vapor to turn a turbine that makes a magnet run over coils to make electricity. This research paper discusses the economic, domestic/international, and environmental benefits of utilizing hydroelectricity with information learned from the following sources.
Grunwald, Michael. “SEVEN MYTHS ABOUT ALTERNATIVE ENERGY.” Foreign Policy, no. 174, 2009, pp. 130–133.
This article provides multiple examples of counter arguments for my topic. While I talk about and discuss promoting the use of an alternate form of energy like hydropower, Michael Grunwald explains how, despite our yearn for alternative energies, “there are [too many] financial, political, and technical pressures as well as time constraints”(130), that block our path from taking full advantage of these methods. But, Grunwald only gives negative feedback to solar, nuclear, and biofuel power and leaves out the negatives of hydropower. Instead, he claims, “we need a technological revolution to save the world”(133). In a way he kills two birds with one stone for my paper by providing a relevant counter argument that covers multiple fronts, and also by allowing me to pick up on his lack of reasoning for being against hydropower.
Hansen, Megan. “The Regulatory Noose: Logan City’s Adventures in Micro-Hydropower.” Ebscohost. N.p., 23 June 2016. Web. Nov. 2016.
A team of three professors from Utah State University explain the importance of the upcoming industry of micro-hydro power. Their report is called “The Regulatory Noose: Logan City’s Adventures in Micro-Hydropower”. They state that, “small and micro-hydropower systems have high energy-generation potential,” even reducing the environmental impact of construction and outside/unnatural forces. This information on hydropower helps me in my argument for increasing the use of hydroelectricity by giving detailed explanations of the benefits of this form of alternative energy. They also give reason for why hydropower is not as big yet because, “[t]he current licensing process for small micro-hydro projects can be long and costly,” making it difficult to move project ideas into action. But if they were able to we would realize that, “[a] system generating only ten kilowatts can power a large home, small resort, or hobby farm.” This is an excellent source for my topic because although it is clearly pro-hydropower, they understand the views and restrictions coming from the other side as well.
Shannon, Del. “Continued Growth Projected for Dams and Hydropower Markets.” Pardon Our Interruption. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.
Del Shannon has written an article about, “Continued Growth Projected for Dams and Hydropower Markets”. In the article it is explained how, “The dams and hydropower markets have experienced significant growth since 2005 and seem poised to continue this trend over the next decade.” Our country is growing quickly, requiring more engineers to make it happen. The increase in growth of the market for dams and hydropower markets is relevant to my topic because that means spreading the use of hydroelectric power will have a positive impact on the economy in many ways. A company called URS Corp. had their revenue increase, “from $13.7 million in 1998 to nearly $120 million in 2010.” By understanding that the increase of use of hydroelectricity has a positive impact on the economy, it emphasizes the need for this industry in as many places as possible so that we can have reliant sources of energy all over the world. Shannon, Del. “Continued Growth Projected for Dams and Hydropower Markets.” Pardon Our Interruption. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.
(Graph from same source as Page 1)
My first impressions are that the graph contains a green, blue, white color scheme. A blue line is used for the line chart. There are two differently labeled horizontal arrows floating in the middle of the graph. The y-axis is based on money and the x-axis is based on time. My first thought/first Idea of graph was that at some point near the end, the amount of money spikes. But then after further looking at it we see that the graph is measuring money only related to dams and hydropower. And when the money spikes, it was around 2000, when engineering wages increased steadily. Then at 2005, it rose significantly. I dislike how there are so many intervals for each axis. The intervals could be more spread out making it less cluttered. I do like the simplicity of what the graph is measuring. It is easy to understand what it means. I would change the intervals of both the x and y axis. There are too many and it clogs the chart. I believe that if I made each axis have fewer points, that the line will still show the data correctly and easily.
“U.S. Energy Information Administration – EIA – Independent Statistics and Analysis.” How Much Electricity Does an American Home Use? – FAQ – U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). N.p., Oct. 2016. Web. Nov. 2016.
This was a very short source but provides key information for me to use in my paper. The U.S Energy Information Administration has found out that, “[i]n 2015, the average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential utility customer was 10,812 kilowatthours”(1st Paragraph). This bit of information corresponds to the data set I found because the data set lists off potential amounts of kilowatt hours that certain sites may be able to produce. This is just a numerical fact that comes from surveys but it helps my paper a lot because it connects across more than one of my sources.
How Hydroelectricity Works. YouTube. N.p., 1 Aug. 2015. Web. Nov. 2016.
In this video, an animation plays while a mans voice narrates how hydroelectricity works.
The animation shows a dam holding up water in a reservoir and how gravity works for the water to flow down a pressurised tube to turn the turbine. He states how hydroelectricity uses water as a source and is generated in hydropower plants. He explains the dynamics of the turbine and how it works to produce energy. I can use this demonstration and narration to describe how easily and fluently dams can produce energy for a population.
My data set:
U.S Department of the Interior. “Reclamation.” Managing Water in the West (n.d.): n. pag. US Bureau of Reclamation. Web. Nov. 2016.
My data set came from a huge set from a collection of measured amounts of kilowatt hours of electricity from multiple dam sites. I cleaned the data by only focusing on one column, the measurement of the annual production of electricity from each dam. This way, I can relate these measurements to the information I found about how much energy it takes to power only one home. I can use this in my paper to discuss the reliability and strength of hydroelectricity.
Graph I made from my data set:
This graph was made using the site plot.ly . The first things I notice are the blue dots and the various amount of variables on the bottom. It is black and white except for the blue dots. Nothing else is on the graph. My first thought/idea of the graph was that there are a lot of sections plotted on it. After further observations of the graph we can understand that it is just plotting the annual production of dam sites in kilowatt hours. I like that there is not anything on the main part of the graph itself. Also the legend helps describe what is being plotted. I dislike how many variables there are on the x – axis and how the title of the x – axis can barely be seen. I would probably get rid of some of the site names on the x – axis because it makes the graph messy and the axis’ title illegible.
dataviz102 