Environmental studies - Bruce Podobnik (Essay Sample)

Instructions:

Instructions:

Critical Review is Due on September 29^th by afternoon 12:00PM Eastern time zone. It is a critical reading review to a article by Bruce Podobnik. The article is uploaded and referred as [2006: Bruce Podobnik] – Global Energy Shifts in World Historical perspective.

The Instructions for the assignment are; the assignment is not very hard. All you have to do is read Bruce Podobnik - it's a very short article - and write a short review based on the questions. The critical review is 1000 words maximum limit (3.5 pages double spaced). The first two or three paragraphs should:

1. State the main problem or issue that Bruce is addressing.

2. Present the debate that Bruce is responding to (What is the author’s central claim, argument or point?).

3. Discuss the methods Bruce Podobnik uses to conduct his study and prove his arguments (Are the strengths and weaknesses of the text?)

4. Discuss the evidence Bruce Podobnik uses to formulate his Thesis. (Evidence does the author present?).

The last paragraph should be your response to the article. You should

Include: 1. What are the possible counterarguments to the text’s claims?

2. Why are the problem(s) and the argument(s) interesting or important?

Bibliography: You MUST cite exactly where and what page number in

Bruce Podobnik (2006) article you are referring to. The easiest way to do this is with in text citations. For example, (Podobnik 2006: 14). Please follow the steps well and for citation just refer to what I wrote.

Read the whole article please and make it very concise and understanding.

- Don’t be confusing please: Do not summarize the texts. You are supposed to be reacting or responding to them, not simply repeating what they say. If there is no analysis involved, then you have not responded, only regurgitated.

- Do not wait too long to start writing. Remember that reading and understanding the texts are only the first steps toward putting the paper together.

- Do not write an autobiographical essay. Reaction/response papers are not about how you feel—even how you feel about the texts. They are not simply a venue for you to say whether you like or dislike the texts. Give praise or blame where you think it is due, but avoid commendation or condemnation for its own sake.

I know it’s very difficult to do this in less then 1000 words, but that is part of the point of the assignment. You have to choose what you think are the most important things that need to be said within this limit.

Evaluation will be based on – Characterizing the text’s arguments fairly and accurately

- Keep an eye out for author’s omissions, and raise counterarguments when you detect authors’ arguments are weak

- Evaluate the evidence that each text presents: point out strengths and weaknesses, both internal to the text and in relation to the others (e.g. other course readings)

- Consider both sides of issues at stake

Evidence, and raising critical questions. If there seems to be something important that isn’t addressed, point it out and state what you think its significance is. Try to be as specific as possible.

Do not exceed 1000 words count!make it 980-1000 words. Instructions: Critical Review is Due on September 29th by afternoon 12:00PM Eastern time zone. It is a critical reading review to a article by Bruce Podobnik. The article is uploaded and referred as [2006: Bruce Podobnik] – Global Energy Shifts in World Historical perspective. The Instructions for the assignment are; the assignment is not very hard. All you have to do is read Bruce Podobnik - it's a very short article - and write a short review based on the questions. The critical review is 1000 words maximum limit (3.5 pages double spaced). The first two or three paragraphs should: 1. State the main problem or issue that Bruce is addressing. 2. Present the debate that Bruce is responding to (What is the author’s central claim, argument or point?). 3. Discuss the methods Bruce Podobnik uses to conduct his study and prove his arguments (Are the strengths and weaknesses of the text?) 4. Discuss the evidence Bruce Podobnik uses to formulate his Thesis. (Evidence does the author present?). The last paragraph should be your response to the article. You should Include: 1. What are the possible counterarguments to the text’s claims? 2. Why are the problem(s) and the argument(s) interesting or important? Bibliography: You MUST cite exactly where and what page number in Bruce Podobnik (2006) article you are referring to. The easiest way to do this is with in text citations. For example, (Podobnik 2006: 14). Please follow the steps well and for citation just refer to what I wrote. Read the whole article please and make it very concise and understanding. - Don’t be confusing please: Do not summarize the texts. You are supposed to be reacting or responding to them, not simply repeating what they say. If there is no analysis involved, then you have not responded, only regurgitated. - Do not wait too long to start writing. Remember that reading and understanding the texts are only the first steps toward putting the paper together. - Do not write an autobiographical essay. Reaction/response papers are not about how you feel—even how you feel about the texts. They are not simply a venue for you to say whether you like or dislike the texts. Give praise or blame where you think it is due, but avoid commendation or condemnation for its own sake. I know it’s very difficult to do this in less then 1000 words, but that is part of the point of the assignment. You have to choose what you think are the most important things that need to be said within this limit. Evaluation will be based on – Characterizing the text’s arguments fairly and accurately - Keep an eye out for author’s omissions, and raise counterarguments when you detect authors’ arguments are weak - Evaluate the evidence that each text presents: point out strengths and weaknesses, both internal to the text and in relation to the others (e.g. other course readings) - Consider both sides of issues at stake Evidence, and raising critical questions. If there seems to be something important that isn’t addressed, point it out and state what you think its significance is. Try to be as specific as possible.

source..

Content:

Bruce Podobnik addresses the possibility of energy shift from fossil fuels to more sustainable global energy sources. An energy shift is a process where a new energy source is harnessed for human consumption (Podobnik 2006: 4). He argues that such energy shift has happened in the past and, therefore, we cannot overrule the possibility of such shifts in the future. The current worldviews do not support the possibility of a viable alternative to oil. There is wide-spread fear that the current world oil reserves will not be able to meet the worldâ€™s oil demand in the coming decades especially with the current political conflicts and consumption patterns. There are few alternatives to oil in the world today. Podobnik associates the energy panic as a major cause of insurgencies, militarism, competition and geopolitical conflicts.
Podobnik bases his argument on world historical developments on the possibility of a global shift from oil to a more viable and sustainable energy resource. He demonstrates how the world has changed its main source of energy from wood to coal and coal to oil as a political shift, in the 19th-century. The author suggests that such shifts occurred in an unanticipated, non-linear and rapid manner during turbulent times. The current systematic chaos and rebellions that characterize the declining US hegemony are, therefore, an indication of a transformational world shift to another source of energy. However, the author fails to prove whether such a rapid and far-reaching shift is possible in current times.
There are three fundamental factors in the past that have facilitated global shift. These are geopolitical conflicts, corporate competition within the energy sector, and social movements within the energy sector. These factors intensify and weaken in recurring manner. Podobnik acknowledges that none of these three factors works in isolation; all three factors should be chained together to bring a new world energy shifts. However, one factor may intensify the other in turbulent times. These factors converge to undermine the viability of previous energy regimes. The factors encourage the growth of new infrastructure, technology and markets of another oil regime that emerges as dominant energy source when the existing energy crisis come to an end. The author, in this case, is right since there is evidence of world order to world chaos, which is greatly impacting our global energy system.
Podobnik uses adequate statistics to bolster his argument on world energy shifts. He analyzes the use of coal during the British hegemony (1900-1960) and its decline to give way to the U.S hegemony to its current decline stage (1960-current times). At the time of British hegemony, coal was the fabric of the British society (Podobnik 2006: 1). Increased societal conflicts characterized the waning of British power leading to the loss of profitability and stability of coal as a source of energy. British hegemony declined during the Napoleon Wars, Franco-Prussian war and in the first World-War. During these wars and in the reparations process, oil consumption began to gain popularity. Coal became unstable and was easily replaced and dominated by oil. However, Podobnik argues that the shift to oil was not without intense marketing. The main aim of marketing oil was to create awareness among the public so that it could subsequently overtake the lower priced coal (Podobnik 2006: 12).
The growth of oil extraction and automobile use was an important stimulus to the growth of US hegemony. According to the author, it helped reduce the costs of reproducing labor, a factor he believes was important in the post-Second World-War. This factor was an important Keynesian model for providing cheap food, transport, heating, and consumer goods to workers in the capitalist perspective (Podobnik 2006: 12). Nonetheless, U.S hegemony faces a number of crises including the oil crisis, nationalization, terrorism, workers struggles, and the Middle Eastern Wars (Podobnik2006: 12). Of particular importance is the "Oil Crisis" that is showing signs of the shift from oil to sustainable energy and nuclear power (Podobnik 2006: 12). The author believes that both energy sectors have gained foundations and are set to replace oil in prominence. Oil has met enough challenges such as depletion, militarism, word-wide crisis and climate change among others. However, the author fails to qualify nuclear energy as desirable or possible to exploit at a big scale.
The declining US hegemony is enough evidence on the shift from oil energy....

Get the Whole Paper!

Not exactly what you need?

Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

Order

Environmental studies - Bruce Podobnik (Essay Sample)

Other Topics: