Bush’s Hydrogen Fuel Cells Research Plan: A Step into the Future or a Fallacy :: Argumentative Persuasive Gas Essays

Cars running on hydrogen fuel instead of gasoline may seem like something that is seen in a science fiction movie, but they may be much closer than many people realize. President Bush announced in his State of the Union address that he has plans to take large steps forward â€Å"to advance into the 21st century† (quoted by Porteus ). This advancement is to come in the form of a $1.2 billion plan to help fund research into hydrogen fuel. By doing this Bush plans to lessen America’s reliance on foreign oil, and help to protect the environment. The Bush administration believes that this program will someday â€Å"boost American’s economy and national security† (quoted by Porteus). The new plan replaces an old one that was originally started during the Clinton administration. Clinton spent money funding research to create more fuel efficient cars instead of spending money on hydrogen fuel cell research. Bush intends to change this plan so that instead of using less oil, we will someday need none. The Bush administration has divided the funding into two major projects. Over five years, the FreedomCar project is designed to research ways to use hydrogen power in automobiles. In addition, the FreedomFuel project is designed to research ways to produce, store, and distribute the fuel to the public (Hakim 17). Although Bush’s plan seems as though it is a very good idea, there is a major argument as to whether or not such a large amount of money should be spent on funding hydrogen fuel cells. Many opposing hydrogen fuel cell research believe that it is too far into the future to spend so much money on. One of the biggest concerns with this idea is that we are not lowering fuel standards while research is being done on hydrogen fuel. They argue that money is being wasted on an idea that may never work when it is possible to lower fuel usage if Clinton’s plan is followed. Unlike many political arguments this one is not split totally between liberals and conservatives; there is a pro-Bush side and an anti-Bush side. This does not mean that either side is for or against Bush; they are simply against his hydrogen fuel cell funding. The pro-Bush side tends to be more liberal and the anti-Bush side leans to the conservative side, but because there is no clear separation of sides, you cannot say all liberals are pro-Bush and all conservatives are anti-Bush.