On Death Penalty in Texas

  My classmate posted in Blogger that Texas should use death penalty more often. She argues that death penalty is a valid means of detering crimes and giving justice to the victims. Another argument of the post is that in the worst cases the imprisoned murderers would bribe the jail for assistance to escape.
In my opinion, the current use of death penalty in Texas works fine and it should not be used more frequently.
  The United States has the most executions among western countries each year and the majority are carried out in Texas. We learned in GOVT2306 class that Texas' early history justified harsh punishment on criminals, which I totally agree with. However, simply increasing the use of death penalty does not solve crimes. My home country also favors the use of death penalty on capital crimes. In fact, the executions in China per year exceed the total number of executions in the USA since 1980s. My country imposes death penalty on capital murders, dealing heroins and involving in terrorism. Recently, our public even proposed death penalty on human trafficking. But the frequent use of death penalty does not lower crime rate in my country. In many cases, death penalty could make criminals more brutal. If the criminals were faced with the capital punishment, they would spare no mercy on the victims. Another example is illegal drugs. In China, selling 50g of methamphetamine is surely punishable by death penalty. This law does deter some people from dealing drugs. But high risk comes with high profit and the drug lords are still importing illegal drugs through the border.
  On the other hand, death penalty is irreversible if the inmate was wrongly convicted and executed. This is the major difference between death penalty and life sentence without parole. In my opinion, the death penalty in the USA is used with considerable caution. A death row inmate usually stays in prison for 10 years before the sentence is carried out. The long appeal process makes death penalty very slow and difficult to be carried out so that any wrongly convicted inmate has enough time to overturn the sentence. Although the justice seems too late for the victims' family, we should bear in mind that the justice system is not only designed to revenge for the victims, but it must also assure that no citizen is punished for something he/she has not done. If we increased the use of death penalty, there will be many appeals overlooked by the courts, hence increasing the risk of executing the wrong person. Unfortunately, my country used to carry out speedy execution after conviction (in the 1980s), which resulted in many deaths of innocent inmates.
 For these reasons, I believe that the cautious use of death penalty in Texas and the USA works fine. It prevents two extreme cases. One is no punishment on capital crimes like Europe (the Norwegian gunner who killed 30 people was merely punished by life imprisonment). The other is the greater risk of executing the wrong people like China. Last but not least, the original post seems a bit sentimental when expressing the support of death penalty. It's true that I'm also pro-death penalty like the author. Personally I would like to see all murderers and terrorists put to death, but I more firmly believe that a good justice system should not be swayed by public anger or the sentiment of avenge

Obama's Clean Power Plan is Ideal but Impractical

President Obama's new countermeasure on global warming mandates the states to reduce their carbon dioxide emission by 32% compared to that of 2005 by the end of 2030. Currently the United States is the leading nation in the world that emits CO2. Among the 51 states, Texas is the largest producer of carbon dioxide due to its oil and gas industry. Hence the Clean Power Plant is expected to have a long-term and major impact on Texas economy.
In my opinion, the plan is well intended but not practical. On the one hand, Texas will be faced with more severe consequences of global warming, such as increased flooding and strength of hurricanes. On the other hand, Texas' economy relies heavily on oil and gas industry. Not only do oil and gas companies contributes significantly to Texas' GDP, but the three major airlines based in Texas (Southwest, American, United's Houston branch) are also dependent on fossil fuels. Therefore, the provisions of the Clean Power Plan will hurt Texas' economy badly.
Additionally, this plan is no better than keeping using fossil fuels. A provision of the plan allows the government to sell the privilege of emitting carbon dioxide. While the big companies have more than enough money to bid the emission right, such policy would put more burdens on smaller businesses, which worsens the unemployment rate. Moreover, this provision does not help raising the awareness of environmental protection because the big companies can emit as much CO2 as they want provided that they can pay for it.
The other provision of the clean power plan encourages the states to employ renewable energies, such as solar energy and wind turbines. Technically, solar and wind are not stable energy sources (in case of cloudy weather and windless days), which are not adequate to provide a stable electrical grid for a state as large as Texas. Secondly, solar energy is converted into electricity by photo voltaic cells, which themselves are made of toxic materials. In order to convert photons into electrical energy, semi-conductors must be used. Many solar cells contain toxic compounds of selenium. Once decommissioned, these solar cells will post new threats to the environment.
A more practical approach would be refining the use of fossil fuels. For example, fuel cells use catalysts and electrodes to oxidize fuels and generate electricity. It is more efficient and cleaner than burning fossil fuels and more stable than solar and wind energy. The fuel cell is a mature technology as well. Since 1970s, many spacecrafts (for example, the Apollo and space shuttles) have been powered by fuel cells. Another technology is carbon dioxide capture, which runs flue gas and basic solution into absorber and then strip the CO2 from absorber liquid product. In this way, CO2 can be isolated before it is emitted to the atmosphere. From the perspective of an engineering student, I believe that optimizing the use of fossil fuel with fuel cells and the CO2 capture suits large states like Texas better than the alternate energies mentioned in Obama's plan.

Toll Roads Does Not Solve Growing Traffic in Texas

A classmate of mine believes that building more toll roads is the solution to the increasingly compact traffic in Texas, even if foreign investments are unavoidable. The article can be found in this webpage. However, I believe that improving public transport, including civil aviation and railroad, is a better alternative to toll roads.
  As an engineer, I am always concerned with the technical perspective of a proposal prior to whether foreign companies are involved. An issue is how much traffic can new toll roads diverge? Not many. Currently the interstate highways generally have three to five lanes on each side in downtown areas and two or three lanes in the suburb. I have seen some toll expressways in Dallas and Houston. They are single lane highways. Practically, it is not possible to build 8-lane toll roads in addition to the existing highways. Therefore, I don't see how single lane (or dual lanes) expressways can alleviate the traffic flow. Secondly, I note that these toll roads have fewer ramps than regular interstate and Texas expressways. An important reason behind building highways is to spur economic growth. Hence bypassing many blocks is not helpful to local economy. Thirdly, building toll roads is against the Texan value of small government. Charging to use toll roads means charging tax payers another time after using their taxes to build the toll roads.
  But what are the alternatives? I would recommend the employment and refinement of RNAV approach procedures in major airports. RNAV combines GPS, on-board inertial navigation and radio navigation to guide airplanes through a precise path to approach the airport. With this technology, we can optimize air traffic flow, enhance safety in malicious weather conditions,thereby increasing the number of flights. Another way to solve the needs of transportation of the growing population would be reviving railroads.