TOEFL 통합 작문

📖 읽기 지문

The introduction of renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power, is often hailed as a cornerstone of sustainable development. However, a closer examination reveals that a complete transition to renewables by 2050 is not only impractical but also potentially detrimental. Three key reasons support this skepticism. First, renewable energy is inherently intermittent. Solar panels generate electricity only during daylight hours and are less efficient on cloudy days, while wind turbines require consistent wind speeds. This variability makes it impossible to rely on renewables as a baseload power source without massive storage systems, which are currently too expensive and inefficient to deploy at scale. Second, the manufacturing and disposal of renewable energy components, particularly solar panels and wind turbine blades, involve hazardous materials and significant energy consumption. This creates a hidden environmental cost that undermines the 'green' image of these technologies. Third, the land and resource requirements for large-scale renewable installations are immense. For instance, wind farms require vast tracts of land, and solar arrays compete with agriculture for arable land, leading to potential food security issues. These factors suggest that a rapid, complete shift to renewables is economically and environmentally unwise, and a more balanced energy portfolio, including fossil fuels and nuclear power, should be maintained.

🎧 듣기 강의

The reading's arguments against a full transition to renewable energy are flawed and fail to account for recent technological advances and systemic solutions. First, while intermittency is a challenge, it is not insurmountable. Modern smart grids, combined with diverse renewable sources (e.g., solar from deserts and wind from coastal areas), can smooth out supply. Moreover, battery storage costs have plummeted by over 80% in the last decade, and new technologies like compressed-air storage and green hydrogen offer scalable solutions. Second, the claim of hidden environmental costs ignores the life-cycle assessments showing that renewables' total emissions, including manufacturing and disposal, are still far lower than fossil fuels over their lifetime. Moreover, recycling programs for solar panels and turbine blades are rapidly improving, turning waste into a resource. Third, the land-use argument is misleading. Rooftop solar, floating solar farms, and offshore wind installations can generate substantial power without competing for arable land. In fact, agrivoltaics—combining crop cultivation with solar panels—can increase land efficiency. Thus, the obstacles highlighted in the reading are temporary and addressable, not reasons to abandon renewable energy.