AliciaLin11

= **Energy Crossroads** =
 * Title, director and release year?**
 * Title:** Energy Crossroads
 * Director:** Christophe Fauchere
 * Release Year:** 2007

America consumers 25% of the world’e energy, and fossil fuels provide 80% of the energy we use in the US. Our entire economy is based on fossil fuels. The resources we are basing our economy and lifestyle on are finite. This film exposes the problems associated with our energy problems and features
 * What is the central argument or narrative of the film?**

People take cheap energy for granted. The average meal uses an immense amount of energy to transport and grow into food. In general, 10 cal of energy is needed for every cal of food on a person’s plate. Additionally, due to green house gases, our planet’s polar ice caps are melting and weather patterns are changing. Also, China and India are trying to attain the western quality of life, which would use a lot of energy and resources.The film also brings in top scientists to explain the connection between fossil fuel usage and climate change and how because of global warming and sea level rise it would be critical to switch over to renewable energy even if we weren't experiencing oil depletion. In the latter half of the film, it offers possible alternative to the energy we use today and innovative solutions people are working on now.

A major problem this film draws out is that people do not understand where their energy comes from and where it is being used. This lack of understanding has led us to turn a blind eye to the issues, and continue unsustainable practices. Our resources are not infinite, and it took millions of years to produce the fossil fuels, but it has taken 150 years to consume roughly half of the world’s fossil fuel. In the future we will hit peak oil, and the fact that small variations in our oil causes large price fluctuations because fossil fuels has become an integral part of our economy is a problem. Our want for a higher standard of living has meant larger energy needs. Our natural resources are depleted at an alarming rate, so we have to rethink our energy issues while we still have time, or wait until we are forced to.
 * What sustainability problems does the film draw out?**

I believe the solutions the film offered were the most compelling because it offered a plethora of ways to pave the way to become more sustainable. It is difficult and perhaps impossible to have zero carbon footprint, but at least the film offers ways to at least start on the path to becoming more energy efficient and reducing our impact. I really appreciated that the film advocated to reducing consumption, not just changing what we consume, and it showed a variety of areas where energy consumption is a problem.
 * What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?**

I felt like the film introduced a lot of problems at a very shallow level, and some problems it pointed out that have an easy solution, such as foods currently travel a great distance before they reach your plate, wasn’t offered a solution such as eat locally.
 * What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?**

I feel like this film compels me to seek out more about the potential in nanotechnology and the innovations that are currently in progress for nanotechnology.
 * What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?**

The target audience for this film doesn't appear to be those already familiar with peak oil and the worldwide energy predicament. Since it covers the energy problem at a very shallow level, the film is best suited for those who want a quick introduction to the energy crisis. The film allows viewers to understand that the energy crisis does not only affect the power in your house, it affects every aspect of life. Because the film offers possible solutions, I think it encourages viewers to think of ways they can change their lives to use less energy.
 * What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?**

People need to rethink their culture. For instance, in America we try to heat large spaces or homes instead of putting on a coat or sweater because we don’t think “I’m cold” we think “the house is cold.” We need to reduce consumption and think of innovative or alternative ways to what we’re doing currently. For instance, use wind, biofuels, hydrogen, solar or other alternative sources of energy. Also, we need to put in place energy-efficient homes and building, have a better public transit system, and emphasize cost-effective alternatives.
 * What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?**

I felt that if the film had a narrower focus, in terms of pinpointing the stakeholders and going more in depth on the topics, the film could have been more educational; however, this film, like 11th hour, was meant to be more of an overview of sustainability issues to get people aware of all the issues, versus becoming an expert in any one issue.
 * What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?**