In this October 03, 2012, editorial by the Houston Chronicle staff writers entitled, "NRG makes a breathtakingly bad proposal", the regional power company is criticized for proposing to build a new power plant that would pollute and worsen Houston's air quality by utilizing "cap and trade" energy credits from the Dallas area.

 NRG wants to buy pollution credits from a Dallas energy company under the Texas cap and trade system.  This system allows companies that emit low levels of pollution to sell their energy credits for being "clean" to companies that cannot meet the standards and are "dirty".  NRG has applied to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to allow this trade so it can build a power plant in the Houston area that will emit 53 tons of pollution into the local air each year. 

The Houston Chronicle editorial maintains the position that NRG is attempting to manipulate the current air quality rules at the expense of local Houston residents who already reside in one of the smoggiest cities in the nation. 

In evaluating this short editorial piece, I have used the assignment's guidelines and also the suggestions and CLUE mnemonic in the critical thinking handout provided for our Texas government course.  Considering the source, I did some brief digging around on the internet and see that The Houston Chronicle has been finalists in the Pulitzer Prize which convinces me that their journalists are fair and credible.  Additionally, The Houston Chronicle supported Barack Obama in the last presidential election which to me puts the paper on the liberal side of the political fence which typically, like democrats, support the environment.  Thus, this editorial makes sense. 

The audience is the Houston resident who must breathe the air.  The editorial I think is clearly also letting NRG know that the newspaper is keeping an eye on them and will do their journalistic best in trying to keep the public informed. This is so, a quick review of the Chronicle's past articles reveals many objective news pieces and editorials on NRG and Texas. 

I agree with this editorial.  Without having to put on my "Einstein Hat" I can just use common sense and see that the NRG proposal is for the benefit of NRG and no one else.  NRG is a large company with a huge intellectual resource pool, so I must assume they already know that building a new power plant under the current cap and trade rules in the Houston market would be expensive.  Thus, they want to buy Dallas's clean air credits.  Why not just spend the money on doing the right thing and build a power plant that meets local clean air requirements? 

While many newspapers, including The Houston Chronicle, have been implicated in pushing agendas that are questionable, I believe that our newspapers are watchdogs of people, politicians, and companies that would otherwise prosper through unethical and illegal actions. 

Part of me feels guilty for being so uninformed, but another part of me wonders if my best friend who avidly reads his local paper and Newsweek, could be considered a better person, a better citizen, or more intellectually developed?  Or does he  just merely have different things to talk about over a beer with his friends?