Is it Scientific?

In Biello's "Green Apple" article, one can seem to receive multiple views of the aim that is being made.

The first section of the article would seem as part of an introduction in a scientific report. A historic scenario is portrayed and cunningly connected to the topic of the paper, the effort to go green. Background information is given on what it is New York City and other major metropolitan areas are trying to achieve to become more green.

The second and third sections, seem to still be giving more of an introduction. Yes, solar and electric power are viable "methods" the article still seems to lie in the "what if" range. It is this taken tone that I personally feel the paper is somewhat theoretical. As Gross says in his paper, a theoretical paper seems to rely on a consistent world. Though we have small proof of what these alternative energy options can provide, we still haven't seen and actual major time-lapse ( 50 years) result. Therefore the alternate sources are neither proven or falsified.

Some would view this article, as Gross describes deductive theoretical papers have a tendency to be, as a persuasion to forward the effort for a green world. The article, perhaps inadvertently, seems to use the efforts of the metropolitan cities as a call of urgency. If these cities and government agencies are making such an effort, shouldn't we?

In closing, the article does seem to follow somewhat of a Baconian induction path and is very informative. The introductory sections do lay out multiple facts and possibilities, and the final sections discuss the possible outcomes and what could impede the process. The article is arranged to attempt to give the reader the thought that climate change, in theory, is not totally feasibly achievable but anything helps.