Prohibiting the manufacturing and usage of plastics will endanger human health and environmental sustainability. Once the plastics were devised by the Swedish engineer Sten Gustaf Thulin in 1959, they were intended to become a better solution to paper bags considered awful for the ecosystem by cutting down trees and preventing deforestation. Plastic bags have been smaller in size, more comfortable to manufacture, versatile, water-resistant, and affordable to ship, so both manufacturer and customers were very attracted by their convenience. They nearly substituted paper bags globally in the 1980s (Xanthos & Walker, 2017). There are currently about a trillion plastic bags produced worldwide every year. They are made annually, and the polymer is produced in the grocery shop in four out of five bags. The adverse effects of these bags were unanticipated until the surroundings began to emerge.
Although some reports associate plastics with adverse health impacts, I perceive the controversial products to benefit community members’ welfare and existence. For instance, supporters of this ban argue that polyesters are non-biodegradable and need to reduce their production. This characteristic of the materials exposes animals to undesirable adverse consequences, and humans risk leading low-quality lifestyles. Though this argument might be accurate and convincing, many alternative innovative ideologies exist to help the global community handle the provocative constituents. For instance, international countries invest in recycling infrastructures to reduce their disposal into the environment. Unfortunately, a section of the enlightened researchers argues that different nations lack resources to install the programs hence exposing their respective citizens to the specific adversities associated with polymers and other non-biodegradable items that find their way into the environment. Nonetheless, international players need to partner and ensure that every nation has the much-needed setups to regulate plastics to boost the much-needed global economic development.
The three essays exhibit some limitations despite illustrating strong arguments about plastics’ complex reality and their products in the environment. Opinions in these three pieces are biased, with the author focusing on the effects of the controversial products on the water bodies and the animals that depend on the water. However, although the enlightened writer acknowledged both the benefits and costs of banning plastic production, the arguments are not comparable. Whereas the pieces that support the restriction of using plastics focus on their influence on water bodies, the item discourages water bodies from the interdiction provisions. Additionally, the educative pieces’ information failed to identify the alternative approaches that guarantee that the global society maximizes plastics’ benefits while minimizing the supposed adverse consequences of their production and application. Finally, the final research document’s efforts to support both arguments guarantee that scholars understand the complex topic. Though the item’s content is beneficial, the author needed to put subheadings to make sure the readers comprehend the information herein conveniently.
Navigating through the contents of the three writings has no influence on my stand about the provocative topic. Responsible parties need to reconsider their decisions on how to handle the hydrocarbons to enable society to take advantage of them to better their lives while limiting their exposures to the compounds’ harmful effects. Although the students’ argument about the merchandise’s dangers is strong and convincing, community members need to uphold optimism. The parties need to suggest approaches to warrant that they use the scandalous commodities cautiously while supporting environmentalists’ specific environmentalists’ goals to ensure that every creature depends on nature to survive safeguarded from extinction. Thus, I maintain my position about this issue despite the additional knowledge acquired from the three documents. The international society needs to put regulations on the production and management of plastics rather than prohibiting them.
Reference
Xanthos, D., & Walker, T. R. (2017). International policies to reduce plastic marine pollution from single-use plastics (plastic bags and microbeads): A review. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 118(1-2), 17-26. 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.02.048.