Introduction
With the hives of economic activities going on around the globe, the rate of environmental degradation is pretty high. The use of plastic bags, mining, and lack of proper environmental protection policies has been critical causes of environmental pollution. Although the impact of environmental degradation is visible, it is surprising that some people believe that the economic requirement of the planet supersedes the need to practice adequate environmental protection. It is possible to achieve the economic objectives of the planet’s inhabitants by not necessarily destroying the environment. While some of the causes of environmental pollution may be beyond man’s ability to stop them, there is the need to curb climate changes and there are many reasons why stopping further damages to the environment is important.
First, the overwhelming majority of climate scientists have demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that the pollution of the environment is causing enormous disruptions to livelihood. According to Naomi Klein (2020), there is evidence that proves the dangerous disruption occasioned by environmental degradation and the situation is likely to worsen unless the relevant authorities and individuals take the necessary measures. For instance, the high level of lead metal in drinking water brought about by industrial activities has disastrous health implications for the poorest populations.
In addition to the presence of lead in drinking water, there is the danger of plastic choking the oceans, killing millions of creatures. Such killings of aquatic lives can disrupt the everyday livelihood of many people around the globe. The only way to reduce the destruction of millions of sea creatures annually is to reduce the amount of plastic usage and deposition into the sea (Klein, 2019). However, even though Moore (2014) supports reducing plastic usage and pollution, he believes that the measure may have a minimal impact on the protection of the environment.
Naomi Klein (2020) also infers the cyclone disaster experienced in Mozambique as one of the dangers associated with failure to take good care of the environment. The melting ice resulting from global warming eventually leads to disasters such as floods and cyclones. Notably, this phenomenon’s impact on Mozambique demonstrates what to expect if the attitude of not protecting the environment does not stop. The several forms of ice melting at a high rate are causing severe disruption to people’s ordinary lives worldwide is of concern. The health of the ecosystem on which both the plants and animals rely is deteriorating at a very high rate, interfering with the economies, food security, livelihoods, health, and the quality of life worldwide.
The only way to curb global warming and its effects on the planet’s livelihood is to reduce CO2 emissions. Even though global leaders have made efforts to reduce CO2 emissions, their levels have been increasing. Fortunately, the wave of youth mobilization against climate change gives a glimpse of hope of curbing the problem of climate change. The wildfire of student strikes ignited the need for governments to declare a climate emergency, which is a good starting point to overcoming the challenges of climate change.
Another reason to stop environmental degradation is that it can help create hundreds of millions of jobs around the globe. The result of such an achievement would protect the economies and, at the same time, guarantee healthcare. Notably, the vision of subverting environmental pollution to create new jobs, regenerate the earth’s life support system, and guarantee childcare and healthcare is not new. Its origin is traceable to social movements in environmentally polluted parts, including Ecuador and Nigeria (Crenshaw, 2020). What is new is that now politicians worldwide are willing to make policies that will help curb the climate change issues.
While Crenshaw (2020) is against taking care of the environment, he acknowledges the impact of climate change. The author suggests that economic activities are more important and therefore deserve priority Crenshaw (2020). It is clear that people need the energy to run their daily errands, and from the look of the situation, it is hard to settle for carbon-free energy sources for various reasons. First, carbon-free energy may not be enough to serve the population. Secondly, only fossil fuels can meet the production requirement that the world needs right now. Further, the call for taxing companies and states that have a high emission rate is misguided because it might give other countries that are not ready to implement the policy an opportunity to expand their market and hence increase the emissions.
Generally, Crenshaw (2020) wants those who are for protecting the environment to be slow and more cautious when criticizing those who put the economic aspect first before caring about the state of the planet. According to Crenshaw (2020), sometimes, the reasoning behind protecting the environment may be flawed. Moreover, there is a need to protect the emergency of the United States as one of the top gas producers.
The catastrophic impact of plastic bags on the environment is undeniable. Major cities in the US, including New York, have indicated that the plastic bag industry needs to be regulated to protect the environment. While people have the perception that paper is better than plastic as it is degradable, the truth is that in terms of climate change, there is not much difference (Moore, 2014). Plastic bags can significantly impact the environment, including clogging up drainage systems, hence contributing to emissions.
On the other hand, marine plastic is a threat to low-income people who heavily rely on fishing for a livelihood. Additionally, many communities around the globe depend on the food that comes from the sea. While it is clear that plastics are making it hard for people to lead a healthy life, it is also clear that getting rid of them is a complicated process. One of the arguments is that reusable bags might not be suitable for the environment. For instance, according to an Australian study, cotton bags can negatively affect the environment as they require a lot of water to grow.
Moreover, cotton papers, unlike plastic papers, are hard to recycle. Nonetheless, the Australian study concluded that reusable bags made from recycled plastic or more durable cotton are the best option. The larger picture is that no bag that does not have any environmental impact.
Conclusion
Although different authors have divergent opinions on whether or not we should care about the state of our planet, the reality is that the impact of not protecting the environment is overwhelming. Global warming resulting from melting ice due to CO2 emissions is catastrophic as it has already claimed innocent lives across the globe. In addition, the plastic bags that find their way into the ocean deny low-income people a livelihood and have a catastrophic impact on people’s health (Adler, 2016). Therefore, even though some global warming anomalies might be beyond human control, there is a need to stop overexploitation, and the wars for economic achievements need to stop.
Some scholars may argue that fossil fuels are essential for enhancing economic development. While that might be true to some extent, it is essential to acknowledge that overdevelopment will destroy the environment and consequently affect the livelihoods of many people around the globe. In other words, it is wise to implement rules and regulations that allow human nature to coexist with planet earth while improving human life. Even though there are indications that the political class worldwide is willing to play a role in protecting the environment, there is a need for balanced and long-term policies to safeguard the environment.
References
Adler, B. (2016). Banning plastic bags is great for the world, right? Not so fat. Wired.
Crenshaw, D. (2020). It is time for conservatives to own the climate-change issue. National Review.
Klein, N. (2019). “We are the wildfire”: How to fight the climate crisis. Guardian.
Moore, J. C (2014). Chocking the oceans with plastic. New York Times.