A research suggests that damage to the environment is an inevitable consequence of worldwide improvements in the standard of living.
Write 150-200 words discussing whether you agree or disagree and why do you take that stance. What effects could it have if the government goes with either choice?
Option A: Support the topic.
Option B: Go against the topic.
I firmly agree to the fact that well-intended actions of human have far-reaching catastrophic ramifications on the entire ecosystem and Environment. Even though science and technology has grown by leaps and bounds over a past decade which has unquestionably transformed the nature and execution of work, the inherited downsides outshine the upsides.
First and foremost, not only contemporary lifestyle comes from non renewable sources of energy such as fossil fuels which exponentially increases the amount of air pollution, water pollution even soil pollution which conspicuously leads to the depletion of ozone layer and causes global warming ,but also domestic waste, industrial effluents which results in contamination of water bodies such as lakes, rivers, oceans precipitates to degradation of aquatic ecosystems. A study predicted that if global warming is not stopped, prime coastal cities like Mumbai, New York, etcetera will be underwater by the end of this century.
Secondly, unlike the bygone days, in the modern era, the trees are rampantly getting chopped without consideration. The prime examples of this are mass-producing furniture factories. Incontestably, there are not enough trees to satiate the oxygen supply of the planet and thousands of plants and animals lose their natural habitats and have become extinct.
Considering these reasons, I vehemently believe technology has impacted the nature adversely. Society must ensure steps are taken to prevent this grave issue from deteriorating further.
Thank you for having the opportunity to participate in this survey.
No comments:
Post a Comment