How We Are Destroying the Planet - Research Paper Example

? How we are destroying the earth and what we can do to prevent it How we are destroying the earth and what we can do to prevent it “Mankind is systematically destroying the sensitive ecosystems which support life on earth. To date, very little effort is being made to stop and correct the damage being done” (Butisingh, 2008). It is an accepted fact that we are destroying our earth in many ways even though we are advancing rapidly socially, culturally, scientifically and economically. Many of the environmental hazards (chemical, physical and biological) are manmade even though some of the hazards are naturally occurring. For example, smoke and dusts coming out of motor vehicles, e-wastes, nuclear wastes, chemicals like DDT, pesticides etc are examples of manmade environmental hazards whereas floods, cosmic rays, ultraviolet rays etc are some of the naturally occurring incidents which destroy our earth. Nuclear waste disposal is another thing which destroys our earth. Destruction of forests for heavy industrialization and injudicious industrial procedures are some other factors which give momentum to the destruction of our earth or environment. It is difficult for us to take drastic steps for the protection of our earth even though we talk loudly about the necessities of protecting our environment. In simple terms, protection of earth means allowing all natural things to remain as it is. But it is impossible for us to avoid the facilities offered by heavy industrialization. Nobody would like to walk 10 kilometers instead of using a taxi in the name of environmental or earth protection. However, it is an accepted fact that earth may not survive longer periods if we continue our selfish activities as we do at present. This paper briefly analyses the ways in which we destroy our environment and the possible solutions to avoid the destruction of earth. Ways of destroying earth “Nearly half of the world’s original forest cover has been lost, and each year another 16 million hectares are cut, bulldozed, or burned. Forests provide over US$400 billion to the world economy annually and are vital to maintaining healthy ecosystems”(Hinrichsen and Robey, 2011). Deforestation is one of the major way of environmental or earth destruction. Dense forests given way for industrial units and hence the climatic changes started to occur irregularly. Human has realized the importance of forests in keeping a balanced climate on earth only in the recent times. Trees absorb the dangerous carbon dioxide from atmosphere and liberate more useful oxygen to the atmosphere. For sustaining life on earth, the percentage of carbon dioxide and oxygen in the atmosphere should obey certain ratio. Trees, which helped us to keep the balance between the oxygen and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, faced heavy destruction in the recent past and from there onwards the destruction of the earth started. Nuclear waste disposal is another way of destruction of earth. Nuclear wastes or Radioactive wastes are normally classified as low-level, medium-level or high-level wastes, according to the amount and types of radioactivity in them (Waste Management, 2007). It may contain harmful radiations like alpha, beta and gamma which can penetrate deep in to our skin and create lot of health problems. Safe disposal of radioactive waste is a major problem faced by the current world. Because of the extended life and the deep penetrating power, it is suicidal to dispose radioactive wastes on earth. Reports from the European press states that Soviet Union is secretly dumping nuclear reactors and radioactive waste into the bordering seas (Rao,n.d, p.1). In other words, prominent countries are disposing nuclear wastes in the proximity of their enemy countries as a strategy to cause problems to the enemy country. Such tactics are not only causing problems to the innocent people, but also to the living things as a whole. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) came up with a scheme for sending radioactive waste into this heliocentric orbit” (Hewitt, 1985). Most of the superpowers are currently planning to dispose the nuclear wastes into the outer universe. We realize the outcomes of our activities rather late in most of the cases. For example, when we invented computers we thought it may not cause any problems to us in future. But currently we know that computers proved hazardous as it contributes heavily to the accumulation of e-wastes. Same way disposal of nuclear wastes in outer universe may not cause immediate harms, but such activities may cause severe unexpected problems earth in future. Commercialization has conquered all the aspects of human life at present. The thirst for making money has resulted in people engage in all sorts of activities which destroy the environment. Harte (2001) has mentioned that economic activities like coal burning have larger impact on environment (Harte, 2001, p.56). It is a fact that we facing severe energy crisis at present. Conventional energy sources were already exhausted because of the heavy exploitation. In search of fresh energy sources, we normally not much think about the negative impacts caused to the environment. People are always looking for the immediate goals and they will never look at the future problems while satisfying their immediate needs. “The earth’s surface is warming due to greenhouse gas emissions, largely from burning fossil fuels” (Hinrichsen and Robey, 2011). Greenhouse gases like water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone etc are causing the phenomenon of greenhouse effect in our atmosphere which is actually killing our earth. Greenhouse effect is a process in which the harmful radiations which should leave our atmosphere will be absorbed by these greenhouse gases. The inability of these harmful radiations to escape from our atmosphere because of the shielding of it by the increased content of greenhouse gases in atmosphere result in these radiations reflected in all directions or send back to the earth’s surface. These radiations are causing temperature rise in our atmosphere. The major liberators of greenhouse gases are automobiles, processing of coal and oil like bio-fuels, industrial units etc. However, nobody think in terms of reducing the usages of automobiles, fuels or industrial units in order to save our earth. Winter & Koger (2003) have argued that the environmental crisis concerned with the kind of creatures we are (Winter & Koger 2003, p.1). When we think of killing of earth, we often think about issues like global warming, wild life problems, deforestation, atmospheric temperature rise, nuclear waste disposal etc. In fact the innate traits of human are a motivating factor for them to exploit the environment as much as possible. When God created Adam, He told Adam that the whole things in this world are given to him except the fruit of a particular tree. The exploitation of the environment started from there. Even though, ancient human was so particular in protecting the earth and environment, the current generation is not much bothered about such things and engages in activities which destroy earth. What we can do to prevent destruction of earth? Collective efforts are necessary to save our earth. Because of the global or wide spread nature, environment problems cannot be addressed by a single country alone. The impacts of environment destruction activities done by one country may not be limited to that country alone. In fact most of the environmental problems created by the industrialized countries, affect badly the poor countries as well. The emission of greenhouse gases especially carbon dioxide have adverse effect on environment. The reduction of emission of green house gases should be controlled as much as possible in order to save our earth. Kyoto Protocol and Montreal Protocol are two international agreements designed for the protection of our environment or earth. Even though these agreements were signed by most of the global countries, the sincerity of the countries in implementing Kyoto protocol and Montreal protocol is highly questionable. Implementation of these environmental protection treaties may result in some economic losses to a country. “Policy action to limit greenhouse gas emissions has clearly been heavily constrained by a hegemonic discourse that such action would impose significant costs on industrialized economies in terms of losses in future GDP growth”(Newell and Paterson, 1998,p. 681). It is an accepted fact that no country can develop properly in the absence of heavy industrialization. At the same time it is difficult to implement industrialization without causing any damages to the earth. The smoke and other gases coming out from industrial units are destroying the earth. Kyoto protocol has been rejected by the main green house gas emitter, United States. “President Bush claimed that the treaty requirements would harm the U.S. economy, leading to economic losses of $400 billion and costing 4.9 million jobs” (West, 2010). The major feature of Kyoto Protocol is that “it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These amount to an average of five per cent against 1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012”(Kyoto Protocol, n. d). Each country seeks to avoid vulnerability to air pollutants. Each state is concerned in the first place with its own territory and pays only lip service to the idea of "spaceship Earth." In particular, countries pursue policies that minimize adverse environmental effects on their own citizens and ecosystems. They are more inclined to participate in environmental protection when the costs of compliance are relatively minor (Sprinz, & Vaahtoranta, 1994, p.78-79) Instead of lip services, countries should show more sincerity in showing their commitments towards environmental protection. “The issue of global climate change and what to do about it has put economics to a severe test in which economists have been challenged to think afresh about how to model such fundamental notions as risk, uncertainty, and discounting”(Weitzman, 2007, p. 703). Everybody knows the fact that any effort to reduce carbon emission or environmental protection may affect the economic growth. In other wise, there should be a compromise between economic interests and the environmental protection efforts. It is impossible for us to prohibit stop the automobile usages or industrial developments. At the same time we can think of options or strategies which reduce the impacts of industrialization or automobile use on environment. For example, even a single family in US like countries may have more than 3 to 4 cars or vehicles. Each and every people in the family may use their own vehicles for their travelling needs. Line bus uses are very less in America. In other words, automobile usages, one of the major culprits of environmental pollution, are more in US like advanced countries. Advanced countries should reduce their automobile usages as much as possible in order to save the earth. It is our duty to protect the environment first and then only we should think of the betterment of life. Burning fossil fuels are necessary for the human development. At the same time we should remember that fossil fuel burning is destroying the environment in one way or other. There is no point in striving for better life if the strategies used for providing better life are causing problems to the earth. It is just like a person sitting on the branch of a tree, cutting the same branch using an axe. "Command and control" regulations focus on preventing environmental problems by specifying how a company will manage a pollution-generating process” (Stuart, 2007). In this type of approach to regulation of pollution, the companies which are responsible for pollution should take necessary precautions to prevent the environment pollution due to their activities. For example, industrial units mostly produce lot of toxic gases and solid wastes which generally they disposed to the land or sea improperly. Waste treatment plants are made compulsory with every industrial unit by implementing "Command and control" regulations. Command and control regulations should be enforced strictly to save our earth from total destruction. Economic incentive approach is another way of controlling environmental pollution by offering economic incentives. In this approach, those who take effective measures to control environmental pollution will be rewarded and strict penalties will be enforced for those who destroy the environment. Pigovian Taxes, emission fees, abatement subsidies and tradable permit system are some of the common methods taken in the Economic incentive approach. Pigovian Taxes is a kind of special tax that is often levied on companies that pollute the environment or create excess social costs, called negative externalities, through business practices. In a true market economy, a Pigovian tax is the most efficient and effective way to correct negative externalities (Pigovian Tax, 2010). The main objective of this tax is to incorporate the social cost of the environment problems caused by the polluter. Thus the polluters will be forced to control their polluting activities because of the fear of the heavy Pigovian Tax. Emission fee is the fee levied to the polluters in order to prevent environment pollution. The heavy penalties like emission fee and Pigovian Tax will force the polluters to implement innovative strategies to reduce pollution. The economic incentive approach is more effective when we consider the long term goals compared to the CAC approach. The outcomes of EI may not be visible immediately like the CAC approach. In any case, it is necessary to enforce more regulations upon the companies or people who is killing our earth one way or other. Some people have the wrong conception that the farmers are working for the protection of our earth. In fact farmers are using pesticides and chemicals in their land for increasing the agricultural yields and thereby killing the earth. If a government goes ahead with the environmental protection activities, farmers may also be forced to sacrifice some of their interests. Reducing the usages of chemical fertilizers and pesticides will reduce the yields. However, it is better to sacrifice some of the agricultural yields to save the earth. Farmers should try to use bio-fertilizers more instead of the chemical fertilizers in order to save the earth. Environmentalists and economists increasingly agree that efforts to protect the environment and to achieve better living standards can be closely linked and are mutually reinforcing. Slowing the increase in population, especially in the face of rising per capita demand for natural resources, can take pressure off the environment and buy time to improve living standards on a sustainable basis (Hinrichsen and Robey, 2011). Uncontrolled population growth is another major reason for the environmental problems. In our attempts to provide better living standards to the growing population, we are knowingly and unknowingly destroying the environment. For example, it is a fact that more industrialization and more vehicles are needed if the population increases at a rapid pace. More population means more pollution. In short, population control is a better way of safeguarding our earth. References 1. Butisingh, R (2008). Retrieved from http://randallbutisingh.wordpress.com/2008/07/29/the-destruction-of-planet-earth/ 2. Harte J (2001), Consider a Cylindrical Cow: More Adventures in Environmental Problem Solving Publisher: University Science Books (February 15, 2001) 3. Hinrichsen D and Robey B (2011). Population and the Environment: The Global Challenge Retrieved from http://www.actionbioscience.org/environment/hinrichsen_robey.html 4. Hewitt R, (1985), Outer Space: the Easy Way Out? Retrieved from http://www.robin-hewitt.com/write/articles/space.html 5. Kyoto Protocol”. (n. d). Retrieved from http://unfccc.int/kyoto protocol/items/2830.php 6. Newell, P. and Paterson, M.(1998). A Climate for Business: Global Warming, the State and Capital. Review of International Political Economy, 5: 4, 679 — 703. Routledge. DOI: 10.1080/096922998347426 7. Pigovian Tax (2010). Retrieved from http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pigoviantax.asp 8. Rao. K R (n. d). Radioactive waste: The problem and its management. Retrieved from http://www.ias.ac.in/currsci/dec252001/1534.pdf 9. Stuart, R. (2007). Command and Control Regulation. Retrieved from http://www.eoearth.org/article/Command_and_control_regulation 10. Sprinz, D and Vaahtoranta T. (1994). The Interest-Based Explanation of International Environmental Policy. International Organization, Vol. 48, No. 1 (Winter, 1994), pp. 77-105 Published by: The MIT Press. Jstor 11. Waste Management, (2007), Retrieved from http://www.world-nuclear.org/education/wast.htm 12. Weitzman, M. L. (2007). A Review of "The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 45, No. 3 (Sep., 2007), pp. 703-724. Published by: American Economic Association. 13. West, L. (2010). Should the United States Ratify the Kyoto Protocol? Retrieved from http://environment.about.com/od/kyotoprotocol/i/kyotoprotocol_2.htm Winter D.D & Koger S. M (2003), › Visit Amazon's Deborah Du Nann Winter Page Find all the books, read about the author, and more. See search results for this author Are you an author? Learn about Author Central The Psychology of Environmental Problems: Psychology for Sustainability, Publisher: Psychology Press; 2 edition (October 1, 2003) Read More