Some industrialized countries have serious environmental problems. The damage to the environment is an inevitable result when a country tends to improve the standard of living. To what extent do you agree or disagree

Some industrialized countries have serious environmental problems. The damage to the environment is an inevitable result when a country tends to improve the standard of living. To what extent do you agree or disagree

Plan

Body1

such a fallacy –> individual and companies only concern their own benefits

eg1 eg buy cars

eg2 discharge wastes

Body2

+invest in alternative energy sources + make them viable–> comfortable life + reduce over-dependence on fossil fuels

eg: electric cars

+ introduce laws, punish companies –>

new technology + no waste –> no threats

Many people argue that nations cannot raise people’s living condition without causing environmental degradation. However, I totally disagree with this view.

I believe the saying that the government focuses on achieving economic targets will inevitably result in environmental problems is just a fallacy. In fact, these serious consequences occurred due to the fact that some individuals and companies only concern their own benefits. Firstly, the introduce of private vehicles facilitate people’s movement, yet people increasingly become dependent on them. For example, people with high incomes continue to buy cars, although public transport is now easily accessible and they are also aware of the danger of air pollution that car emissions cause. Secondly, while factories undeniably help solve the problem of unemployment, the unethical business of some factories lead to environmental deterioration. Taiwan’s Formosa Corp., as an example, illegally discharged toxic chemical substances into the river without using any waste treatment systems so that they could earn higher profits. If there had not been such activities, the environment would not have been destroyed.

I am of opinion that there are several ways to make people’ lives better without the loss of the environment. Firstly, it is advisable for the government to invest heavily in alternative energy sources and make them viable for public use. As a result, citizens would have a more comfortable life while reducing the over-dependence on fossil fuel. For example, they could drive to work by electric cars which are environmentally friendly and cost-effective. Secondly, the government should impose and enforce strict laws to punish companies that have harmful practices to the environment. Those companies may have to try new technologies to recycle wastes instead of disposing of them right away and the survival of citizens would no longer be threatened.

In conclusion, I would argue that by taking feasible measures, countries could both protect the environment and make an improvement in people’s living standard.

313 words