Going green recently has become a new phenomenon with great support from not only individuals but also a myriad of companies and factories in the world. Due to great benefits, the writer firmly believes that this movement seems to be a wise choice. However, the professor is at loggerhead of this statement by pointing out some sparks making this trend undesirable.
First, the author expresses support for going green in light of its positive impact on the environment. It is stated that the process of environmental degradation can be slowed down with the application of going green. The argument, by contrast, is opposed by the lecturer since the deteriorated environment is the result of thousands of individuals; the number surely must terrify humans. He also fumes that without the involvement of a multitude of global companies and residents, this correction would never become true.
Second, company profit is another reason to publicize going green. When the motor and image of a certain company links with an eco-friendly message, this obviously facilitates the soaring growth of that firm. Nevertheless, the speaker is at the opposite view. He rebuts that in order to go green, there would be a surge in the manufacturing cost, which leads to the following swell in final price to consumers. This negates the sales of companies fiercely inasmuch as buyers are unlikely to pay higher for the same products.
Last but not least, the reading cites advantages that both citizens and companies can obtain through employing going green. Solar panels are considered a suitable example to clarify for this point since the spending on electricity is likely to plummet along with the efficiency in shielding the environment. In opposition, the professor does not advocate this statement. He asserts that the spending outweighs the saving owing almost completely to the high installation and maintenance costs, which become considerable factors for not going green.
Going
green
recently has become a new phenomenon with great support from not
only
individuals
but
also
a myriad of
companies
and factories in the world. Due to great benefits, the writer
firmly
believes that this movement seems to be a wise choice.
However
, the professor is at loggerhead of this statement by pointing out
some
sparks making this trend undesirable.
First
, the author expresses support for going
green
in light of its
positive
impact on the environment. It
is stated
that the process of environmental degradation can
be slowed
down with the application of going
green
. The argument, by contrast,
is opposed
by the lecturer since the deteriorated environment is the result of thousands of individuals; the number
surely
must
terrify humans. He
also
fumes that without the involvement of a multitude of global
companies
and residents, this correction would never become true.
Second,
company
profit is another reason to publicize going
green
. When the motor and image of a certain
company
links with an eco-friendly message, this
obviously
facilitates the soaring growth of that firm.
Nevertheless
, the speaker is at the opposite view. He rebuts that in order to go
green
, there would be a surge in the manufacturing cost, which leads to the following swell in final price to consumers. This negates the sales of
companies
fiercely
inasmuch as buyers are unlikely to pay higher for the same products.
Last
but
not least, the reading cites advantages that both citizens and
companies
can obtain through employing going
green
. Solar panels
are considered
a suitable example to clarify for this point since the spending on electricity is likely to plummet along with the efficiency in shielding the environment. In opposition, the professor does not advocate this statement. He asserts that the spending outweighs the saving owing almost completely to the high installation and maintenance costs, which become considerable factors for not going
green
.