World population has increased greatly over the last few decades and industrialization has posed a major threat to wild species these days. While some argue that this trend cannot be stopped, others including myself believe that we still have time to tackle the issue.
People who hold the opinion that we should accept the current situation base their argument on several reasons. To begin with, many places with serious environmental problems are already not suitable for some species to survive. For example, many wild animals lost their habitats because of deforestation and both water and air pollution brought by industrialization, especially in some developing countries. It is simply impractical to shut down these factories as some local governments give top priority to economic development. In addition, some problems are too complicated to be solved in a short period of time. Global warming is one of them. Some marine lives, for instance, are dying out because of increased temperature and there is nothing we can do to make a quick change.
However, others believe that governments and individuals can still make efforts to save wild lives. Governments could introduce environmental laws to force factories to reduce carbon dioxide emissions that lead to global warming, and they can also impose green taxes on drivers to encourage people to drive less. As a result, less greenhouse gas emission from both factories and car use will lead to a better environment for both human and wild species. As for individuals, we can also limit our contribution to environmental damage by becoming more energy efficient. For instance, if paperless offices were widely encouraged and adopted, then there would be less demand for wood, and thus helping to curb deforestation and better protect wild habitats.
World population has increased
greatly
over the last few decades and industrialization has posed a major threat to wild species these days. While
some
argue that this trend cannot be
stopped
, others including myself believe that we
still
have time to tackle the issue.
People
who hold the opinion that we should accept the
current
situation base their argument on several reasons. To
begin
with,
many
places with serious environmental problems are already not suitable for
some
species to survive.
For example
,
many
wild animals lost their habitats
because
of deforestation and both water and air pollution brought by industrialization,
especially
in
some
developing countries
. It is
simply
impractical to shut down these factories as
some
local
governments
give top priority to economic development.
In addition
,
some
problems are too complicated to
be solved
in a short period of time. Global warming is one of them.
Some
marine
lives
,
for instance
, are dying out
because
of increased temperature and there is nothing we can do to
make
a quick
change
.
However
, others believe that
governments
and individuals can
still
make
efforts to save wild
lives
.
Governments
could introduce environmental laws to force factories to
reduce
carbon dioxide emissions that lead to global warming, and they can
also
impose green taxes on drivers to encourage
people
to drive less.
As a result
, less greenhouse gas emission from both factories and car
use
will lead to a better environment for both human and wild species. As for individuals, we can
also
limit our contribution to environmental damage by becoming more energy efficient.
For instance
, if paperless offices were
widely
encouraged and adopted, then there would be less demand for wood, and
thus
helping to curb deforestation and better protect wild habitats.