In a world with an ever-growing population, providing housing is one of the crucial tasks of all governments. At the same time, however, the environment has to be protected from too much destruction and deforestation. Different solutions have been created to solve these problems. One significant solution could be increasing the height of buildings.
When looking at the skyline of metropolitan cities, skyscrapers are becoming increasingly visible. The reason for this is simple: housing has to be provided, while the environment should suffer the least amount possible. Decreasing the building footprints of houses and therefore the destruction of environment, while increasing the height, is an effective solution in overcoming this dilemma. This resolution also has its faults though, as increasing height also means that sunlight reaching the streets will decrease and that housing will be built more densely in order to save space.
Another possible solution is to increase building costs to pressure the population into living in smaller areas, which would save space. As this impacts members of the community unevenly depending on their wealth, this would encourage unequal living standards and conflicts as a result of this. Therefore, this is not a plausible solution to the problem.
In my opinion, finding the perfect way to minimise environmental damage while increasing housing is a problem to which there is no simple solution. Many governments are currently relying on height to solve the problem, but this is not attractive to many people. Any solution chosen should be one that causes the fewest problems.
In a world with an ever-growing population, providing housing is one of the crucial tasks of all
governments
. At the same time,
however
, the environment
has to
be protected
from too much destruction and deforestation.
Different
solutions
have
been created
to solve these
problems
. One significant
solution
could be
increasing
the
height
of buildings.
When looking at the skyline of metropolitan cities, skyscrapers are becoming
increasingly
visible.
The reason for this is
simple: housing
has to
be provided
, while the environment should suffer the least amount possible. Decreasing the building footprints of
houses
and
therefore
the destruction of environment, while
increasing
the
height
, is an effective
solution
in overcoming this dilemma. This resolution
also
has its faults though, as
increasing
height
also
means that sunlight reaching the streets will decrease and that housing will
be built
more
densely
in order to save space.
Another possible
solution
is to increase building costs to pressure the population into living in smaller areas, which would save space. As this impacts members of the community
unevenly
depending on their wealth, this would encourage unequal living standards and conflicts
as a result
of this.
Therefore
, this is not a plausible
solution
to the problem.
In my opinion, finding the perfect way to
minimise
environmental damage while
increasing
housing is a
problem
to which there is no simple
solution
.
Many
governments
are
currently
relying on
height
to solve the
problem
,
but
this is not attractive to
many
people
. Any
solution
chosen should be one that causes the fewest
problems
.