Owing to the surge in industrialisation, the demand for fossil fuels has also increased. For this reason, utilisation of renewable sources is encouraged in comparison to non-renewable sources. In my opinion, this is a positive development as non-conventional resources are not only reusable but can also mitigate environmental pollution.
To begin with, the first reason to support my view is that the energy provided by the sun, wind, and ocean can be used again and again. This is because these sources are eternal and everlasting and there is no issue of their depletion; therefore they can serve mankind for many years. To exemplify, a USA study found that renewable energy can easily provide up to 80 percent of US electricity until 2050. In contrast, coal, petroleum and oil are non-renewable as they take thousands of years to form; thus, the over-consumption of these resources can possibly lead to their extinction in the coming years.
Second, my viewpoint is further bolstered by the factor that these resources do not pollute the environment. The reason for this is that the production of solar, ocean, and wind power, do not emit any harmful gases such as carbon dioxide and methane which can pollute the environment. For instance, according to research by the department of International Renewable Energy Resources in the USA, the usage of solar power can reduce the annual carbon emissions by 25 percent. Alternatively, while using fossils, a large amount of carbon emits into the air which pollutes the environment to a large extent.
In conclusion, although setting up of solar panels, and windmills require surplus financial assistance, in my perspective, once installed, these plants tend to provide a number of benefits such as clean environment and reusability of resources. Hence, in comparison to fossil fuels, there should be more consumption of renewable sources.
Owing to the surge in
industrialisation
, the demand for fossil fuels has
also
increased.
For this reason
,
utilisation
of
renewable
sources
is encouraged
in comparison
to non-renewable
sources
. In my opinion, this is a
positive
development as non-conventional resources are not
only
reusable
but
can
also
mitigate environmental pollution.
To
begin
with, the
first
reason to support my view is that the energy provided by the sun, wind, and ocean can be
used
again and again. This is
because
these
sources
are eternal and everlasting and there is no issue of their depletion;
therefore
they can serve mankind for
many
years. To exemplify, a USA study found that
renewable
energy can
easily
provide up to 80 percent of US electricity until 2050.
In contrast
, coal, petroleum and oil are non-renewable as they take thousands of years to form;
thus
, the over-consumption of these resources can
possibly
lead to their extinction in the coming years.
Second, my viewpoint is
further
bolstered by the factor that these resources do not pollute the
environment
.
The reason for this is
that the production of solar, ocean, and wind power, do not emit any harmful gases such as carbon dioxide and methane which can pollute the
environment
.
For instance
, according to research by the department of International
Renewable
Energy Resources in the USA, the usage of solar power can
reduce
the annual carbon emissions by 25 percent.
Alternatively
, while using fossils, a large amount of carbon emits into the air which pollutes the
environment
to a large extent.
In conclusion
, although setting up of solar panels, and windmills require surplus financial assistance, in my perspective, once installed, these plants tend to provide a number of benefits such as clean
environment
and reusability of resources.
Hence
,
in comparison
to fossil fuels, there should be more consumption of
renewable
sources
.