Nowadays, owing to the surge in industrialisation, the demand for energy sources 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 resources are eternal and everlasting and there is no issue of their depletion; therefore they tend to 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 the extinction of these resources for future generations.
Second, my viewpoint is further bolstered by the factor that these resources do not pollute the environment. The reason for this is that solar, ocean, and wind energy, do not emit any harmful gases such as carbon dioxide and methane, which pollute the environment. For instance, according to research by the department of International Renewable Energy Resources in the USA, the usage of solar energy 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.
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. Therefore, in comparison to fossil fuels, there should be more consumption of renewable sources of energy.
Nowadays, owing to the surge in
industrialisation
, the demand for
energy
sources
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 resources are eternal and everlasting and there is no issue of their depletion;
therefore
they tend to 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 the extinction of these resources for future generations.
Second, my viewpoint is
further
bolstered by the factor that these resources do not pollute the environment.
The reason for this is
that solar, ocean, and wind
energy
, do not emit any harmful gases such as carbon dioxide and methane, which pollute the environment.
For instance
, according to research by the department of International
Renewable
Energy
Resources in the USA, the usage of solar
energy
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.
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.
Therefore
,
in comparison
to fossil fuels, there should be more consumption of
renewable
sources
of
energy
.