HOLLA ALL! We have less than 24 hours to GP P1 (but also about 36 hours till we bid the subject goodbye forever) — hang in there!! We’ll make it out fine : ).
“The answer to environmental damage is not to be found in technology but by leading a simpler life.” How far do you agree? (CJC 2014)
“The world has enough to satisfy every man’s needs, but not every man’s greed.” Is an oft-quoted line by environmentalists advocating for a more eco-friendly approach in our lives today. Indeed, with the population increasing by 10 000 an hour and an unprecedented rate of production increasing today, the strain we place on the world is indubitably the worst yet. Environmental damage is apparent, from rising temperatures, erratic weathers and barren landscapes, leading many to make calls for action. To a large extent, I believe that technology is of invaluable importance in resolving this crisis, more so than simply reducing our consumption and production patterns.
Nonetheless, it is indisputable that the root of the problem lies not in our inefficient technology, but rather, in our excessive consumption and desire for more today. Indeed, even as resources are fast-depleting, human consumption has been on the rise- both among the affluent in the developed countries, as well as among the poorer who has witnessed rising income in recent years. Examples that highlight our high levels of consumption as a factor of environmental damage abound – in its pursuit of economic growth, China has experienced consistently strong budget surpluses, but also hyperpollution with air standards bordering on unhealthy.
Other examples: Fast Fashion, throwaway gadgets, disposable printer, e-waste. I think the first paragraph is a replica of the second so I’m probably not continuing with the first…. Yeah. Also an interesting statistic to insert in para 2 is that each Briton’s carbon footprint is equivalent to that of 22 Malawians (i.e. developed vs developing country – this shows that if everyone were to collectively reduce their consumption levels significantly, there will definitely be a significant impact on our environment.)
In Economics, the supply is said to be created by the demand. At the core of it all, it is the consumers’ demand for more goods that encourages suppliers to increase their production, prompting me to believe that perhaps the answer lies in reducing our consumption, rather than on improving technology. Today, consumerism is on the rise, a term only recently coined as an “affluent” problem. Companies today thrive on meeting the consumers’ demands, but more pertinently, by ‘creating’ demand where there previously was not. Take for example the smartphone industry: ten years ago, touch phone screens were bulky and had poor user interface, leaving users grappling with the unfriendly stylus that was hard to utilise efficiently; today, in most developed countries, it has become a challenge to find someone willing to leave the house without their smartphones. Corporations today make massive profits from blurring the ‘wants’ and ‘needs’ of consumers, as seen in many electrical products consumers swear by today. Unarguably, these have greatly improved the standards of living for all involved in terms of efficiency, entertainment and convenience. However, such appliances do not come from thin air— in the process of production, millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases and pollutants are released into the atmosphere, contributing in large to the environmental damage we face today. In fact, the modern world generates more than 5000 tonnes of e-waste every year, most of which contain metals that cannot be recycled but are instead incinerated at great costs to the environment. Given that our high standards and demands for more products feed the toxic fumes that damage the world today, it is perhaps worth considering that the power to resolve such problems lies not in creating more efficient technologies. Rather, the onus should be on the consumer to reduce their boundless appetite for consumption, only then will large companies respond by reducing their production levels accordingly. Such a collective response appears to be more sustainable and promising in the long run towards reducing environmental damage, instead of depending on technological advancements as a panacea to resolve our insatiable appetites for more gadgets and products.
While the argument that much of the damage on the environment today has been caused by us consumers appears unassailable, to claim that these problems can be solved by simply reversing our consumption patterns alone is a far-fetched claim at best. Instead, the role of technology in resolving our environmental crisis grows more crucial, and I believe that technology is a better and more realistic answer for our current environmental crisis than leading a simpler life, primarily because of technology’s efficiency and untapped potential. In the short span of years environmental technology has been looked into, the world has witnessed impressive energy-efficient, environmentally friendly products that offer promising alternatives to our current energy sources. Some examples are solar energy, hydro energy, nuclear energy and wind energy. Technology has enabled us to harness the renewable and ‘infinite’ energy Mother Earth delivers effectively, in a way that is sustainable and non-polluting for current and future generations. In fact, Japan’s rapid economic climb in the late 20th century can be attributed to its investment in nuclear energy, with 48 nuclear plants that supplement more than 50% of the country’s energy needs. Countries like Switzerland, Luxemborg and Australia utilise a combination of wind energy, hydro energy and solar energy to power their production processes, sterling examples that these alternative forms of energy can and do offer a better alternative to the dirtier fossil fuel sources which are rapidly depleting. The role of technology in enabling countries to utilise these natural sources such as through hydro-powered turbines, solar panels and windmills is evident. As further research and development is invested into these fields, the increased efficiency and energy conversion of these alternative fuels appears to offer a promising solution to the energy crisis plaguing the world today. Thus, I am inclined to believe that technology has an increasingly integral role to play in this fight against environmental damage, with far more extensive reaching positive effects than individual consumers.
Lastly, we must look to technology as a solution to resolving our environmental damage today, beyond just ourselves. As discussed earlier, it is inevitable that population numbers increase, and with the growing affluence worldwide, consumption levels are bound to skyrocket in the next 50 years or so. Thus, the possibility of us reducing our production or consumption levels in the future appear more unrealistic than feasible. Nonetheless, technological advancements into more environmentally-friendly products today highlight the possibility that technology may in fact enable us to ‘have our cake and eat it’ too. With the numerous environmental campaigns that have emerged over the years, more and more consumers are increasingly aware of the need to consume responsibly and in a sustainable manner. Thus, companies recognise their corporate social responsibility (CSR) and have pushed out more environmentally-friendly products in recent years, all made possible with technology. Some examples are the lithium-ion battery that powers mobile devices and calculators today, with significantly higher energy efficiency conversion; cars that run on the hydrogen-oxygen fuel cell, the iron-chrome battery, for example. H&M (a clothing retail outlet) and Uniqlo featured clothes made with recycled cotton and natural fibers, with the former offering “buy back schemes” to recycle clothes which people would have otherwise disposed. These were made possible due to advances in recycling methods, synthesis of natural fibres, a result of technology. Beyond just electrical gadgets we are familiar with, a group of scientists in London have created “enviropigs” which pass out faeces that have lower phosphate content, reducing pollution levels in lakes and soil, freeing up more arable land for farmers. Additionally, technology has streamlined the deforestation process, offering alternatives to subsistence farmers who previously relied heavily on slash-and-burn techniques. Clearly, technology has great power and potential in improving the planet’s environmental health, not just in the developed countries, but also in reducing pollution in developing countries even before they begin their industrialisation processes.
The need to restore our ailing planet back to its former glory has never been more pressing. Such a seemingly insurmountable feat is not possible by relying on a few individuals and technology alone; despite all its potential, technology is ultimately still limited in its reach if consumers, producers and corporations fail to acknowledge the problem at hand. After all, technology is but a tool we can harness to our advantage, but cannot be seen as the ultimate panacea complacently. Only as we work together as a community of global citizens, can we look beyond our own personal, corporate and national interests, in a way that will enable the earth to satisfy every man’s needs, instead of every man’s greed.
aleywrite 