In recent years, developing countries such as China, India and Vietnam have been growing their economies at phenomenal rates. This clearly implies that there are increasing demands for resources that are essential for production. The main resources required would undoubtedly be oil or coal as they would generate energy. The process of energy consumption would emit pollutants such as carbon monoxide which would adversely affect our health and also our surroundings. The rising trends of global warming and severe depletion of natural resources such as crude oil are one of the many concerns of environmentalist. It is indeed true that it is very difficult to have a balance between production and environmentalists. However, it is actually possible to implement effectual measures to curb the worsening of environmental degradation, depending on the willingness of the country.
It is argued that sustainable economic growth will eventually precipitate eco-friendly economic growth. When countries increase their demand of energy, enormous amount of pollutants would be emitted into the air, water and our land. Statistics have shown that while average emission of carbon dioxide in developed countries have stabilized in recent years, yet in developing countries they have been increased by 4% a year. Some economist may say that when countries have more demand for energy, they are actually developing their economies and when they eventually gain sustainable economic growth, they would also gain wealth which can be used for research and development of clean energy or on infrastructures to solve environmental problems they have caused.
However, this is only an assumption made by the economists. Since most economies in the world are profit-motivated, countries can be reluctant to engage in protecting the environment. Taking America as an example, although the Americans just made up 4% of the world population, they produce 25% of carbon dioxide pollutions, more than China, India and Japan combined. This clearly indicates that America should take the leadership role in solving the problem, but why is she not doing it? The American government even refused to rectify the Kyoto Protocol- an international treaty with the goal of achieving "stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level to prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. In addition, developing countries would prioritize their nation’s interest before environment because they have too much infrastructure to be developed to improve standard of living of her people. With countries averse to solve the problem, it seemed more difficult to save Earth.
Some may say that measures are already implemented such as carbon tax and tradable emission permits to curb environmental problems. Hence, even though countries have increasing demand, the amount of pollutants emitted would be limited. However, it is difficult to apportion blames and to fairly distribute the emission permit. Richer developed countries such as Japan can actually buy the permit from another country which does not require the pollution permits. This would not solve the problem; instead, it gives countries the legal rights to pollute. Moreover, these measures have existed for a long period since 1990s and there is no evident effect on the current situations, instead, it has worsened. This is an implication of countries engaging in economic developments instead of mitigating environmental problems.
It is indeed true that some countries have successfully switched to non-carbon based energy sources. Norway has the world largest solar production plant and for Sweden, majority of the country’s power is generated by hydroelectricity or nuclear, which are better alternatives than fuels or coals. Using of solar power to generate electricity would not emit pollutants. Countries can actually make use of their geographical advantages to protect the environment. Taking New Zealand as an example, she has been actively engaging in development of geothermal energy which is a renewable resource that would help to generate power without emitting pollutants.
However, only a handful of countries are engaging in these eco-friendly developments. Most countries are still not making use of their geographical advantages. Singapore is a good example. She has an equatorial climate which is an advantage of using solar power; however, she is still not engaging in such clean energy development. Despite having a small population, Singapore’s energy consumption is one of the highest in the world. In addition, even though environmental friendly vehicles such as CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) cars have been invented in recent years, many people are still not driving them. One of the studies conducted on road users in Singapore have shown that the main reason of them not driving those environmental friendly vehicles is due to the insufficient refuel stations available. If the Singapore government had spent money on building more of such stations, many people would choose to drive these vehicles which would in turn reduce pollutions. It goes to show again that a country can actually protect the environment; however it all depends on her willingness.
In conclusion, when countries have high energy consumption, it is impossible to prevent pollutants from being emitted. However, they can engage in developing effective solutions to solve the problems they have caused. It depends very much on the foresight and political will of the government of the day.
No comments:
Post a Comment