Ever since the Industrial Revolution, the growth of economy has become tied with hurting the environment. It was around that time that we first grasped the idea of mass production, and began implementing it. Before that, technology was not as advanced to be able to hurt the environment in a major way, in order to produce something. Now everyone has their own personal carbon footprint in the world. Due to the fact that every nation abuses the environment in order to continue manufacturing and grow their economy, the environment is getting abused on a massive scale. If one country was to set a regulation on carbon and green house gas emitted into the atmosphere, it would have a disadvantage in the global economy. However, disregarding the environment is just as bad. A country who exploits their environment, in the long run will suffer. Which will make their economy stagnate. This can be seen today, in China. China’s rivers and air are so polluted today that they are detrimental to the health of its citizens. China has been so invested in unclean manufacturing, that a massive switch to green manufacturing will stagnate the economy severely.

Life expectancy in north China, is worst then south China by 5.5 years due to the air pollution. The cost to deal with air pollution is rising, due to the fact that it has gone untreated for so long. Currently 3.5% of China’s GDP goes towards the environment. However, that statistic is not accurate due to the fact that it is a sensitive topic and the ministry releases figures intermittently. Air pollution alone causes 1.2 million premature deaths in China. Currently China is trying to limit its pollution and clean its environment. The environment we live in is extremely important, and should be protected. We should put laws in place now to help our environment, even if it hurts our economy. Because if the environment in our country is destroyed our economy and way of life will be decimated as well.

Albert, Eleanor. “China’s Environmental Crisis.” Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 18 Jan. 2016. Web. 16 Dec. 2016.

Recycling our trash is considered to be the norm these days. However, some people still seem unconvinced if it is worth it. Recycling by definition is converting waste materials into something useful, to reduce the waste created on the planet. However, people still wonder if it is worth doing as recycled products may be of lower quality than regular products.

The basic steps of recycling are the collection and processing of recyclable materials, the manufacturing of new products, and the purchasing of products made from recycled materials. The obvious benefits of this are that it reduces the amount of waste in landfills, while conserving natural resources like timber. Recycling also prevents pollution by lowering the need to collect new materials, and helps reduce greenhouse gasses. A final benefit is that it also creates new jobs.

People against recycling often argue that it is too expensive both on the government and the taxpayer and that the collection of recyclable materials helps contribute to the total pollution. However, a cost-benefit analysis of efficient recycling will show that over time it actually helps save money. Take how New York handles its waste today, because it has no more room it has to pay Pennsylvania to accept it, and pay to transport it there. Recycling reduces the cost of what we have to pay to get our waste transported. Also recycling is proven to help save energy which in turn does not raise the price of energy, which saves you money. Finally, our waste has been proven to hurt the environment, lowering our natural resources. Pretty soon basic resources such as coal, timber, and drinking water will raise in price due to the fact that they may become limited. Recycling not only helps postpone that, but prevent it.

Sources:

“Recycling Basics.” EPA. Environmental Protection Agency, n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2016.

“Recycling: Beyond the Bin.” NRDC. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2016.

It is widely accepted in today’s society that our planet is over populated and dying from human pollution.  Now that this problem has grown so large in our mainstream society, people and companies as a whole are trying to go greener, as long as it does not affect their profit too much. Many opinions arise from this, about what the next logical step is to help the environment without killing our economy and GDP. Aquaponics, an innovative way to garden greener is a small scale way of dealing with our problem, and it faces similar problems as going green as a whole.

Aquaponics is a self sustainable form of gardening that uses the environments of fish and pants symbiotically. Fish waste fertilizes the plants, and the plants filter the waste from the water for the fish. At first it appears to be a brilliant way of saving resources as the water never has to be poured out or filled back up again. The only thing required is for the fish to be fed. A nearly self sustaining gardening system such as this is a big step towards everyday people going green, and producing healthy food too. The main problem with it however, is its cost and relative size. An aquaponics system costs at least a few thousand dollars to set up and maintain, and it simply takes up too much space for one person to have in areas such as New York City. Now it may even be possible for a large scale aquaponics system to provide all of the nutrients required for people. However, the cost for the average American would be equivalent to many months of food, and the investment would not pay off until the plants are fully grown.

Although aquaponics may be a logical next step for those who can afford it and provide the space needed, it will not be a revolutionary system. Unless government action is taken aquaponics will never be able to affect the life of the ordinary individual due to its two great disadvantages, space, and money.