Developments in science and technology have caused environmental problems. Some people think that a simpler way of life will protect the environment, while others believe that science and technology can solve environmental problems. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
40 minutes, 250 words at least.
Science and technology have developed quickly since the first industrial revolution and have made a huge difference
different on our ways of life, but it is undeniable that some inventions seriously damage the environment. While some people are strong advocates of protecting the environment by living in a simpler way reducing consumption, I would argue that science and technology technological advancements can help us sustain the environment.
Think what does SIMPLE mean? It means living on fewer resources and consuming less.
Some people believe that we should live as simple as we can to protect the environment, as many technologies
will make emit (LR) pollutions. (Some people believe that technologies such as diesel engine emit pollutants and the only way to prevent this is to live simply.) The transports, for instance, emits enormous carbon dioxide every day (Which transports? How does living simply solve this issue. TR lost.) For instance, by avoiding personal cars and using buses instead, we can help prevent climate change. Moreover, many countries use nuclear power station to provide enough power electricity for people due to the huge amount of energy we need in the modern society. However, it is clear that nuclear leak can make a huge damage to on the environment. For instance, this leak is one of the famous unfortunate events that happened in Japan. It has seriously damaged the ocean which closes (?) to this country and thousands of fishes fish has have been killed. (Where does simpler way of living come in picture? Lost TR.)
The above paragraph lacks a proper explanation of ideas. This is likely to impact TR and LR scores.
Moreover, in many developed countries, people use a large amount of electricity for useless activities. They, for instance, keep air conditioners running even when no one is using them. They fail to understand that this power is made from coal and nuclear material which damage the environment irreversibly. By merely curtailing the use of electricity (= simpler way), they can make a positive impact on the environment.
It is sometimes
arguing argued by other people that science and technology can actually solve environmental problems and there is no need to follow a simpler lifestyle. High-tech can help find and use renewable sources such as solar and wind power which will do not make pollution pollute on the environment , like solar power. This reduces reliance on coal and consuming more electricity does not impact the environment. As the population increases, people put pressure on the earth even if they live simply. This means that we must find another way to provide the basic necessities such as electric and renewable sources can play vital roles food and water to allow people to enjoy our life as well as sustain the environment. There are ways to filter used water so that the problem of water deficit can be handled effectively.
The ideas are not clearly and adequately explained. This will impact the coherence, TR and LR scores.
In my opinions, living a simpler life (Simpler what? It is an adjective and needs a noun to exist.) is not an effective way to protect the environment, and we need new technology to help us achieve it. Plastic bags, for instance,
is prevalent in our life are universally used in all countries. Although they are simple objects in our life, (in our life does not mean anything.) they will end up in damaging the environment if people do not treat it properly as they are non-biodegradable. The scientists, however, have invented another way to produce plastic bags which can be recycled. Therefore, new technology has solved one of the biggest issues in the world.