Can you save the environment by taking shorter showers? Possibly not, but living a simple life can have a positive impact on the environment. In Derrick Jensen's, “Forget Shorter Showers,” and Bill McKibben's, “Waste Not, Want Not,” essays we are given two different opinions on what causes environmental issues. Mckibben's theory is based on individual blame; Jensen's theory places blame on large industries. The perspective of this compare and contrast essay will side with Mckibben's theory over Jensen's and that instead of blaming the industry, we as individuals are to blame for environmental harm. Both essays reach out to the most wasteful individuals in the world, Americans. Mckibben expresses that we as Americans don’t conserve what we have and we are not frugal enough with our possessions. According to Jensen's argument, industries are to blame for the environmental issues we face “Municipal waste accounts for only 3 percent of total waste production in the United States.” (565). Americans demand too many resources from industries that will supply. The more resources that Americans demand, causes more harm to our environment. Mckibben's belief that if …show more content…
Americans abuse technology by taking advantage of it which can lead to environmental issues. Americans use more energy than most as Mckibben explains, “the average American uses more energy between the stroke of midnight on New Year's Eve and dinner on January 2 than the average, say, Tanzanian consumes in a year,” (559). In both essays, the authors discuss how Americans abuse technology and harm the environment, but Jensen's solution to cut technology altogether would be detrimental to our environment. Technology extends our capability to change the world to better suit us. Instead of cutting technology altogether, we should increase our technology in an energy-efficient way to minimize the harm it may
In today’s society technology is everywhere, whether it be in a car, on a billboard, a laptop, or even on one’s phone. However, is all this technology a bad thing or is it truly a worldwide phenomenon. Even back during 1992, author Neil Postman wrote about how technology is both a blessing and a burden. Many people believe Postman’s views are arrogant or far-fetched, but there are also those who agree with him about the dangers of technology.
In Michael Pollan’s “Why Bother?” Pollan argues that each person can contribute to helping to the environment by erasing their carbon footprints. In my everyday life I experience the choice of driving my car to work or riding my bike. More often than not I choose to drive my car because it is the easier option. I, along with many other people, believe that my individual impact will not cause a larger impact on the global scale. In Pollan’s essay, he makes each person think about the effect they are leaving on the environment and how each person, as an individual, can change his ways before it is too late. Wendell Berry, a naturalist and well-respected and influential writer, was a key factor in recognition of the environmental crisis and how to solve the problem.
The modern lifestyle, full of one time use items and pollution generating machines, is harming our environment, and, without a plan, the death of our planet is certain. Environmentalist and author, Derrick Jensen uses a comparison of possible outcomes to persuade his readers to take action that would help stop climate change; political resistance is his preferred and recommended course of action for his audience. Throughout his essay, “Forget Shorter Showers”, Jensen makes clear his desire to reduce or even reverse the effects industrialization (476-478). He advocates an approach where society makes changes to industry and to government over the current methods of voluntary
Bill McKibben's "The Environmental Issue from Hell" argues that climate change is a real and dire concern for humanity. His essay deals with the methods and persuasive arguments needed to spur American citizens and the government on to change to more eco-friendly choices. The arguments he proposes are based largely upon emotional appeals calling for empathy and shame, and examples of what in our daily lives is adding to the changes we're seeing in the climate.
In “Curbing Overconsumption: Challenge for Ethically Responsible Engineering,” professor E.J. Woodhouse discusses modern overconsumption, and claims that engineers should be responsible for aiding the environment. At one point, he asks, “if it is technically feasible to arrange consumption far more efficiently, […] does that imply that the engineers who help arrange the wasteful approaches are violating certain ethical standards?” (24). Woodhouse claims that it is the ethical role of engineers to use their positions and resources to decrease the waste production of American overconsumption. Meanwhile, in “Individualization: Plant a Tree, Buy a Bike, Save the World?” professor Michael Maniates discusses modern environmentalism, and in particular
In addition, McKibben wants to make his audience aware of the importance of being true Christians and following their religious principles. He shares this goal with other environmentalists, and he shows disappointment when he questions the nature of countries like Norway and Sweden versus that of the United States. People are helping those who are in need in places where religion is not a significant part of society (McKibben 271). For example, citizens in those countries give aid to the poor, and help the environment by using public transportation, which reduces carbon emissions. However, in the United States, Americans’ actions are branded with the title of “American failure” because people do not try to be responsible stewards of the earth (271). In Genesis, God put a man in “the Garden of Eden to work it and keep it,” demonstrating what it is that He wants us to do with the earth He has given us (Gen.2:15). It is upsetting that people from other countries, whose actions are not cemented in religious beliefs, are more attuned to what God commands than citizens of the United States. Overall, McKibben’s purpose is to enlighten America and use this essay as a call for action towards positive transformation in American
In today's world, technology is constantly changing from a new paperclip to an improvement in hospital machinery. Technology lets people improve the way they live so that they can preserve their own personal energy and focus on the really important factors in life. Some people focus their energy on making new innovations to improve transportation and the health of people that may save lives and some people focus on making new designs of packaging CDS. Technology is significant in everyone's life because it rapidly changes what is in the market. But, some new innovations of technology are ridiculous because they serve no purpose in helping mankind.
Book Report: The Conundrum by David Owen Efficiency is not always the answer, according to David Owen, in his novel The Conundrum, explains that society is headed in the wrong direction, believing that to be greener we need to make our everyday lives more efficient when in reality we need to change our behavior. As consumers, people want to be sustainable and preserve the Earth while greedily expanding our collection of trinkets. Efficiency can be beneficial, but to make the world a greener one, it is essential for people to change their behavior, not efficiency of the products. The Conundrum describes how in modern times we have come a long way in increasing the efficiencies of cars, air conditioners, trains, airplanes, energy resources, or
Waste Not, Want Not: if you use a resource carefully and without extravagance, you will never be in need. In a 2009 essay, “Waste Not, Want Not”, writer Bill McKibben argues on the excess of unnecessary waste. To halt climate change, he proposes to convince the reader to shift priorities in waste management and go back to the frugality of simpler times. Bill approaches his argument with a vast amount of informative charged words to convince the reader into taking his side of the argument. The writer’s intended purpose in writing this piece is to make a statement and develop his argument against the unnecessary waste. To make this argument effective, the writer utilizes logic to persuade the audience with overwhelming data and reason. His primary instrument of choice in this essay is using logically charged words followed by factual evidence to back up his claims. Although his use of emotion and pathos are less obvious, but where used, is effective.
In conclusion, the impact I personally have on the planet has surprised me. My personal ecological footprint is much larger than I expected. However, there are measures I can take to drop my current consumption rate, such as altering my recycling choices, making better purchasing decisions, and adopting the reduce, reuse, and recycle concept throughout my household. By altering my habits and consumption rate, I can affect my local community tremendously in a positive way for the planet Earth.
Derrick Jensen, born in 1960 is a writer and environmental activist who was against capitalism and western civilization. In the article “ Forget Shorter Showers” Jensen is talking about Environmentalism. He specifically states that individuals will not change the environment very much if that individual wants to get something done they should work with a group of other individuals with the same views. Jensen talks about three different subjects water, energy and waste. Which are three main parts of the environment. Having the background of being an environmental activist helped prepare Jensen to write about the environmental issues in the world.
One of the major points that Kaplan makes and he focuses on heavily in the beginning of the article is how environmental scarcity plays an impact on people’s decisions. There is a finite amount of natural resources in the world for people to use, and we are fast approaching a point where the world can no longer support our growing population. All of this is spurred on by an increase in practices that cause deforestation, soil erosion, pollution and global warming. A great analogy within the article is that we are robbing from tomorrow’s future to support the present, which is shown in that “…man is challenging nature far beyond its limits, and nature is now beginning to take its revenge.” (Kaplan, 1994) The new major threat that every nation and person has to be aware of is how the immediate results of our mismanagement of the environment can have a tremendous backlash, not only within our lives but the lives of future generations. All of these environmental concerns are dots that connect with Kaplan’s other main arguments.
Technology is unavoidable in our modern lifestyle. You wake up, you use technology; you use technology while cooking, while eating, while driving. While you’re lying in bed before you fall asleep, you use technology, technology wakes you up in the morning. Is all the technology around you good for you, or is it harmful to your health? Was our society healthier or safer before all the advancements? So many questions and concerns about all of the technology we crave, but there are very few people who know the answers. Technology affects all parts of human life. It can create jobs, motivate people to get active, and assist people in learning, but this does not balance out that there are dangers that follow the use of technology.
The effects of technology on society will always be a double edged sword. The debate is a never ending one, in which both sides have valid and compelling arguments. The Industrial Revolution reduced manual labor in the long run, but had negative consequences such as child labor and sweatshop conditions. Nuclear Power reduces the cost of producing energy, but raises serious environmental issues like pollution and radiation. In this day in age refusing to assimilate to at least some form of modern living is simply not an option. One invention causing controversy today that has yet to cease being alter, modified, and “improved” since its debut is the ever present cell phone.
The standard 21 year old adults have exchanged 250 thousand emails, spent 5 thousand hours video gaming and 10 thousand hours using their mobile devices (Lei, 2009). When people hear the word technology, they think of microwaves, televisions, cars, NASA, different types and transportation and more. For all that, technology has occurred long ahead these discoveries. Technology is an arguable matter amongst people. .In the old days, people lived an extremely simple life without technology. They used candles to light their houses and lanterns at the dark to travel, they used fire to cook and used newspapers and mail to share news. On the other hand, technology has seized an important place in our society. People are living in a stage of progressive technology. They are using all natural reserves applicable for making their lives better and easier. The society cannot picture life without electricity since it allows them to live through their everyday life. This paper argues that technology positively impacts people’s lives.