Argumentative Essay About Technology and Its Negative Effect on Society

  • Category: Science, Technology,
  • Words: 1938 Pages: 8
  • Published: 07 June 2021
  • Copied: 198

With every advantage in technological progress, comes a slight or a drastic disadvantage to society. What concerns civilization today might not have concerned our forefathers yesterday, but what those of the past and those of the future have in common is that they all abide to the same Mother Nature that fed mankind for centuries. This sameness of Mother Nature has been altered by the corporate body which in its effects has not only tampered with the world around us, but also to the human mindset and how the concept that a business’ profits are more beneficial to mankind than the trees that allow us to live to see another day. Fossil fuel corporations have been the largest source of climate change towards the world and should be required to assist society in the combat against this war on our environment by coming together to create safer restrictions that will ensure a reduction in carbon emissions produced. 

Political lens 

The politics involved in business corruption to promote laws that, instead of helping nations in green projects, instead go to funding large corporations. It is already been determined world wide that there is a direct correlation between human production and the effects of global warming, but in the case of humanity, the top 1% commit most of these atrocities. To begin with, the ever prominent corruption into the American political system on the issue of climate change is well known among many Americans, yet it is not being combatted as it should. With the past global events taking place, especially in the rise of nationalism in western nations and the United States pull out of the United Nations Paris climate agreement, there seems to be an underlying benefit that is not targeted to the well being of the overall population. These benefits are given to corporations by the means of easier access to territories, especially native American territories (north dakota pipeline) and easier ways to rip off their consumers. Oil corporate control has been a huge part of the business and political debate on how they have influenced the U.S. dialogue on climate science and policy (grifo).

Therefore, it is no surprise that those who own a significant portion of the fossil fuel infrastructure are strongly against any laws that limit their resources. This is very distinct in how the phrase, “climate change denier” defined as someone who is trying to delay or obstruct policy steps that used in line with the scientific consensus that states humanity needs to take rapid steps to decarbonize the environment. Although most of today’s political lobbyist does not outright deny the irrefutable science indicting the planet is warming, they do indeed deny the need for solutions that can decrease the warming. A well known example of this atrocity can be seen in the second largest private industry in the U.S., the Koch Brothers. This industry is infamous for being one of the largest fossil fuel industries in America and also one of the most politically involved companies which they have shown with their involvement in continuing to finance campaigns that help to doubt people’s seriousness of global warming hiding money through non profits like Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund. (greenpeace).

The politicians that provide these corporations with their funds are tenacious, but the underlying problem with supporting these fossil fuel industries is that they generate an enormous amount of greenhouse gases that immediately impair the human health. Furthermore, because this is a human problem and politicians are more or less humans, there has been a growing pressure amount the political world to focus on ways to generate the energy supply nations depend in in a sustainable way that does not impair millions of people’s respiratory systems. This grand shift has caused countries, including China, Canada, Germany and others to take part in widespread political support to decrease humanity’s use of fossil fuels as much as possible. (Blog) (UN Speech)

Economic lens 

How corporations can actually financially benefit from going green with their products instead of relying so heavily on wasteful manufacturing

It's been already said that businesses main goal is profit at the end of the day, so if their main goal is profit, then the safety of the earth has to be tuned into a market deal and thankfully for mankind businesses have more to gain from going green than nought. Fossil fuel companies are facing more and more opposition in the modern world than they have in previous generations and that is mostly due to the rise in technology that is always changing to create new and innovative ways to deal with global problems i.e. climate change.

A modern image of this change can be seen in the American automotive industry and how the nations are needing fewer people to make the materials required even though in the U.S. over 80% of the GDP is centered in the service sector. Although companies such as Apple, Microsoft and Google do not necessarily have the political backbone of Exxon Mobil and the Koch brothers, political power tends to lean towards those with significant economic standing. Although lacking political power, tech companies have much to gain economically from going green, because of their high dependence of a stable energy supply which can be gained from a more modern transition into renewable resources. While it would be beneficial to mankind if today’s nations would invest in the scientific research and infrastructure to make this transition move faster, ultimately nothing will get done if the people as a whole are not willing to help stop climate change.

Societal lens 

The culture, especially in western countries, has been transfixed in its apparent distaste for the rich and the wealthy to the point that even the rich and wealthy wont call themselves such in fear of isolation.

In the beginning of the 21st century there was a rise in the amount of information that can be able to reach a stunning amount of people all at the same time. This advancement in social media has made an issue that affects all of humanity, something that can be brought to the streets of Washington D.C. all the way to India. It’s a tremendous accomplishment in human communication, but even though the political and economic tides of change are stronger than the forces resisting the change, history is nothing if the people do not change with it. In contrast to the issues of maintaining the health of Earth’s oceans and biodiversity, the issue of climate change among the general public is relatively understood. Although the problems are complex in their own way, the solutions presented to society are in reach. The companies should be made to disclose more information on how the influence the climate change conversation and other public issues and the media should be more mindful of the potential conflicts of interest among the ‘experts’ and other individuals they rely on for information and furthermore disclose such information when found. (2012 grifo). 

Current events

The Union of Concerned Scientists analyzed in 2016 the actions of 8 major oil, gas and coal companies including: ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Royal Dutch Shell, Arch Coal, Consol Energy, Peabody - and found that none of them have publicly made any contributions to stop with the disinformation on climate science or planned anything that would adequately free the world from carbon pollutions. Continuing their investigation in 2018 they analyzed that although some companies have publicly supported the Paris climate agreement to limit the pollution across all nations, none of the companies have actually set any company-wide emissions reduction targets consistent with this goal. Instead, many continue to downplay or misrepresent climate science and the lethal dangers of carbon emissions, also supporting trade groups that spread climate disinformation and work to prevent needed climate politicians. ExxonMobil, one of the largest American oil companies, became the latest to leave the corporate lobbying group American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in July 2018 after successfully pressuring the group to drop a resolution against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 2009 finding that global warming gases are endangering the planet.

Even though, ALEC has notoriously fought climate policies and drafted sample legislation that sought to hamper the development and use of low- carbon energy, companies such as Chevron and Peabody Energy maintain their leadership positions in this distasteful group. Following this investigation, science now makes is plausible to detect that those 8 companies have contributed about 14% of global energy related carbon dioxide and methane emissions driving disruptive global climate problems. It is bad enough that these 8 leading fossil fuel companies have and are failing to fix their business models to reduce global warming emissions from their overall operations, but it is even more obscene that many of them have been deliberately progressing the public confusion about climate science and the drastic dangers about climate change while also lobbying against much needed climate policies that would help humanity transition to a low carbon energy system. 

Solutions and how they will be done

Instead of continuing their crimes against humanity, these fossil fuel companies and practically all fossil fuel companies should first of all renounce all their misinformation on climate science, convert their business models to free the world from carbon pollution, support sensible climate policies to reduce emissions of heat trapping gases while fully disclosing to the public their climate related risk and most significantly, paying their fair share of the costs of climate related damages and climate change adaptation. If these companies choose to become part of the future of humanity and meet the emerging political, economical and societal expectations, they must do so, be consistently acknowledging the scientific evidence of human caused climate change and affirm the need for swift reductions in carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.

Also, change their business models to properly set company wide, net zero emission targets consistent with the Paris climate agreement,s global temperature goal and publicly reject positions and actions taken by affiliated third parties, including trade associations and lobbying groups, that have proved to be inconsistent with the company's’ future positions on climate science and policy. If these solutions were to be implemented towards most fossil fuel corporations, the reduction in the Earth's global temperature would gradually normalize and even though much of the climate problems created in the past century cannot fully be undone, it would halt further disruption towards the Earth’s atmosphere.

Counter Argument

How the interconnective system related between the economic, political world, and the environment as a whole is strongly relied upon on the continuation of business as usual for any real progress to be made. A British entrepreneur named Richard Branson once said,” our only hope to stop climate change is for industry to make money from it".

Counter for Counter Argument

Businesses should stop putting their financial profit before the lives of actual human beings, because climate change is not a financial issue, but a moral and human issue and instead of isolating themselves from the problem they primarily started, they should require their business practices and customers to help the world around them. Without consumers, there would essentially be no use for business and without the resources obtained from Mother Nature, there would be no business. If the Earth fails to provide those resources, because of the carbon pollution created by humankind, then we all lose in the long and short run. 

Conclusion

Therefore, the solutions provided in each presented aspect and how they will be implemented thoroughly enough before 2030 relies not only on the responsibility of businesses, but also with everyone who believes there will be a tomorrow for human kind. Climate change is not only just a business opportunity, but also a social and moral issue that should be treated more than a measly price tag when in reality affects over 7 billion people. With the help of the financial backing of the top producing fossil fuel corporations using their funds to supply new renewable energy supplies such as solar energy and wind energy, there could be a chance to not simply reverse the effects done on the planet in the last century but ultimately give a better future on Earth to the future generations.

Humanity must come together to thoroughly understand the complexity between how the political, business and societal systems all interact with one another that will require improved practices and effective laws. The world has all the technology, science and solutions change the course of our environment, but if we keep allowing fossil fuel corporations to bombard our climate with enough toxins to increase the global temperature every year without even a fight back, then we are doomed as a species.

 

Sorry,

We are glad that you like it, but you cannot copy from our website. Just insert your email and this sample will be sent to you.


By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails. x close