Economic Growth versus Environmental Degradation - 550 Words

Economic Growth versus Environmental Degradation (Essay Sample) Content: Economic Growth versus Environmental DegradationStudents NameInstitutional AffiliationEconomic Growth versus Environmental DegradationEconomic development is driven by the growth of industries and availability of cheap energy. However, the latter is associated with high external costs due to environmentally harmful effects linked to extraction, processing, and consumption of various types of energy. Most of the power used in industrial applications, such as processing and manufacturing, is derived from fossil fuels. In addition, other forms of energy, such as hydro and some biofuels, lead to emission of greenhouse gases. According to Clark (2011), almost all forms of industrial activities produce carbonaceous flue gases or toxic liquid effluents. It is impossible to have economic growth without environmental pollution since most industrial activities lead to global warming, contaminate water sources, pollute the air, or cause noise pollution.A close examination of dev eloped countries proves that economic growth goes hand in hand with environmental degradation. For example, Chinas gross domestic product (GDP) grew by more than 10 per cent annually for more than ten years. However, the country has emerged as the worlds top producer of carbon dioxide. As a result, the air quality in its major cities falls below international health standards. In fact, smoke and particulate matter emitted in industrial towns sometimes form a heavy smog that compel residents to use gas masks. Consequently, the state of public health in the nation has rapidly deteriorated, and life expectancy in the northern side of Huai River is 5.5 years lower than that of the southern side (Albert, 2016). In the same vein, China produces a larger amount of greenhouse gases than the Middle East and Africa Combined (Clark, 2011). Hence, it can be concluded that economic growth is a precursor of environmental pollution.A robust economy is marked by the availability of ample production resources, jobs, and disposable income. Almeida, Cruz, Barata, and Snchez (2017) opine that these factors can only coexist in a fiscal ecosystem that allows for production and consumption. Hence, it can be argued industries are the bedrock that anchor any form of economic growth. However, no income generating activity can be conducted without the presence of energy that is used to operate machinery and heat or cool certain media in processing plants. Consumption of energy harms the environment in various ways. For instance, fossil fuels consist of carbon chains with trace amounts of oxygen and other contaminants, such as methane and sulfur (Almeida et al., 2017). When the fuel is burnt in engines, carbon-oxygen bonds are broken with release of energy. However, carbon molecules are discharged into the environment where they quickly combine with air to form carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide.Furthermore, industrial liquid effluents contain heavy metals, such as mercury, copper, lead, and arsenic that poison ground water sources. The problem is exacerbated by the accumulation of these pollutants in the ecosystem where they rise up to the upper rungs of the food chain and poison human beings (Almeida et al., 2017). In addition, some untreated liquid wastes are rich in nutrients such as nitrogen which encourage excessive growth of water plants in surface water bodies. When the vegetation dies, bacteria that are responsible for its decomposition increase exponentially and use up all the dissolved oxygen. As a result, aquatic animals suffocate and die. Still, in cases where industries are positioned near residential areas, the smoke, dust, and particulate matter emitted trigger respiratory disease (Almeida et al., 2017). Finally, the noise associated with h...