NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
The Analysis of the Blue Marble Throughout history, there has been tremendous progress made on the part of mankind. We, as a species, have been able to tame fire, learn to hunt, survive in extreme conditions, and use our resources to their fullest potential. But do we overuse our resources? I strongly believe that we, as a population, do overuse our resources.
This is an issue, which we must now face as we head into the next millenium, for it is there, which we will find the answer to the future. Never has more alarm been raised about the peril that the Earth is in. Some choose to ignore it, most notably Julian Simon as far as this paper is concerned, while others, most notably Norman Myers, speak out against it, imploring the population of the planet to listen. Listen to the sounds of a planet that is overburdened, overused, and overheated. One can only wonder how much more our great Blue Marble can take. I don't believe that it can endure much more.
One cannot deny the fact that more and more people are inhabiting the Earth every year. This is indisputable. However, the question is, what type of effect does this have on the Earth? Well, for one, more people leads to overpopulation, which in some places on the planet, this is already a huge problem. Julian Simon likes to look at this as a good thing because, as he puts it, 'the triumph of the human mind and organizations over the raw killing forces of nature'; has increased the number of people the Earth can hold (Simon 6). However, what if you look at the other side of the coin?
Mankind has exhibited the ability to wield its gift of superior intellectual ability and with increased technology, more people can now be packed into an area than previously expected. Mr. Norman Myers points out that human beings' relationship with nature has changed. Humankind is 'no longer a part of nature'; , rather, society is 'now in control of the Earth'; (Myers 18).
This is an extremely important point when discussing the Earth and its future. The fact that the relationship between humans and nature has changed is very important in the debate between Myers and Simon. Technology has a great deal to do with this changing relationship. It is in my opinion, that technology, while it has made many things possible that were once only considered dreams, is really masking many of today's problems.
In the short term, technology can almost hide the fact that the Earth natural resources are being slowly tapped, or that the population is going to increase again, but eventually, what happens when the raw materials needed for some of these technological feats simply aren't there? Much of technology has occurred from an original problem and then the invention, or whatever device needed to solve the problem has proven to be the answer. But, soon the answer will not lie on Earth. Man will have to look elsewhere, and perhaps technology will benefit mankind when the time comes, but that is yet to be seen.
I'm not totally against technology; it has a great deal of benefits. In my opinion, its benefits are far greater in number than its negatives. However, in this case, technology is hurting the people of the Earth. One thing that technology has been able to mask is the always declining resources and food production of our planet. For starters, prices are going down, at least in the U. S as far as food is concerned.
The same can be said for natural resources, and this is even a more global trend than the price of food. As Norman Myers points out, just because our gasoline is cheaper than it was thirty years ago, or because our prices for food at the supermarket are lower, doesn't mean that we won't have to pay the price later (Myers, 24). Essentially, Myers is saying that later on, the mankind will have to pay to clean up the environment and try to reverse the effects of the pollution produced when gasoline is burned in automobiles. However, money is not the only thing that will be sacrificed. Generations upon generations of people will have to change their way of life, and we might as well start now. I strongly agree with precisely this theory.
If one were to think about this trend just for a moment, it would become clear what is going to happen in the future of the Earth if the rates of consumption continue at their present pace. First, let me state my logic for agreeing with this statement. When the Earth was created in the beginning of time, there was and still is a fixed amount of natural resources in the Earth. The only way that this can change is by species using up natural resources or putting them back.
Currently, there are enough resources on the Earth to last mankind for many, many more generations. However, there will come a time when our oil supply runs out, or our ozone becomes too worn away, and changes will have to be made to ensure survival of our species. More oil cannot be produced overnight, and more copper can't be changed without substantial cost involved. Eventually, these resources will start to grow very scarce, and prices will rise sharply.
It will definitely have a drastic impact on our economy. I can't think of a single item produced in the world that doesn't depend on at least one natural resource for production. Whether it is a silicon computer chip, or a leather shoe, everything is dependent upon resources. What is going to happen when they run out? This is precisely why we should start conserving, and trying to replace what we use. It might not be the more profitable thing to do in the present, but think about the future.
Clearly, Myers would most likely be in favor of raising the price of gasoline immediately. Not only would this catch the public's attention and alert them that they are doing damage by using gasoline so carelessly, but it could also lead to support for a cleaner-burning fuel. I know for a fact that several automobile companies already have cars that run on electricity, as well as several other alternative sources of power. Perhaps these alternative sources of power would be taken more seriously once the people are aware of how much harm they are doing.
For that matter, Myers would favor significant price increases on oil, metals, and other natural resources in order to reduce pollution and help conserve these raw materials. Julian Simon tries to use the fact that agriculture and mining used to account for 80 percent of the national economy. Now, agriculture and mining make up roughly three percent of the economy of the United States (Simon, 21). When one considers this fact, it may appear that agriculture isn't needed any longer, however this is definitely not true. This fact is useless in terms of the importance of natural resources. The only thing that this fact means, is that today, the economy of the United States of America is extremely diversified, much more so that it was fifty years ago.
A great deal of profit is found in technological applications, or entertainment, and while that is not directly related to mining of the Earth's resources, it is indirectly related. Computer chips can't be made without the silicon used for their production; television networks, satellites, and phone systems aren't of any use to the world without the copper used in the wiring or the power supplies. In every product produced everywhere in the world, some sort of resource is used. Simon continues to point out trends that prices for certain things are lower now, then ever before. He does this throughout his argument. If one followed the laws of supply and demand, which our economy is cent...
Free research essays on topics related to: alternative sources, years ago, great deal, raw materials, natural resources
Research essay sample on Natural Resources Raw Materials
