Introduction
The destruction of the planet’s biodiversity is mainly linked to human activity. Humans’ influence on the ecosystem is significant because they have accelerated the extinction of organisms at a pace that is 1,000–10,000 times higher than it would otherwise be. For example, waste materials and changes in the world’s climate have hastened the demise of marine life.
The twenty-first century has seen a remarkable technological rise, improving living conditions. This has, unfortunately, also come at a high expense since it is challenging to get rid of the materials created without harming the environment. Plastic bags, home rubbish, and technological waste represent a significant danger to the environment due to the difficulty of disposing of them.
People now have a serious issue with pollution remnants. They produce garbage daily; thus, it is near everyone who exists globally. In most of the world, trash is typically either burned or buried. Both are harmful to the environment and humanity, and incinerators that burn trash generate harmful gases and dust that contaminate waterways and forests and cause climate change.
The question of how to decrease rubbish has become a significant concern for everyone. The discussion below will be dedicated to the theme of human activities’ harmful impact on Earth, providing possible solutions and refuting possible counterclaims.
Land Degradation
Papers, cartons, and plastics bleached with chemicals, foils, food scraps, and batteries make up the majority of household garbage. In the United States, an individual may create about four pounds of rubbish per day on average. Among the 50 million people who live in non-metropolitan areas of the country, 40% are said to burn their trash in their backyards, and about 60% burn it in burn barrels (Rhodes 210). Consequently, burn barrels burn upwards of 2 billion pounds of domestic waste each year.
Over 500 billion single-use plastic bags are used worldwide each year, left everywhere as garbage or misused. In addition, because plastics cannot biodegrade and cannot be buried without destroying the ecology, they endanger marine habitats. Plastics are made of polymers, are very unlikely to biodegrade, and stay in the environment for a very long period (Xu et al. 459).
Electronic waste, often known as e-waste, is abandoned electronic devices such as computers, phones, televisions, and electronic accessories. When burned or inappropriately disposed of in landfills, they become toxic. For example, the Cathode Ray Tubes used in TVs contain fluorescent dyes and, when incorrectly disposed of or transferred with incinerator waste, pollute the soil and water (Xu et al. 459). These landfills pollute the soil nearby, which then pollutes the groundwater.
Air Pollution
In addition to hurting human and child health, air pollution also impacts animal and plant life, according to several studies. Carbon monoxide, sulfur oxide, hydrocarbon, as well as both solid and liquid particulate matter, are the primary sources of air pollution in most metropolitan areas, with automobiles and other machines producing the majority of these pollutants (Li et al. 1). Indoor and outdoor locations both have contributed to air pollution to a great degree.
Certain air pollutants produced by construction materials, including linoleum, telecommunication wires, cleaning supplies, and other construction materials, are three times more likely to trigger some forms of cancer inside a house than outside. Then, many respiratory conditions, such as asthma, coughing, obstructive pulmonary disorder, lung cancer, heart problems, irregular heartbeat, and cystic fibrosis, are brought on by air pollution (Li et al. 4). It is well known that people with chronic illnesses, such as heart disease and diabetes, are more likely to have problems and, in the worst-case scenario, pass away when exposed to high levels of air pollution (Li et al. 2). Last but not least, polluted air, both indoor and outdoor, may exacerbate allergy symptoms, particularly in infants and older adults.
Due to their immature immune function and essential organs still developing, children are more susceptible to the impacts of air pollution. On a more somber note, the scholars highlight that mounting data suggest that environmental exposures may contribute to newborns being born prematurely, underweight, or with specific birth abnormalities. According to studies, children who are exposed to high levels of air pollution early on have a higher chance of developing heart disease and diabetes later in life (Li et al. 7). Early childhood, as previously established, is a crucial time for the sustained growth and maturity of vital biological systems, including the immune system, the circulatory tract, and the brain. Thus, children are especially susceptible to the effects of air pollution since the toxins either prevent or hinder the development of the systems above or exacerbate pre-existing medical disorders like asthma.
Water Pollution
When buried or permitted to accumulate at dump sites, certain plastic and electronic garbage eventually decompose into more basic hazardous chemicals that harm groundwater and flowing water. Plastic and technological debris are burned, and the ashes eventually end up in rivers and lakes, endangering aquatic life. As a result of bioaccumulation in the environment, contaminants, including mercury, dioxins, furans, and PCBs, move up the food chain. Plastics that are not correctly disposed of accumulate and block drainage systems and sewers, generating floods where mosquitoes and other diseases proliferate, resulting in poor sanitation with detrimental effects on human health (Little et al.). When buried or dumped in landfills, dangerous materials found in incinerator ash may pollute the groundwater.
They mainly include heavy metals, the majority of which are cancer-causing, such as cadmium, lead, and mercury in devices, as well as chromium and arsenic from wood material. They build up in plants or pollute the surface and the flowing water supply.
As garbage debris enters the waters, it kills zooplankton, sea turtles, and other marine creatures. Marine life may eventually ingest trash left on beaches, dropped from ships into rivers, or caught in fishing nets, obstructing their digestive tracts. Some of the organisms are drowned/starved, exposed to predators, or unable to seek their prey because they are strangled, entangled, or imprisoned by the debris (Little et al.). These are only a few adverse effects of marine trash caused by littering that endangers the lives of these creatures.
Polychlorinated biphenyls, which are alsodangerous to invasive species, are also present in the ingested plastics. In addition, because of the imbalanced flourishing of the marine ecosystems caused by waste debris, hypoxia, and anoxia are risks.
Global Warming
The planet’s surface heat has increased by around 1 degree Fahrenheit over the last century, with recent warming accelerating. This finding is supported by investigations carried out by several Science Academies. According to new and stronger data, most of the warming that has occurred over the last fifty years is thought to be caused by human activity (Lim). With the accumulation of greenhouse gases, notably carbon dioxide, formaldehyde, and nitrous oxide, human activities have changed the chemical makeup of the environment. The sun’s energy powers the Earth’s weather and climate, heating its surface and radiating heat back into space.
Evaporation, carbon dioxide, and other environmental greenhouse gases capture part of the emitted energy, holding heat similar to the glass panels of greenhouses. Recent studies show that atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations have grown by about thirty percent on average since the start of the industrial era, gas concentrations have more than tripled, and nitrogen oxide concentrations have increased by roughly 15% (Yuan et al. 1082). One can feel the shift in the environmental balance if we go around industrial areas on the fringes of cities. In some of the emerging nations that are rapidly industrializing, the situation is terrible. Smoke, acid rain, coal ash, and polluted indoor air are a few manifestations of the environmental consequences of brutality.
Solutions
As a significant amount of resources is spent on cleaning up and treating litter, taking care of public health issues, and recycling, the economic effects of rubbish cannot be disregarded. International collaboration and laws should be focused on protecting the environment via efficient waste disposal, plastic recycling, and using biodegradable packaging or durable bags that may be used again (Little et al.). Then, educating the larger community via the school curriculum should help increase public awareness. The principle of ‘thinking globally and doing locally’ facilitates international interactions, considerably reducing the environmental danger caused by rubbish disposal.
Recycling programs or restrictions on plastic bag packagingare two ways to control garbage pollution. Alternative, environmentally friendly packaging options should be developed, and both the producers and users of these plastics should be subject to significant fees. Moreover, electronic trash may be recycled and restored. The three Rs – ‘reduce,’ ‘reuse,’ and ‘recycle’ – effectively address the waste problem (Little et al.).
Recycling involves choosing products with less packaging or ones that can be recycled. Reusing old papers, plastic bags, and cans, donating old clothing, and using a travel mug rather than plastic containers are essential. Reducing means buying value-added packages and stopping wasting paper to reduce home waste. Maintaining the recycling of plastics, paper, cardboard, and even e-waste is essential.
Although the remainder should be dumped in authorized landfills, biodegradable waste should be allowed to decay in a compost pit. In conclusion, backyard burning must be prohibited everywhere, especially in rural areas, since it not only pollutes the air but also releases large amounts of harmful residue that endangers public health and worsens the quality of life (Little et al.). Furthermore, burn barrels that enable the emission of highly harmful chemicals via incomplete combustion should be controlled. Approved incinerators with filtration and temperatures over 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit for complete burning should be employed to reduce dangerous pollutants.
Counterarguments
It seems reasonable to refute several counterarguments that may be present within the scope given. First, those who perceive climate change skeptically may claim that this process is natural and appropriate – it has already happened several times throughout history. It is correct that during the Earth’s lengthy history, there have been times of global warming and cooling, which are likewise associated with peaks and troughs in greenhouse gas levels.
However, such unprecedented CO2 rises need to serve as a warning to people (Ahima 560). These rises caused severe environmental disturbances, such as mass extinctions. More greenhouse gases are being released into the atmosphere by people now than ever in history.
The following counterargument is that the Earth, including animals and plants, is likely to adapt to human activities even if they produce an exact extent of pollution. However, the rate of climate change brought on by humans makes it impossible for species to adapt. It can be said that frogs are the proper instance in this regard (Ramanathan et al.). They are typically among the first creatures to go extinct when ecosystems tilt out of balance because of their semi-permeable covering, unguarded eggs, and dependence on ambient temperatures to control their own – and they are nearing extinction in significant numbers.
Frogs were chosen as a bio-indicator for many environmental organizations. The latter has been trying to create a healthy ecology, including vibrant communities, and a healthy frog population indicates a healthy habitat.
The final counterargument is that there may be environmental harm being caused by humans, but it is already too late to avert it and deal with the consequences. Indeed, there is no second to squander, yet it is still possible. People can, for instance, keep global warming under the 1.5 °Cthreshold established by the Paris Agreement if governments, businesses, and individuals start taking serious action right now (Ramanathan et al.). If humanity realizes the degree of severity of the drastic outcomes of pollution, there is still a chance for a healthy and clean environmental future.
Conclusion
The above discussion was dedicated to the issue of pollution resulting from human activities and related harm. The formulated suggestions imply that people must protect our world and its resources. Even something as easy as collecting plastic bottles or turning down the lights when one leaves a room may make a difference. Individuals may participate more actively in protecting the environment by joining various environmental organizations that promote reforestation and other initiatives that benefit our ecosystems. People also demand that businesses and our governments lessen their dependence on fossil fuels, tighten environmental restrictions on industrial waste, and make countrywide investments in renewable energy sources.
Another appropriate alternative is to donate to institutions that are protecting the environment. They are developing amazing initiatives to repair the harm done to the ecosystem and maintain the planet’s health for future generations.
Ecological, social, and economic leadership is needed to reduce pollution. Although developing countries must endeavor to grow their economies without harming the environment, developed nations must minimize and recycle their waste. Developed and developing nations must fight to conserve the planet for present and future generations. Humankind is at significant risk of losing its home, and people must devise joint actions to deal with the harm they produce. It is essential to constantly develop environmental strategies and policies that will contribute to addressing the issues discussed.
Works Cited
Ahima, Rexford. “Global Warming Threatens Human Thermoregulation and Survival.” The Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 130, no. 1, 2020, pp. 559–561.
Li, Yongze, et al. “Association Between Air Pollution and Type 2 Diabetes: An Updated Review of the Literature.” Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism, vol. 10, 2019, pp. 1–15.
Lim, Chin Leong. “Fundamental Concepts of Human Thermoregulation and Adaptation to Heat: A Review in the Context of Global Warming.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 17, no. 21, 2020. Web.
Little, Grace, et al. “Health and Environmental Protective Behavioral Intentions for Reducing Harm from Water Pollutants.” Environmental Management, 2023. Web.
Ramanathan, Veerabhadran, et al. “Global Warming will Happen Faster Than We Think.” Nature. 2018. Web.
Rhodes, Christopher. “Plastic Pollution and Potential Solutions.” Science Progress, vol. 101, no. 3, 2018, pp. 207 – 260.
Xu, Fangian, et al. “Prehistoric Heavy Metal Pollution on the Continental Shelf off Hainan Island, South China Sea: From Natural to Anthropogenic Impacts Around 4.0 kyr BP.” The Holocene, vol. 28, no. 3, 2018, pp. 455–463.
Yuan, Chenheng, et al. “Numerical Investigation Into the Fuel Evaporation and Mixture Formation Characteristics of a Free-Piston Diesel Engine.” International Journal of Engine Research, vol. 21, no. 7, 2021, pp. 1180–1192.