Daily Life: Part 14

In my opinion, I think both should tackle from in way that different angle. First of all, factories definitely would produce massive waste. But it actually could be controlled by the government. For example, the government put a new law about how factories reasonably emit industry. If some factories infringe on this strategy, they should be punished financially. Therefore, most of the factories wouldn't produce massive waste into the environment. Another thing is that people have to obey conscious of what waste would harm our planet that we depend on. There are some styles that could cast the environment-AD on the TV, podcast. To remind people to protect our environment continuously! In conclusion, combining the two methods would protect our environment, avoiding harm!

Some argue that factories, as major producers of pollution and waste, should be pushed to make dramatic changes in how they operate in order to protect and preserve the environment. Others contend that it is the small, cumulative actions of individuals that lead to the greatest impact, so public awareness and altered societal norms are most critical. I would like you to consider: who do you believe should make more efforts when it comes to environmental protection - factories or individuals?

Andrew:
Factories should take the lead on protecting the environment because their impact is massive compared to individuals. For example, a single factory can generate tons of pollution per day, dwarfing what one person produces in a lifetime. Strict regulations and greener technologies for manufacturers would lead to huge reductions in emissions and waste.

Claire:
Individuals should lead on environmental protection because we can drive cultural change. By making green lifestyle choices - reducing energy, taking public transit, minimizing waste - we set an example and normalize sustainability. And by purchasing eco-products and ethical companies, everyday consumer decisions incentivize businesses to follow suit.