Essay Sample about Recycling Paper

📌Category: Climate Change, Environment
📌Words: 1127
📌Pages: 5
📌Published: 25 April 2022

In 2017, Paul Hawken's Drawdown was published. Hawken concludes that recycling paper can make various positive impacts on the environment, including fewer greenhouse gases produced, and the decrease of the water waste threat. He also attempts to convince the reader that recycling paper can "present a significant opportunity to draw down the emissions of the paper industry, which are estimated to be as high as 7 percent of the world's annual total". I believe that there is more to be defined, and the fallacy of Hawken's conclusion is due to him seeking facts to support an already-assumed conclusion. This is why this argument will be based on the idea that the leaders of our country should invest more in recycling paper industries since it can help reduce the amount of material waste, energy use, and help the economy of the U.S. In the upcoming thirty years. 

One of Hawken’s strongest supporting claims is of the benefits of recycling paper. His arguments are full of data and very educated claims, some that explain how "virgin- fiber paper emits an average of 10.67 tons of carbon dioxide, while recycled paper comes in at just 2.92". And others like; forests are spared keeping habitats intact, water use is reduced, relieving pressure on a resource that is increasingly threatened, and more economic value since the creation of new jobs. However, he fails to mention how we can help or the truth of who is responsible for all the troubles. Americans today tend to believe that we are the responsible ones for everything involving climate change and global warming. A significant factor of this is the misleading information experts have done since most of them (like Hawken) do not step out of their box and instead they keep retelling the same facts over and over again. On the other hand, we have other experts that do want us to hold others accountable. Vandana Shiva, the privatization book Earth Democracy, introduces us to the term "globalisation" which she determines as " a war against people, especially the poor". She makes equally important claims as Hawken but she does mention who are the responsible ones. In her book, Earth Democracy, Shiva maintains the belief of the negative economies. She states that "negative economies are taking the resources of the poor and converting them into a corporate property. They are destroying the earth spreading non-sustainable production and consumption patterns worldwide", "governments everywhere are betraying the mandates that brought them to power" and "this 'dollarisation' of the economic value of nature, and products necessary for human survival, is an essential part of globalisation". I find this to be quite a bit more compelling than an outdated and simple executed research, and even though Hawken tries to approach the subject by saying "such as subsidies for less sustainable alternatives, should be addressed" himself fails to address them and make his audience aware or at least share who should be making these decisions. 

One of the longest-standing arguments against the recycling paper industry is that it gives leaders a profit gain and more opportunities to expand their businesses. Hawken states in his book that it "is also vital to shift the industry's investments in that direction. If the chorus of concern grows, there is no reason recycled paper cannot claim a dominant share of the market". I have several issues with this statement but also agree: first, the simple fact that he is finally approaching the topic of the profit involved in the recycled industry is appreciative, but again he decides not to go in-depth, which would've made the audience care about what he is talking about. Second, he is also keeping us the readers wanting more from that perspective and to know why would it have a " dominant share of the market". Although the profit obtained and who are the responsible ones may seem trivial, it is crucial in terms of today’s concern over the recycling paper industry and everything that involves environmental crisis because it is something that impacts us daily and puts us at certain risks. According to Shiva, some of these risks are our basic rights."The most basic right we have as species is survival, the right to life. Survival requires guaranteed access to resources". The essence of Shiva's argument is that if we keep the localization of power where it is, our right to survival will not matter since we will not have any resources left. In this case, everything within our planet will be taken away from us if we don't start to define who should take care of the issue. In another way, Shiva also states her argument by saying "the recognition that the right to vital resources is a natural right. It is not given by nation-states, and so it cannot be taken away by corporations through privatization".Which again states our rights and she supports it by defining how the corporations take advantage too.

Here various readers would probably object that recycling paper industries are not doing enough. But, let’s put it this way, if the government of the U.S decides to not take action regarding climate change and does support the larger industries that will probably be against the recycling paper ones, they will not get enough support if it is needed for it to have a greater impact in society. So, it wouldn't necessarily be the recycling paper industry's fault, it would be the lack of support they are getting from their sponsors. Leaders, of course, may want to question whether it is important to bring up the profits, who is responsible, and why should we care. As a result of the lack of information regarding this subject we are not as educated as we wish we were, so it is a hundred percent understandable to feel this way, but it is also very simple. If we are not honest with the fact that people are benefiting from making the issues even bigger for their corporations to keep working, we will not get anywhere and will fall into a deep hole of nothingness. Why is defining who is responsible so important? Well, if we as people blame ourselves for what is going on with climate change we will also get nowhere since we are accepting it and moving forward. Lastly, we should care because if we do not take action and let the bad governments take the lead forever our rights will be removed. 

Recycling continues to be a relevant controversial issue in society today, as many people find it very difficult to know which side to support, partially due to the media propaganda, some of which even contradicts itself in its favor. This is likely the result of many wealthy and influential organizations that have a financial interest in this issue, from the large companies who stand to lose profits from its support, the governments who stand to gain from profit, or the company owners who will be put out of business with the elimination of their product making. It seems that those with a vested interest in that the recycling paper industries gain or continue will pull whatever strings necessary to sway public opinion to their side. This may include creating, supporting, or merely citing biased or already-known research to support the desired conclusion, just as Hawken has done in his book.

+
x
Remember! This is just a sample.

You can order a custom paper by our expert writers

Order now
By clicking “Receive Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails.