Is technology the best asnwer for environmental destruction?

While technology offers many promising solutions to the problem of environmental destruction, it also has the potential to aggravate the problem when it is applied recklessly. In such an unfortunate case, whatever benefit a certain technology has brought will then be negated by the drawbacks arising from the improper and reckless implementation of it, resulting in a net deterioration of the environment instead of an improvement. An example for such a scenario is the cultivation of certain crops such as corn and maize to produce ethanol as biofuels. Such technology that allows us to tap into renewable resources definitely helps to tackle the problem of environmental destruction by preventing us from depleting the earth’s natural resources. However, the reckless and overzealous rush to support such biofuel production, spurned by government subsidies, has instead resulted in the opposite effect. Natural habitats are being converted to farmlands in order to accommodate the rising demand for these biofuels. Indonesia for instance has burned so much wilderness to grow palm oil trees for biodiesel that its ranking among the world’s top carbon emitters has surged from 21st to third according to a report by Wetlands International quoted in the cover story of the 7 April 2008 issue of TIME. Hence, we can see that the reckless implementation of technology that is meant to solve environmental degradation is actually self-defeating and thus, I believe that technology cannot be the best answer to environmental degradation without the correct and proper implementation.

Eugene, Ying Ying, Rui Ting, Yik Sin (09S07A)