Traditionally, environmental problems emerge as headache issues blamed for fossil fuel existence. A school of thought indicates that the most efficient strategy to solve the world’s nature is applying an increase in fuel prices, while some assume that is not the best method for the long term. Both viewpoints are justifiable, I lean towards the latter, in terms of the consideration of both social problems and the national economy.
On the one hand, undeniable factors suggest that the unreasonable application of material costs potentially results in residents’ living conditions negatively. In particular, if the authorities increase the fuel unit price in all manners, it primarily causes severe inflation and fosters the underprivileged to find other sources of nature to maintain their daily life. For instance, if the local government raises the diesel cost, a vast majority of gas manufacturers will drain the wood resources to be the main material for operational maintenance, instead of using fossil fuel at an unaffordable price. Besides, individuals can impose a certain tax on some direct-environmental sectors like over-2500cc motorcycles or unrefined fuel distributors that might have a considerable contribution to protecting the environment.
On the other hand, fuel is not the unique cause of environmental pollution in particular, and in the planet in general. Therefore, increasing that material cost is not an effective policy to prevent it. People are living in the contemporary era where trash litter can be seen everywhere on the street, and the abuse of rare species of both flora and fauna is more and more overrated. Noticeably, the youth generation is the primary driving force behind the improvement of human habitat instead of the high attention to pricey fuel. To cite an example, Vietnamese authorities have been enhancing residents’ knowledge of planting more tropical forests through public education and social media, which encourages people to absorb the awareness of saving material possessions and its relevance to the risk of global warming.
To conclude, the government should consider carefully increasing the fuel costs to the whole economy, which might result in adverse perennial consequences of the social issues and economic sectors. Alternatively, practical actions must be taken to contribute to a green planet.