There is a debate over coexistence of economic development and a healthy environment, with some saying that a country can be both economically strong and have a well-preserved environment, and others are arguing these two may not coexist. While I acknowledge that there may be an opportunity to have these aspects together. I strongly support the second view.
On the one hand, there are some countries that can have a well-preserved environment and be economically successful. This is because the government can invest in renewable energy. As a result, economic growth can be achieved without harming the environment. For example, Norway has invested heavily in hydropower, which supplies most of the country’s electricity. At the same time, the renewable energy sector has created jobs and generated revenue, allowing Norway to maintain a strong economy while keeping carbon emissions relatively low. Consequently, the country is able to maintain economic growth while limiting environmental damage.
On the other hand, I hold the view that these two aspects cannot coexist. This is because the economy runs through expenses, and for consumption, people should produce more. However, to produce something, we need energy. As a result, fossil fuels are burned to produce it, which leads to air pollution. As an example, China experienced rapid economic growth through industrialization and manufacturing. However, this growth led to severe air and water pollution in many cities. Consequently, it shows that the environment is highly likely to suffer, when a country develops its economy.
In conclusion, although a country may be both economically successful and have a clean environment, I believe that these two aspects cannot coexist because it usually comes at the expense of the environment.