It is frequently debated that some environmental problems are too big for individuals to solve, while others hold the view that these issues cannot be done if peoples do not take proper action. In this essay I will examine both perspectives and explain why I lean towards the viewpoint that environmental issues are may too huge for peoples to solve it.
On the one hand, there is a group of individuals, who firmly support the viewpoint that environmental problems are too much concern for citizens to solve it. The primary reason for this prevent solution for solving environmental issues not a normal deal for people, because some issues like reducing carbon-die oxide and minimizing temperature are extremely difficult for people. In other words, many individuals live in systems where they cannot choose eco-friendly options. For example, if a city has no public transit, an individual is forced to drive, regardless of their personal values. Only governments have the power to implement carbon taxes, ban single-use plastics at the source, or transition national power grids to renewable energy.
On the other hand, there exists an alternative perspective, some individuals advocating for the opposite viewpoint, their argument suggest that individual action can play vital role for reducing many issues. If millions of individuals stop purchasing plastic-heavy products, the industry is forced to innovate or face bankruptcy. They believe that individual actions are rarely private; they are social. When a neighbour installs solar panels, it normalizes the technology for the entire street.
In conclusion, while both perspective present valid arguments, I firmly believe that some problems should solve government and individuals. The reason I have discussed above effectively support my position, and I am confident that this perspective is the more compelling one.