It is argued that mankind should harness unexplored areas to gain access to further commodities. This essay fully disagress with the statement. I believe that the exploitation of natural landscapes to extract resources would firstly massively destory intact nature and secondly would lead to a surge in emissions, which further drives the greenhouse effect.
Touching formerly natural landscapes to extract resources usually comes with devastating effects on the nature and the habitat for wildlife. Extraction of commoditiies often needs a lot of space, which results in the removal of forest and depending on the resource, also chemicals are used for the extraction process, which can pollute the environment. This happend for example in Nigeria. To harness new oil fields, a wide range of forest was removed and during the process of oil extraction, some of the oil spilled into nature and the adjacent rivers and lakes.
The extraction of new oil and gas resources would inevitably lead to a further increase in CO2 emissions, which are known as key driver for earth heating. This can be explained with a simple equation: oil for instance, is mainly used to produce petrol and burning petrol is signifcantly generating emissions. This means, that when we do not touch new areas for resources, we do not only keep the oil under the earth, we also let the emissions stay under the surface.
In conclusion, exploitation of new oil and gas fields would lead to a destruction of nature and to further CO2 emissions, which are driving the greenhouse effect. Therefore I can not recommend to harness untouched nature to retrieve further resources.