Comparing Forget Shorter Showers By Bill Mckibben And Derrick Jensen

952 Words4 Pages

Bill McKibben and Derrick Jensen were born in 1960 in the U.S.A., and both have accomplished successful academic backgrounds. McKibben graduated from Harvard University in 1982, and Derrick Jensen graduated from the Colorado School of Mines with a degree in Mineral engineering in 1983. Both are environmental activists and have written many articles and books. The authors of the articles “Waste Not, Want Not” by Bill McKibben and “Forget Shorter Showers” by Jensen show Mckibben and Jensen are environmental activists and they have similar and different points of views concerning whether individuals or industrialists cause more environmental pollution. McKibben and Jensen have similar views on their activism. They believe consumers contribute …show more content…

McKibben believes individuals are mostly to blame for environmental pollution. For example, he says people’s wasteful habits have gone beyond imagination because of the increase in global population and increase in consumption. He explained it with an example, about how many plastic bottles each person discards each day, and how that adds up globally. He mentions this because he wants people to imagine how much waste worldwide population leaves behind each second, minute, hour, and day. As a solution, he proposed people should adapt to living a simple life. For example, use public transport and use renewable sources of energy for other basic needs. On the other hand, Jensen disagrees that individuals are to blame for environmental pollution. He believes individual’s contributions are not significant for environmental pollution. He presented the showers people take each day as an example; and he explained how that water can be used again after it has gone through the sewage system. He pointed out that in developed nations only a small amount of water is wasted. Also, as evidence, Jensen clarifies, Even if every person lives environmentally friendly way, the carbon emissions would fall by only 22% instead of the necessary 75%, which experts suggest. For these reasons, Jensen disagrees with the significance of individual’s contribution for environmental pollution. Moreover, Jensen disagrees …show more content…

McKibben believes there have been important developments, for example, international agreements, “Clean Air Act” and “Clean Water Act” that prevent further pollution of air and water. Also, McKibben, in his conclusion, points out that he expects from Barack Obama’s administration that more needs to be done in policy changes to protect environmental pollution or global warming issues. On the other hand, Jensen is pessimistic because he believes the leaders are not dedicated and are dominated by industrialist power. He believes industrialists hire lobbyist that protect their interests. He insists citizens should organize and protest more frequently to put pressure on the congress for all citizens’ interest. He objects McKibben’s option that individuals should adapt to live simple life to minimize environmental pollution and waste. Jensen believes there could be a change in the political arena by organizing citizens to resist by using different tactics, such as voting, not voting, petition, participate in election and protesting for new legislations to prevent further environmental pollution. Also, both McKibben and Jensen seem to agree influential and dedicated leaders are necessary to get important solutions and changes in policy for environmental pollution

Open Document