Some people feel a country can't be economically progressive and environmentally friendly at the same time. Others disagree with this view. Discuss both points of view and give your opinion.

Some societies believe that the government can not develop the recession progressively and at the same point , they can not be friendly to the environment. Others believe that the authority can do both. I personally believe that the homey can do both without decreasing the level of each other.

This

essay will elaborate on that issue. on the one hand, the public who believe that a country can not be aggressive in the economy without harming the environment have a reason, without destroying essence which means that by exploring natural resources, the ministry can not push the number of developments in the recession.

This

is because the rule must produce some product and

then

sell it to provide the margin.

For example

, the regime of Indonesia must explore the nickel massively in their description to produce batteries and

then

sell them to mobile companies.

For instance

, they make some margin to develop their country in huge numbers. despite that fact, Indonesia destroys habitat massively too.

on the other hand

, the community who believe the union can develop their recession without ruining their type,

also

have the opinion that the power should be shifting their oldskull way to producing some product.

For example

, some countries have switched to using renewable resources for producing electricity

such

as geothermal, wind and water. They do not ruin their description because they find another way and they realize their forest is important for their agrarian not only for now but

also

in the future. in conclusion, I completely agree that the provincial must find a new way or solution to develop the economic field without ruining natural resources. we can learn from the developed countries how to produce some products without destroying the ecosystem.