Jessica Raybe Ms.

Geyer 11 AP Language 26 November 2012 2011 AP Free Response Questions Green living, a practice that promotes the conservation and wise use of natural resources, has become a highly discussed topic all around the world. It is questioned whether the ideal of green living should be forced and required of all citizens or if it should be the peoples choice. This issue rising about the world today can affect life as we know it. Imagine future generations struggling to survive in air filled with dangerous and harmful chemicals circling the population killing humans and animals off one by one. Can we make a difference today? The government feels that by forcing the issue of going green upon its citizens the problem can be solved. Does this act cause rebellions? Does this question individual rights? The United States government should foster green practices through recommendations and suggestions, but should not force an individual into going green because the government supports the people having the individual right to make their own decisions. Although the government feels that going green should be a priority for American citizens, making suggestions and filling the peoples mind with knowledge on the issue would be far more beneficial than forcing the going green movement upon them. As the Department of Energy states in its booklet recently published in 2009, Energy Savers Booklet: Tips on Saving Energy & Money at Home, we as people should start making small changes today (Energy Savers). With this booklet they are allowing Americans to have the freedom to make their own choices while giving recommendations on ways to conserve energy and help for future generations to come. Things such as driving sensibly to not waste gasoline through poor choices like aggressive driving and turning off computers and anything electric when not being used are

discussed in this booklet (Energy Savers). These few examples are small changes that could in reality change the world. Instead of forcing the issue upon the people, giving them small changes that can easily be done and not change their entire lifestyle will make the population more willing to change and less reluctant to green practices. As stated in Sevastian Winters online article, The Pros and Cons of the United States Going Green: Is Environmental Consciousness Really All Good, many people are aware that natural resources do not exist in limitless supplies (Winters). Winters focuses on green living itself with not much of a bias view as it takes into consideration the pros and cons of the Unites States Going Green. This source states that although going green will prolong the amount of time that the earth will continue to sustain life, it takes away the time of productivity (Winters). No matter which way one looks at the situation, green living should be a choice and even if an individual chooses to act in a manner supporting those green practices, it cannot be said the same for many individuals. In an editorial by Alan Webber in the national newspaper, USA Today, the theme was how we should learn a few things from other countries, like Singapore, and how they made green living a priority by forcing the matter upon its population. The source states that Singapore is only one of many places in the world that is making energy conservation and auto management a priority (Webber). Singapore has enacted this policy of going green by making transportation harder to use by forcing the population to buy a permit in order to buy a car, forcing the mass of the population to use a transit system. Many people who have heard or read about this say that we should be doing the same thing as Singapore, but the question is can that same logic and movements really work in a place like the U.S? In a country like the United States, filled with people with busy lives form work, to school, to sports, to even just visiting family or friends, the last thing people want is to be late to some social event due to the multiple

stops a transit system would have to make. It all seems like a great idea seeing what an impact it has made for other countries, but with the common lifestyles among the United States the plan thriving in Singapore would surely frustrate a huge amount of the population. Forcing an ideal so life changing to some individuals cant ensure that the green living practices will be used and acted upon. Thomas Friedman says in an excerpt from his book discussing why we need a green revolution, bad habits that we have let build up over the last three decades have weakened our societys ability and willingness to take on big challenges (Friedman). This may seem like an over exaggeration, but it is true. In todays society, peoples bad habits, such as littering and leaving the lights on when we arent home, have changed our way of life, even in ways other than green living; for example, voting. If everyone actually voted maybe we could have a different president, maybe not. We will never know all because of the bad habits portrayed by Americans. What people do not understand is that their reluctance to vote transfers over to the ideal of going green. Because these bad habits have caused something so severe, the government cannot force anything upon them because it will just make them more resistant. Green living is a practice that has been questioned throughout the world. The real question was how to deal with it? Today our society calls for a less extensive way of enacting the practice. Once cannot force a new way of life on an individual. The government can only suggest and full the human brain with knowledge on why this issue is so important and life changing, and the population will slowly increase the amount of people on board for the movement going green.