Whenever we talk about an alternative to anything, we come to a stark realization that the alternative might be good for the general well being of the people and a better substitute to the main thing but at the same time the so called substitute does not give the same performance as the main thing. This could also be the reason why many people go back to using the same thing again because of convenience. Take for example, solar energy which is supposed to be an alternative to the energy we derive from coal( fast depleting) with almost no pollution. While our planet gets a lot of radiation and energy from the sun, the so called solar panels are only ever able to tap less than 1 percent of the energy. So come to think of it, it has a long way to go before becoming a feasible alternative.
Coming to the case of plastic, we have paper as the best known alternative to it. But again the question comes about the feasibility? Doesn’t using paper harm environment more? How so? The answer is pretty simple. Paper and woods are the by products of deforestation. So to supply the general public with an alternative, we are inadvertently harming the environment that much more and that cannot be a good thing. Plus paper cannot be recycled as easily and is usually discarded after single use.
Our task while divining alternatives to things we know to be harmful is how to mitigate the risk of using the substitute ? This can be done through careful weighing of the pros and cons of such a case. Only then can we think of a better tomorrow with a cleaner health for all of us.
Are alternatives feasible?