The article Treadmill Predispositions and Social Responses, by Schnaiberg Gould, is related to the article Silent Spill, by Beamish, in that it explains an overview general of what people do to the environment, due to the expansion of production and the need for profits taking The Silent Spill as an example. The Silent Spill further shows how people do not care about the environment during this expansion of production due to their narrow view of the need to make profits. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essay First of all, Treadmill Predispositions and Social Responses ultimately explains that a rapidly growing population has very little 'social or ecological benefits and is considered the explanation for environmental disruption. But the expansion of production and profits is the ultimate environmental antagonist. The global spread of money, increased technology, and increased information allowed production to expand, thereby increasing profits. The expansion of production has a direct impact on the environment through removals and additions. The evolution of energy forms has been a major factor that has been removed and added to the environment, which is ultimately linked to technological changes. From coal to steam to electricity, modes of transportation expanded dramatically, allowing trade (and profits) to increase on a global scale. This has removed many resources from our environment, such as coal, oil and trees, leading to their depletion. The processes by which we extract and use these resources add terrible consequences to the environment, such as pollution of air, land and water. It affects all species, including us humans. Once companies reach such a size, they must compete with other companies, further ignoring environmental regulations. And although a larger population ultimately leads to environmental disorganization, production decisions are controlled by only a few individuals, who have only a desire for profit, within the population. It is therefore not the size of the population that destroys the environment; it is the expansion of production. The intense obsession with profit clouds the vision of these decision-makers, so that environmental impacts are easily dismissed. An example of this would be the Guadalupe Dunes oil spill, as discussed in the article The Silent Spill. This oil spill had lasted for 38 years without any “warning”. Between 8.5 and 20 million gallons of oil spilled beneath the surface of the beach, destroying the environment. Unocal should have reported this spill, but did not because it did not want to lose profits or jobs. The company blamed its reporting system for a lack of communication that prevented news from reaching the manager who would alert Los Angeles of the problem. The employees all felt like it wasn't their responsibility to say it. But the sad truth was that they weren't losing money from this spill and were still making a profit. So they didn't want to get in trouble or risk the industry closing down, as it would result in a loss of jobs and profits. . In the past, businesses started as small family organizations, where owners were leaders and had relationships with their employees. They produced to meet the needs of their familyand a few other people, but did not aim to create as much money as possible. They were held responsible and therefore did not harm the environment as a whole. Today, with large companies establishing hierarchies, no one feels responsible for harming the environment because they feel so small and unimportant in their company. This makes it easy for production to destroy the environment without anyone feeling guilty. It is upsetting to see how people are so consumed with making profits for themselves that they will allow the environment to become so depleted and disorganized. People don't realize that it affects all species, including themselves, in the long run. Most people, like Pinchot, believe that the environment and nature exist for human consumption. But only Pinchot realizes that we must preserve the environment if we want to continue using it. With such rapid production in today's world, we will exhaust our resources and have nothing left to support us. Everyone worries about their profits, but doesn't realize that they will be at a dead end once they no longer have the resources to continue making them. This type of mentality is very common in my project area, Asia and the South Pacific. With such rapid growth and production in Asia, yes, they are becoming very rich, but that will soon no longer matter when they have used up all their resources and can no longer live a healthy life due to pollution from the air. As for Australia, the Great Barrier Reef, which constitutes an extremely important ecological site, is in the process of being depleted due to pollution and lack of respect from the population. As you can see, no one feels responsible for any of these problems, and they are achieving their goal of making a profit, so they don't feel the need to stop their selfish actions. The environment will make people regret this one day. Delaney KippleFebruary 11, 2016Reflection 2 Rethinking Environmental Racism by Laura Pulido and Race, Class, Gender, and American Environmentalism by Dorceta Taylor both present the underlying problem of racism as “white privilege.” Rethinking Environmental Racism explains how racism is analyzed and applied to environmental racism, while Race, Class, Gender and American Environmentalism describes all the racism people of color have experienced throughout history. These articles go hand in hand, showing every possible reason for the obvious environmental racism that exists and always has existed. Pulido's article explains how environmental racism is determined by its location, intentionality, and magnitude. Since it is difficult to pin down this phenomenon in all cases, many cases of racism have very vague boundaries. In most cases, it seems that environmental injustice is always blamed on less wealthy and racially affluent communities. So it's easy to blame industries and government for this discrimination. But Pulido describes a “chicken or the egg” scenario: which comes first, the site or the people? Are communities established and do industries then choose communities with the fewest white people to locate right next to, in order to intentionally pollute their lives? Or do people of color settle near industrial areas? It could be one or the other. Black communities are seen as less desirable, as defined by white privilege. Land is therefore cheaper and industries buy this land for reasons.