🚯 Environmental protection and conservation (Part 3) + Transcript

Hello, hello Dylastina and welcome into Held's picking part 3. We are discussing the natural world, the environment. Yeah, the ideas and vocabulary could be useful for your essays as well, okay? So we are killing two birds with one stone. The essays and speaking part 3. What can people do to protect the natural world? Well, it's supposedly practically, we could definitely afford to recycle more and use a lot less plastic, which would keep the environment clear for our animals and use up fewer resources. It might not be possible everywhere, but something we could do in this country is use tax payer money to fund the conservation of areas under threat and maybe help the ecology their cope with various issues. Is it important to teach students environmental protection at school? Well, it certainly seems so, since these days we can see and hear a lot of bad news related to the environment and educating pupils about these issues could help them grasp how to resolve them more effectively. The only alternative might be asking parents to do it, and that's highly unlikely since they're often so busy with their own work. Is it easy for children in cities to get close to the natural world? Generally, no, because cities have a lot of traffic, or at least traffic congestion, and the country is far away from them. So it's not an easy place to reach despite being all around the urbanized areas of the country. Of course, we have zoos and things like parks nearby, but it's nothing like being out in the wild. What laws about the environment are effective in your country? Unfortunately, I honestly don't think they're that effective in general since we seem to have a lot of problems in that area at the moment, and these statutes have been around for a long time without having any obvious positive effect or impact on the situation. If they'd been better formulated, I doubt there would be, well, anything like that posing a problem. What do you think people prefer? Rewards or punishment when it comes to government intervention in environmental protection? Well, from a psychological perspective, it certainly seems people would respond better to being rewarded since it's much more pleasant compared to being punished, and it seems much more encouraging and positive. And maybe it sends a better message to the public at large. Punitive measures tend to engender panic and pessimism by contrast, and nobody wants that, do they? What technological innovations could the world develop to protect the environment? I don't know. It's tempting to talk about things like alternative energy, but we don't have a very good track record on that front because the creation of solar panels actually destroys the locations where rare earth minerals which are used to create them are located. So that's not great. I don't really think there is a technological solution. I think people will just have to get used to the idea of consuming less and living in a way that's more in balance with the natural world. But that's not a technological thing. That's a psychological hurdle that we need to overcome. As you know, we now release all of our premium content for free, and it's available for one month. It goes into our super secret archive. Designed for the archive, click the link in the description below. See you soon. So, Dylessna, we protect the natural world, the environment or the natural world. So we could afford to recycle more so people could recycle more or people should recycle more. Use less plastic. People should use less plastic. This would keep the environment clear for animals. People should use up fewer resources. And we could use taxpayer money to fund the conservation of areas under threat. So use taxpayer money so you pay taxes and we could use this money to fund to invest in to give money to conservation of areas, the conservation of areas like saving these areas. Conservation, the protection of plants, animals, natural areas. For example, these forests, what do you call them? It's not our boreal forest. All right. I thought you were talking about our boreal forest there. You know, I was thinking, how am I going to explain what that is? Should you say rain forests? Yes. Well, our boreal forests and rain forests are different things. So just say rain forests. Students should be taught how to protect the environment at school or they should not be taught. Dylessna, what's your opinion? Or we should educate students how to protect the environment. Teach them to educate them, teach them to grasp how to help the environment like grasp means understand, understand something, especially if it's difficult. Like grasp the main points of the lecture. Grasp how to write an essay and in this context it's C1 8.5. It is. Oh, amazing. So education could help students to grasp how to help resolve environmental issues, resolve or solve solve solve problems or resolve problems resolve issues. Alternatively or the only alternative might be asking parents to do it. So not at school, but parents could also do it. A very nice question, should children get close to the natural world? I mean, it means should we let children into the forests in cities or just let them out into the park, run wildly, like crazy, can you imagine? Well, we do that in this country. Oh, seriously? You take children to parks, but it's dangerous. It's not dangerous. Don't be ridiculous. Yeah, but the child can climb a tree, can fall over into a lake, can I destroy half of the park? Nope, they want to destroy half of the park. No, but if a child hurts themselves, that's really bad. Well, yes, but that could also happen in school, so they're probably going to hurt themselves one way or the other. Cities have a lot of traffic or a lot of traffic congestion, they'll listen to them. So just don't say cities have a lot of traffic. It's too simple. Cities have a lot of traffic congestion, blocked roads, congested roads, like roads full of traffic gems. Cities have a lot of busy roads, a lot of congested roads, or traffic congestion. And it's not easy to find a place with greenery in urbanized areas, urban areas, city areas or urbanized areas. There are zoos and parks, they help, but it's nothing like being out in the wild. In the wild? In nature. Yeah, in real nature. So in the city, it's not really possible to be out in the wild. Wild and uncontrolled. Laws about the environment could be effective and gelison adrenal any laws about the environment in your country. Hmm, I know we mustn't light fires in parks. Hmm, that's a rule, that's kind of a law. You can say I don't think I honestly don't think they're effective. So we do have some laws, but I don't think they're effective. They're not, unfortunately. Otherwise we wouldn't have all these problems. And indeed, I think I used a conditional. If the laws had been better formulated, formulated or better written out, I doubt there would be anything like that in the world today. Yeah, Rory, you've used a mixed conditional, it's very difficult. How about you? Exactly, it's a mixed conditional, it's like C2, DLSN, just don't bother, don't bother with it. It's difficult. No, no, no. No, do bother. If they'd been better formulated, I doubt there would be anything like that posing a problem. Ooh, I didn't realize I'd done that, but I just thought, oh, it's a conditional. It's insane. It's not. If the laws had been made better in the past, then no, these problems would not be happening. You can also use the second conditional, like if we had more effective laws, if people had to pay more fines, so that people had to pay more, they would care for the environment. There we go. Rewards or punishment? People could be rewarded, for example, be given money or punished, like pay a fine. or be sent to prison for dropping litter in the street. And the question is about the government. So when government makes regulations about the environment, about how to recycle rubbish, for example, light fires in parks. So should people be rewarded or punished, which is better. And here, Rory uses a technique like perspective strategy from a psychological perspective. Like, if you think about psychology, it's this. But if you think about something else, economy, or, I don't know, finance, it's the other thing, right? So from a psychological perspective, people respond better at being rewarded. People answer better to rewards. Respond answer. Respond better to being rewarded. Then to being punished. I think so. What do you think? That's a good question. Are you just thinking everyone should be punished? Yeah, I think punishment. Yeah, because if there's no punishment, no one will do anything. I'd go with punishment. That's true. Oh, Maria, you're so cruel. No, but it's, it doesn't have to be cruel. Just fines take money away from people for dropping litter in the streets, for dropping cigarette butts in the streets. Well, yes, they should probably avoid that. Yeah. So fines work best, I think, but they should be like pretty high. Harsh penalties. See, I'm much more liberal about this. I think that it's OK to encourage people rather than punish them. Maria has a different philosophy. Penalties or punishments, right? And another thing in them is punitive measures, like punishment or punitive measures, punitive actions, again, like different punishments. So punitive measures tends to be less effective than rewards. Deal, listen, then you can talk about drone technology. We can monitor forests and wildlife with the help of drones. Like drones are a little thing is fly over forests. Unmanned vehicles. Unmanned aerial vehicles. So drones help to monitor forests and wildlife. If a bear is lost, if a very rare bear is lost, then they can find the bear with the help of drones. And in inaccessible areas, places that you can't just go there, because they're far away, you can monitor forest fires, for example, or wildlife, endangered wildlife with the help of drones. So like we should develop drone technology and also artificial intelligence. But for me, unfortunately, I don't think there is a technological solution. I just think there is a psychological solution, or a moral solution maybe. Yeah, so even if the examiner asks you about technology, you can say, yeah, I don't think technology would help, but I think it's like, we should work with people's psyche. Sweet. Thank you very much for listening, Delis and I'm-- I hope you enjoyed our environmental answers. And we'll get back to you in our next super episode. OK? Bye. Bye. [MUSIC PLAYING] [MUSIC PLAYING] What can people do to protect the natural world? Well, it's supposedly, practically. We could definitely afford to recycle more and use a lot less plastic, which would keep the environment clear for our animals and use up fewer resources. It might not be possible everywhere, but something we could do in this country is use taxpayer money to fund the conservation of areas under threat and maybe help the ecology their cope with various issues. Well, it certainly seems so. Since these days, we can see and hear a lot of bad news related to the environment and educating pupils about these issues could help them grasp how to resolve them more effectively. The only alternative might be asking parents to do it. And that's highly unlikely since they're often so busy with their own work. Generally, no, because cities have a lot of traffic, or at least traffic congestion. And the country is far away from them. So it's not an easy place to reach, despite being all around the urbanized areas of the country. Unfortunately, I honestly don't think they're that effective in general, since we seem to have a lot of problems in that area at the moment. And these statutes have been around for a long time, without having any obvious positive effect or impact on the situation. Which do you think people prefer? Well, from a psychological perspective, it certainly seems people would respond better to being rewarded, since it's much more pleasant compared to being punished. And it seems much more encouraging and positive. And maybe it tends to better message to the public at large. I don't know. It's tempting to talk about things like alternative energy. But we don't have a very good track record on that front because the creation of solar panels actually destroys the locations where rare earth minerals, which are used to create, are located. So that's not great. That's a psychological hurdle that we need to overcome.