📘 Part 3: Environmental Protection and Conservation

This episode's vocabulary

Killing two birds with one stone (idiom) – to achieve two things with a single action. → The podcast is useful for both speaking and essays, so we are killing two birds with one stone.

Afford to do something (phrasal verb) – to be able to do something without it causing problems. → We could definitely afford to recycle more and use a lot less plastic.

Fund the conservation (collocation) – to provide money for the protection of something, especially the natural world. → We could use taxpayer money to fund the conservation of areas under threat.

Grasp (verb) – to understand something completely, especially something difficult. → Educating pupils about these issues could help them grasp how to resolve them.

Traffic congestion (compound noun) – a condition on road networks characterized by slower speeds and longer trip times. → Cities have a lot of traffic congestion, and the country is far away from them.

Urbanized areas (noun phrase) – areas that have become towns or cities. → It's not easy to find a place with greenery in urbanized areas.

Formulated (verb) – created or prepared something carefully. → If the laws had been better formulated, I doubt there would be a problem.

Punitive measures (collocation) – actions intended as a punishment. → Punitive measures tend to engender panic and pessimism by contrast.

Engender (verb) – to cause or give rise to a feeling, situation, or condition. → Punitive measures tend to engender panic and pessimism.

Track record (noun) – all the past achievements or failures of a person or organization. → We don't have a very good track record on that front because the creation of solar panels actually destroys locations.

Rare earth minerals (compound noun) – a set of seventeen metallic elements which are often difficult to extract. → Solar panels are made using rare earth minerals.

Psychological hurdle (collocation) – a mental or emotional barrier that must be overcome. → Consuming less is a psychological hurdle that we need to overcome.

Questions and Answers

Maria: What can people do to protect the natural world?

Rory: Well, I suppose at least 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 there cope with various issues.

Maria: Is it important to teach students environmental protection at school?

Rory: 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.

Maria: Is it easy for children in cities to get close to the natural world?

Rory: 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.

Maria: What laws about the environment are effective in your country?

Rory: 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.

Maria: Which do you think people prefer: rewards or punishment when it comes to government intervention in environmental protection?

Rory: 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?

Maria: What technological innovations could the world develop to protect the environment?

Rory: 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.

Discussion

Maria: So, dear listener, 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?

Rory: It's not arboreal forest.

Maria: All right, I thought you were talking about arboreal forest there and I was thinking,

Rory: how am I gonna explain what that is.

Maria: So just say rainforests.

Rory: Yes. Well, arboreal forests and rainforests are different things. So just say rainforests.

Maria: Students should be taught how to protect the environment at school or they should not be taught. Dear listener, what's what's your opinion? Or we should educate students how to protect the environment. Teach them, educate them. Teach them to grasp how to help the environment. 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.

Rory: 8, 8.5.

Maria: It is.

Rory: Oh, amazing.

Maria: So education could help students to grasp how to help, resolve environmental issues. Resolve or solve. Solve issues, 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? 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?

Rory: Well, we do that in this country.

Maria: Oh, seriously? You take children to parks, but it's just dangerous. They could just,

Rory: It's not dangerous. Don't be ridiculous.

Maria: Yeah, but a child can climb a tree, can fall over into a lake, can I don't know, destroy half of the park.

Rory: Nope, they won't destroy half of the park.

Maria: No, but if a child hurts themselves, that's really bad.

Rory: Well, yes, but that could also happen in school. So they're probably going to hurt themselves one way or the other.

Maria: Cities have a lot of traffic or a lot of traffic congestion, dear listener. 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, roads full of traffic jams. 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.

Rory: In the wild. In nature.

Maria: Yeah, in real nature. So in the city, it's not really possible to be out in the wild.

Rory: Wild and uncontrolled.

Maria: Laws about the environment could be effective. And dear listener, do you know any laws about the environment in your country? I know we mustn't light fires in parks. 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.

Rory: They're not, unfortunately. Otherwise, we wouldn't have all these problems. And indeed, I think I used a conditioner.

Maria: If the laws had been better formulated, like formulated, well, 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.

Rory: Oh, have I?

Maria: Exactly. It's a mixed conditional. It's like C2. Dear listener, just don't bother. Don't bother with it, okay? It's it's it's too difficult. No, no, no.

Rory: No! Do bother. If they'd been better formulated, I doubt there would be anything like that posing a problem now. I didn't realize I'd done that. I just thought, oh, it's a conditional.

Maria: It's insane.

Rory: It's not. If the laws had been made better in the past, then now these problems would not be happening.

Maria: You can also use the second conditional, like if we had more effective laws, if people had to pay more fines, so if 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, 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. Perspective strategy. From a psychological perspective, 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. So from a psychological perspective, people respond better at being rewarded. People answer better to rewards. Respond, answer, respond better to being rewarded than to being punished.

Rory: I think so. What do you think?

Maria: That's a good question.

Rory: Are you just thinking everyone should be punished?

Maria: Yeah, I think punishment. Yeah, because if there's no punishment, no one will do anything. Yeah. I, I'd go with punishment. It's true.

Rory: Oh, Maria, you're so cruel.

Maria: No, but it's 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.

Rory: Well, yes, they should probably avoid that.

Maria: Yeah. So fines work best, I think, but they should be like pretty high.

Rory: Harsh penalties.

Maria: See, I'm much more liberal about this. I think that it's okay to to encourage people rather than to punish them. Maria has a different philosophy.

Maria: Penalties or punishments, right? And another synonym is punitive measures, like punishment or punitive measures. Punitive actions, again, different punishments. So punitive measures tends to be less effective than rewards. Dear listener, then you can talk about drone technology. We can monitor forests and wildlife with the help of drones. Drones are these little thingies that fly over the forests.

Rory: Unmanned vehicles. Unmanned aerial vehicles.

Maria: So, drones help to monitor forests and wildlife. 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. We can monitor forest fires, for example, or wildlife, endangered wildlife with the help of drones. So, we should develop drone technology and also artificial intelligence.

Rory: 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.

Maria: Yeah, so even if the examiner asks you about technology, you can say, yeah, I don't think technology will help, but I think we should work with people's psyche. Sweet. Thank you very much for listening, dear listener.

Rory: I hope you enjoyed our environmental answers.

Maria: And we'll be back to you in our next super episode. Okay? Bye.

Rory: Bye.