That depends on how you define “resource,” I suppose. The hole in the ozone layer and the protection it could have provided can certainly be cited as an eventual externality of the industrial revolution. In fact, most of the problems with see with global warming, assuming that it is anthropogenic, would be the result of the industrial revolution and the mechanisms through which it functioned.
Other than fossil fuels though, which now run scarce, and the environmental damage it caused I can’t think of any particular individual resource that it ruined though.
Prior to the Industrial Age and cheap and easy transportation, everybody lived in communities that were self-sustainable. There were local farmers, local carpenters, local blacksmiths, etc. Trade was usually between neighboring communities. Because of this, there was less waste. Packaging was virtually nonexistant since people lived in close vicinity of what they bought. Throwing away a broken object such as a chair was out of the question because there were only a handful of carpenters who could build the chair. It was more practicle to have the chair repaired by your local carptenter- this was also a more environmentally friendly choice.
With the coming of the Industrial Age came mass transportation and mass production. People could suddenly buy chairs cheaply and easily, most of which were transported from far away and had extensive packaging. Throwing away broken chairs was a viable option as there were many more to replace them. I feel that this inclination to waste more helped lead to the waste of more resources- so yes I believe the Industrail Revolution ruined resources.
Click here to cancel reply.
Sorry,At this time user registration is disabled. We will open registration soon!
Don't have an account? Click Here to Signup
© Copyright GreenAnswers.com LLC