Some people believe celebrities' support towards international aid organizations draws attention to problems, while others think celebrities make the problems less important. Discuss both views and give your opinion

Across the globe, governments have assigned certain areas not to be developed in order to preserve the environment for future generations. However, some people suggest that the rule should be abolished as this can generate the most amount of electricity. I agree to some extent but I think we shall not because it only can last a couple of decades. First of all, supporters think utilizing oil and gas is the most efficient way to produce energy. Although a couple of methods have been invented, no one can completely replace the ordinary method. For instance, renewable energy is the most eco-friendly way, but uneconomical and nuclear energy can produce an adequate amount of power, but it has a higher risk. It is argued thus to discover untouched zone should be allowed due to rising consumption in energy. However, in my opinion, opening the untouched areas leads to nothing but resource depletion since it does not tackle an initial issue. The high efficiency of utilizing fossil fuel blind the public the truth that it is not a temporary solution. Since the consumption of a resource is father than it can be replenished, we should end up finding other solutions for meeting the demand for rising electricity rather than depend on gas and oil without a doubt. If we decide to utilize fossil fuel, in the future, we will reface this issue. Consequently, exploring undiscovered lands cannot be implemented. The main conclusion that can be drawn is that although fossil fuel maximizes the efficiency to produce electricity, it cannot be pursued with the intention since it is a short-run solution and the resources will end up being exhausted.