Introduction Three articles provided points for discussion, focusing on environmental risks and the opposing views of the three authors. The identified risks are industries and manufacturing plants, agriculture activities and the use of fertilizers and insecticides, solid waste from households, hazardous waste in landfills, gas emission from transportation, migration, and noise in the city. The purpose of this essay is to provide an analysis of the three articles, focusing on the environmental risks and the risk perceptions of the authors. Summaries of the articles Pollution The first article is about pollution, its causes and effects. Factories, industries and various modes of transportation release toxic chemicals in the atmosphere. Pollution is a major cause of lung diseases. Most people know the causes of pollution and its effects like haze and smog, but they ignore it and continue to be instrument of this man-made environmental problem. Other harmful chemicals destroy vegetation and damage the earth’s ozone layer, our only protection from extreme ultra-violet rays of the sun. Pollution is one of the primary contributors of global warming since greenhouse gases (GHG), such as carbon dioxide and methane, are stored in the earth’s atmosphere. As the earth’s temperature rises, sea temperature also reacts and the polar ice caps in the Antarctic melt causing ocean levels to rise. Air pollutants are produced and stored in the atmosphere. In the U.S. atmosphere, there are approximately 160 million tons of toxic chemicals that affect air quality. In order to control pollution, the U.S. government has formed the Environmental Protection Agency to administer and enforce environmental laws and rebuild the environmental damage ( Opposing viewpoints in context , 2012). Climate change The second article is about climate change and its emphasis on prevention. There is only one countermeasure introduced in this article, which is the practice of green consumerism, or the buying of green products with the aim of protecting the environment. Businesses and small organizations have recommended to consumers to buy eco-friendly products, organic food and “sustainable building materials” ( Opposing viewpoints in context , 2013, para. 1). Larger organizations take their share by manufacturing green products. Buying “green” products can help in reducing climate change but there are consumers who do not support it because they do not have knowledge about the relation of green products and environmental preservation. For example, approximately 80,000 chemicals of various types, mostly toxin, mix with the atmosphere and are inhaled by humans and other living things. Knowledge of this relevant information can motivate consumers to start buying green products. Critics of green consumerism argue that buying green is not enough to alter climate change because this will continue if yearly emissions are not drastically reduced at least by half by year 2050. Critics also argue that consumerism can even encourage buying not environment-friendly materials. A study conducted in 2010 found that although exposure to eco-friendly products had positive effect on consumers, the participants tended to lie and steal than consumers who preferred other products ( Opposing viewpoints in context , 2013). Green shoppers had the tendency to buy more, thinking that they had switched to eco-friendly products, rather than control their impulse