One long-distance flight consumes fuel which a car uses in several years’ time, but they cause the same amount of pollution. So same people think that we should discourage non-essential flights, such as tourist travel, rather than to limit the use of cars. TASK: To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Despite the fact that fuel emissions from the car and flight are the same, vehicles consume five times less gases than aeroplanes, and to solve

this

problem the government proposes cancelling unnecessary flight

such

as a tourist trip rather than restricting the use of cars. I personally disagree with

this

statement as it will cause great resentment among people as well as it is not the biggest dilemma nowadays.

First

and foremost, it is not solving

this

problem, as it is two main ways of moving.

Furthermore

, individuals, travel for different reasons it would be medicine, work, studying, exploring, developing as well as they will always travel to relax and diversity their surroundings. As an example, we can take the period during the quarantine, when all flights were cancelled and the situation with our pollution did not advance and

as a result

individual moving by car. Apart from air pollution, there are numerous problems connected with the environment,

such

as climate change, water pollution, unsustainable waste generation

,

Accept space

,

natural disasters and so on.

Last

but not the least, I am convinced that to change our environment we should

firstly

change ourselves.

For instance

, we could handle

this

complication if we could increase control over industrial waste-discharge and adopt more environmentally friendly materials and production equipment. In conclusion, I would like to say that both cars and aeroplanes have a negative effect on our globe, but it is not a positive way to be discouraged tourist air travel

instead

of limiting the use of private cars.