A long distance flight consumes more fuel than a car running for several years. Some argue that it would be better to discourage people to have non-essential air travel than to limit the use of cars. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is sometimes argued that unnecessary
air
travel
should be banned instead
of restricting road transport as vehicles consume more fuel and generate more pollution. I disagree with this
statement and the following paragraphs will explain the reasons.
The primary reason to limit the vehicles is their frequent usage than aeroplanes. While
it is undeniable that air
travel
over long distances consumes more fuel than running a car for many years, they are used by fewer people
and less frequently, so in total
they consume less than the daily use of cars. Add a comma
total,
For example
, you can see a great number of vehicles running on roads every day, however
, there is a limited number of people
who can travel
to distant areas with limited times. Therefore
, only limiting unnecessary air
travel
is not a wise way to save energy.
Another reason is there would be fewer impacts for people
to suffer if governments limited the use of cars. There are other alternatives to transport for the public to use, such
as bicycles, subways and trams. However
, there are no other means to replace planes when travelling to other parts of the world and not all destinations can be easily travelled by road. Our lives will be greatly influenced if there is a restriction imposed on air
travel
. For example
, people
who live in Shanghai want to visit Taiwan, there is a cross-strait between the two regions, so air
travel
becomes an accessible way for visitors.
In conclusion, due to
the fewer impacts and many alternatives that can offer
, compared to stopping the usage of non-essential aeroplane Wrong verb form
be offered
travel
, it is better to impose restrictions on road transport instead
.Submitted by wly_yanwang on
Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
task achievement
While the essay is generally well-organized and develops a clear argument, you may want to further elaborate on the examples provided to make them even more convincing and specific. For instance, adding statistics about fuel consumption or pollution differences between cars and airplanes could strengthen your points.
coherence cohesion
The essay is cohesive and paragraphs flow well with appropriate use of linking words. However, consider refining transitional phrases for better fluidity between some points. For instance, transitioning from discussing the frequency of use to the impact on people's daily lives could be smoother.
coherence cohesion
The introduction and conclusion are clear and effectively set the scope of the essay and restate the main argument.
task achievement
Main points are well-supported and the essay addresses all parts of the prompt, providing a balanced perspective.
coherence cohesion
The essay maintains a focused argument and uses clear, comprehensive language to convey ideas.