Some experts suggest people a method to solve the environmental problem is to increase the cost of fuels and all vehicles. To what extent do you agree with this point? and make comparisons where relevant.

it is sometimes argued that experts suggest

people

a method to solve the environmental problem is to increase the

cost

of

fuels

and all

vehicles

,

while

I disagree with

this

idea . on the one hand , it is true that increasing the

cost

of

fuels

and all

vehicles

has some advantages .

firstly

, it can reduce car fumes if government increase the

cost

of

fuels

and all

vehicles

, because a few

people

can afford to pay the

cost

of

fuels

to drive their cars to go to work .

secondly

it is beneficial for the environment,because fewer

people

drive cars fewer fumes can be produced,

therefore

it can solve pollution problems .

finally

, it good for

people

healthy ,and reduce the number of

people

who suffer from the breathing problems.

on the other hand

, increasing the

cost

of

fuels

and all

vehicles

has some advantages , but I think increasing the

cost

of

fuels

and all

vehicles

also

may cause some disadvantages.

firstly

,it increases the financial burden on relevant industries, especially for the transport industries ,because the company

cost

more than before ,

then

it may

also

develop the price of products ,so that few

people

want to buy them,and customers decrease the demand for products,

then

company can make fewer profits which cause the decrease of the staff's salary,

moreover

,it increases poverty.

secondly

, it is inconvenient, because it can put pressure on public resources,

for instance

, public transportation

also

becomes more and more crowded ,increasing the number of workers taking buses and subways. in conclusion , I disagree with Some experts who suggest

people

a method to solve the environmental problem is to increase the

cost

of fuel and all

vehicles

.