Many people think cheaper air travel should be encouraged because it gives ordinary people to travel further. However, others think this leads to environmental problems, so air travel should be more expansive in order to discourage people to have it. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Individuals are split when it comes to air travel. Some believe that providing less expensive travelling commodities by atmosphere should be encouraged since it provides more travel opportunities for people with less income. Others,

on the contrary

, assert that the availability of more flights could result in environmental damage,

accordingly

it should have higher expenses compared to before for reducing individuals interest. There are valid arguments on both sides, which I will discuss and conclude by clearly stating my viewpoint. On the one side of the coin, proponents of lower-price flights claim that using affordable airlines as a main vehicle for individual transportation has two main plus points for mankind.

Initially

,

aeroplanes

are the fastest way of travelling which are really helpful in making a joint between two cities with thousand kilometres distances around the world in the global village era.

In addition

, the convenience and attraction of flights for passengers are inevitable since diving through skies and clouds has been a pleasant experience for mankind for centuries. From another angle, opponents respond that expensive flight travelling services could result in people's tendency for using railways or cars or even ships as the main means of transportation for long journeys. Primarily, higher prices in

this

industry result in less air traffic which is harmful to the atmosphere

due to

released emissions from aircraft.

Moreover

, even hi-tech

aeroplanes

could not chase the air crash that takes thousands of people's lives during a year and the accidental risk is not negligible, so

it is clear that

terrestrial ways are safer.

To sum up

, in conclusion, I tend to agree with the advocates of lower priced

aeroplanes

, since they have a more robust argument but we should work on a cleaner source of energy to power the

aeroplanes

. It should not be forgotten that higher expenses are usually the case, provided that the budget for modifying damages despite the emissions from fuels and endangering individuals' lives are extremely harmful to nature.