It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environments, such as the South Pole. Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?

It is observed that researchers and visitors are now able to travel to distant isolated areas. There are two major positive effects to
this
including collecting materials that are vital for research and adding more places to visitors' travelling lists, I am of the opinion that the drawbacks consisting of a rise in
pollution
and an adverse bearing on indigenous residents will be likely more significant. On the one hand, travelling to remote destinations can bring certain benefits. Chief of these is that these isolated places might have more materials which are crucial for research. By travelling to these sites, scientists are enabled to gain access to an enormous amount of information
such
as geographical structures, unique species and climate patterns.
Therefore
, they can have a deeper insight into the natural landscape of these destinations which have been rarely visited by humans. To illustrate, a recent study by Doctor Luke Trusel has revealed that the reason for the increase in sea levels is
due to
the ice caps melting in the Arctic.
Moreover
, exploring untouched space can help travellers add more places to their travelling lists. In fact, going to well-known cities and countries is common for most people, so it might be more exciting and appealing for tourists to explore more secluded ranges
such
as the Arctic or the Kiribati islands.
Hence
, travelling to these regions can give them valuable experiences and unforgettable memories.
On the other hand
, I firmly believe that the downsides of visiting less explored lands can overshadow the positive aspects. The first one is that travelling to these regions can cause a rise in
pollution
. Given the fact that many popular attractions are already polluted with tourists’ waste, it is readily apparent that nothing can make sure
this
will not happen again to newly-discovered areas.
For instance
, the Amazon rainforest used to be lush and verdant,
however
owing to the development of tourism, more waste
such
as bottles or nylon bags has been released into the environment; thereby, the Amazon rainforest is more likely to be destroyed.
Furthermore
, other activities might have an adverse bearing on indigenous residents. When
pollution
is increasingly prevalent in these zones, it can breed poor sanitation, which affects locals’ health.
Consequently
, it can facilitate diseases to spread among local inhabitants. In conclusion,
while
visiting faraway lands can bring new materials for research and expand people’s travelling lists; I suppose that
this
tendency can be detrimental
due to
the rise of
pollution
and the undesirable effects on local people.
Submitted by huyquang17406 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.

Word Count

IELTS says that you should write a minimum of 250 words in writing task 2. If you go under word count you will lose marks in task response.

A very long essay will not give you a higher band score.

Aim for between 260 to 290 words in writing task 2. This will ensure a concise essay and will be realistic in terms of time management. You have only 40 minutes to write the essay and you need around 10 minutes of planning time, so you will not be able to write a long essay in 30 minutes.

Discover more tips in The Ultimate Guide to Get a Target Band Score of 7+ »— a book that's free for 🚀 Premium users.

What to do next:
Look at other essays: