Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve growing traffic and pollution problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree? What other measures do you think might be effective?

It is claimed that an increase in the price of

fuel

is the most effective way to solve surging traffic and pollution issues. I totally disagree with

this

statement because it is an item of daily use, which people need to get at any cost.

However

, introducing electric vehicles and better

engines

might be effective in coping with

this

issue. Some would argue that an in the cost of gasoline will lead to a reduction in the use of automobiles and their catastrophic effects on the environment.

This

is to say that the higher be price of fossil oil, the lesser the number of cars, buses, trucks etc. on the roads.

This

will reduce the release of smoke and greenhouse gases into the earth’s environment, which are principal contributors to global warming and air pollution.

However

, I think that

fuel

is a necessity that everyone should purchase even if its cost rises.

For example

, the public in Pakistan was compelled to purchase

fuel

at a high rate

due to

inflation, but it did not reduce the amount of traffic on the roads. Installing automatic electric vehicles would be more effective.

This

is to say that the

engines

of automobiles should be modified to operate using electricity or solar energy rather than

fuel

oil. It will

consequently

wipe out environmental pollutants and toxic gases emitted by combustion

engines

.

For instance

, Tesla Motors produces excellent cars that produce zero CO2, and its sister company, Solar City allows people to produce their own electricity using innovative photovoltaic roof tiles and power wall battery packs.

To conclude

, I believe that the cut-off in the price of petrol is not suitable for tackling traffic and environmental pollution,

while

other measures

such

as the production of electric

engines

should be taken into consideration.