Some people think an international car-free day is an effective way to reduce air pollution. Others think there are more effective ways to do this. Discuss both sides and give you opinion.

It is true that the existence of

cars

detriments the air quality. Many people believe that holding a global car-free day can mitigate the damages,

whereas

I believe that there are more effective measures for

this

situation. On the one hand, the idea of organizing an international car-free day has both advantages and disadvantages. The first reason for

this

is it can encourage individuals to participate in protecting the environment.

This

could be explained by the fact that humans do not usually pay significant attention to global issues,

nevertheless

, if

this

event appears, it will attract more advocates, and increase environmental awareness.

In contrast

, only a few days without

cars

out of 365 days only cut down a mere per cent of annual pollution.

Consequently

,

this

solution does not mitigate the massive amount of air contaminants that are released from vehicles.

On the other hand

, I believe that there are more useful ways to tackle air deterioration. The main one is having a governmental allowance dedicated to alternative resource vehicles.

For example

, authorities can reduce the tax on hybrid or electric

cars

, and enhance users in order to reduce CO2 from fossil fuels transportation.

Furthermore

, investing in public transport can contribute to changing human habits.

This

is because people are finding convenience when using any means of transport, so if buses or MRTs meet the residents’ demands, they can get rid of private

cars

. In conclusion,

while

there are some benefits to

organize

Wrong verb form

organising

show examples

an international car-free day, I still believe that it is more beneficial to use other methods to address

this

phenomenon. It can be predicted these measures will have sustainable effects on a larger scale.