Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve growing traffic and pollution problems. What extent do yo agree or disagree. What measure do you think might be effective.
In our contemporary era, it is acknowledged that the government making significant efforts by increasing fuel prices to reduce gas emissions and improve the natural environment, marking
this
method as the paramount solution. I cannot stand back to this
policy as there are other alternatives like promoting more ecologically balanced and industrially effective vehicles that could be supported by the officials.
With the immense growth of accessibility of modern cars
, which is caused by improving individuals' prosperity, more and more civilians can extend their private car parks. For instance
, in Kazan, over the last
two decades, statistics of 2 or more car ownership accounted for a 35% increase. Having more cars
on the city roads tremendously increased the number of traffic congestion and gridlocks. Furthermore
, the city pollution figures noticeably correlated with the desire for transport purchasing, affecting the average carbon footprint levels of the country.
On the other hand
, alleviating the gas emissions and mitigating the environmental causes could be done by the mutual contribution of the government and the local communities. With the extension of funds and promotion of environmentally friendly vehicles among the public, the number of fuel-based cars
can be reduced, leading to a healthier habitat and atmosphere. For example
, in Moscow, in the year 2017, the authorities financially supported societally responsible industries as well as
volunteers, whose aim was to implement more electric cars
in cities which eventually reduced CO2 emissions by 25% in only one year.
In conclusion, raising the gas prices strategy that is
considered the best solution could be redesigned, in order to reduce pollutants numbers and eliminate their side effects. Additionally
, with the effective contribution of regular people, the government can come up with more influential activities, focusing on a variety of carbon-free cars
and the quality of the environment.Submitted by gainutdin87 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.
task achievement
Ensure that all arguments are equally and thoroughly supported with specifics. For instance, while you provided a specific example from Kazan, it would be beneficial to expand a bit more on its broader implications or effects on the local environment and traffic, providing concrete numbers or outcomes if available.
coherence cohesion
Be cautious with certain phrases or vocabulary to guarantee clarity. The expression, "I cannot stand back to this policy" may be more clearly rendered as "I cannot fully support this policy." Higher precision wordings fortify your position.
coherence cohesion
While your essay is indeed cohesive, consider improving the flow between main points. For instance, smooth transitions between discussing car ownership and discussing alternative environmental strategies can enhance reader comprehension.
task achievement
Your introduction effectively frames the debate on petrol prices versus alternative solutions for traffic and pollution. This sets a clear and focused thesis for the reader.
coherence cohesion
The essay concludes with a coherent and persuasive summary that ties back to the introduction, reaffirming your position and providing a final thought on the government's role.
task achievement
Your use of specific examples, like the one from Moscow in 2017, adds credibility and solidifies your arguments on effective environmental measures.