The government should impose a fee on drivers who use their vehicle during rush hour to help cut down on air pollution from exhaust fumes. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Global warming upholds its position as the most prevalent threat in the 21st century, continuously exacerbating the existing conditions of our planet.
Therefore
, countries are proposing an equitable number of solutions to alleviate the negative impact of air pollution and one such
method is charging drivers
a certain amount of fee
who drive their machines during traffic hours. I believe that implementing such
a drastic law may not be the most effective way to tackle air pollution from exhaust gases. Therefore
, I am opposed to the proposal of charging drivers
a fee
.
To begin
with, usually, the introduction of additional fees on individuals ends up with unfair treatment in societies as economically well-off people will disregard the laws anyway, especially the ones that can be paid with money. Therefore
, exerting an exhaust fee
on cars will not solve the problem entirely and decrease the amount of tailpipe smoke. For example
, the UK Government passed a similar law, but it has long been proven that despite receiving tickets during peak traffic times, the roads remain congested with vehicles.
Furthermore
, although
there are many effective and equitable alternatives in order to eliminate the impact of exhaust gasses on air quality, sticking up to this
radical decision can be jeopardizing to certain people. It is important to acknowledge that methods like improvement of public transportation and infrastructure development can generate a solution which can provide a more affordable, accessible and sustainable dominance. Additionally
, promoting a culture of remote work capabilities and flexible working hours can significantly decrease the number of drivers
on roads during the peak-hours
.
In conclusion, Correct your spelling
peak hours
while
reducing traffic and pollution is crucial, imposing a rush-hour specific fee
law on drivers
is unjustifiable and is not the most equitable strategy. Instead
, a combination of improved public transportation, flexible work policies and technological advancements should be pursued to address these issues in a multifaceted and holistic manner.Submitted by orkhanshamil 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
Adding more specific data or studies would further strengthen the argument, making it even more persuasive.
coherence cohesion
Ensure that each paragraph deals with a distinct point, and transitions between ideas can be slightly smoother.
coherence cohesion
The essay offers a comprehensive introduction and conclusion, clearly laying out the topic and summarizing the main points effectively.
task achievement
The essay demonstrates a nuanced understanding of the topic and addresses multiple perspectives, which is commendable.
task achievement
Relevant examples, such as the UK Government law, are used to reinforce main points, though more details could make it more compelling.