The government can take a variety of actions to help protect the environment. Which one of the following do you think is the most important for the nation's government to take to protect the environment?
1. Fund the research to develop environmentally friendly energy sources such as solar and wind energy.
2. Preserve the natural places like forests and protect the animals that live there.
3. Enforce laws to prevent the pollution of air and water by large companies.
Nowadays, environmental pollution has emerged as one of the most urgent issues of the government to handle and government is obliged to take necessary measures to protect it from contamination. Some experts have come up with three plausible solutions, from environmentally-friendly energy source development, to the protection of natural habits and wild animals, and to forbidding businesses to emit air or water pollution by law. Among all these three suggestions, I suppose that enforcing laws to prohibit air or water contamination by huge corporations is the best option.
First, compared with the other two choices, implementing laws on corporate pollution is much more economical. If the government decides to invent new environmentally friendly energy, they have to recruit relevant experts and specialists, for whom it has to pay thousands of dollars to make the best of their brain and talents to get the project finished. Also, if the government decides to protect natural forests or wild animals, they are likely to choose a place as a potential spot of a wildlife reserve and then spend a tremendous amount of money contacting several construction companies to build this natural protection area. However, when it comes to enforcing laws to prevent the air and water pollutions by huge companies, it may just take a few officials to draw up the first draft and wait for the congress to pass it. It won't add any single financial burden to the government.
Second, the law on water or air pollution is the very prerequisite for the other two solutions. Even though the government successfully innovate new energy sources such as solar and geothermal energy, the contamination issue wouldn't be well tackled if the pollution released by huge firms is so severe and even out of control. Similarly, one of the threats to forests and animals is man-made pollution, whether water or air. If no laws has been passed to put a curb on companies' emission of pollutants, the natural habits and animals dwelling there could be harmed continuously, even endlessly. Therefore, as we can see, it is vital to establish laws to ban companies from releasing and emitting their chemicals wastes or toxic discharges. Without these necessities, the other two options are just like buildings erecting without a solid foundation and someday it may collapse eventually.
In a nutshell, among all these three possibilities, drawing up and implementing environmental pollution laws is the one I prefer.
P.S: I'd appreciate if you could help me revise my toefl essay. Cheers!
1. Fund the research to develop environmentally friendly energy sources such as solar and wind energy.
2. Preserve the natural places like forests and protect the animals that live there.
3. Enforce laws to prevent the pollution of air and water by large companies.
environmental pollution laws should be implemented
Nowadays, environmental pollution has emerged as one of the most urgent issues of the government to handle and government is obliged to take necessary measures to protect it from contamination. Some experts have come up with three plausible solutions, from environmentally-friendly energy source development, to the protection of natural habits and wild animals, and to forbidding businesses to emit air or water pollution by law. Among all these three suggestions, I suppose that enforcing laws to prohibit air or water contamination by huge corporations is the best option.
First, compared with the other two choices, implementing laws on corporate pollution is much more economical. If the government decides to invent new environmentally friendly energy, they have to recruit relevant experts and specialists, for whom it has to pay thousands of dollars to make the best of their brain and talents to get the project finished. Also, if the government decides to protect natural forests or wild animals, they are likely to choose a place as a potential spot of a wildlife reserve and then spend a tremendous amount of money contacting several construction companies to build this natural protection area. However, when it comes to enforcing laws to prevent the air and water pollutions by huge companies, it may just take a few officials to draw up the first draft and wait for the congress to pass it. It won't add any single financial burden to the government.
Second, the law on water or air pollution is the very prerequisite for the other two solutions. Even though the government successfully innovate new energy sources such as solar and geothermal energy, the contamination issue wouldn't be well tackled if the pollution released by huge firms is so severe and even out of control. Similarly, one of the threats to forests and animals is man-made pollution, whether water or air. If no laws has been passed to put a curb on companies' emission of pollutants, the natural habits and animals dwelling there could be harmed continuously, even endlessly. Therefore, as we can see, it is vital to establish laws to ban companies from releasing and emitting their chemicals wastes or toxic discharges. Without these necessities, the other two options are just like buildings erecting without a solid foundation and someday it may collapse eventually.
In a nutshell, among all these three possibilities, drawing up and implementing environmental pollution laws is the one I prefer.
P.S: I'd appreciate if you could help me revise my toefl essay. Cheers!
