Last time Eddies gave me a lots helpful advice and I was really appreciate that. thank you.
This is my 2nd essay posted here, hopefully everyone would leave some feedback about my vocabulary as well as my outline. tks in advance.
Topic: 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?
Arising from modernization, traffic congestion and environmental contamination have been two controversial issues in many developing countries. The co-operation between a country's government and its residents should be the best measurement to this. While rising the cost of petrol generates noticeable merits, i would have to argue that it is not the best way amongst a variety of solutions.
To begin with, increasing the price of haulage power is an exciting possibility but not reliable. Firstly, this measure, absolutely, affects directly to drivers, namely, motor drivers and car drivers. That is to say, as the petrol become costly, there will be a short-term deduction in its consumption which directly affects transport usage. Hence, traffic jam can be decreased considerably which brings about some beneficial impacts to the environment. On the contrary, since people find it hard to travel to work there would be a long-term deduction in national GDP. To put it simply, people need more reasonable means of transport in order to support their work.
On the other hand, there are, obviously, more efficient and more effective cures to traffic growth that we need to take into account. One good answer is to encourage public transport. Take public bus for example. That is to say, those means of transport are economical and efficient in terms of carrying commuters. Moreover, changing our working habit is another possibility. As a result, the density on roads and freeways in rush hour would be in a decline. Giving workers flexible timetables or making use of internet to help people to work at home are good cases in point.
Similarly, environment pollution stemming from traffic growth can be solved largely. In my opinion, the most reliable way out of this beside reducing vehicle density is that government should invest heavily on electrical transportation. In particular, a new project called Tesla has been carried out in some Western countries. In that case, instead of producing contaminated petrol exhausts into the air, our cars would use electricity which is less costly and more friendly to the environment.
To put it in a nut-shell, I would like to reaffirm my position that if governments and people both give a hand to help lower traffic growth and pollution problems, there will be an array of remedies better than rising the petrol's price.
This is my 2nd essay posted here, hopefully everyone would leave some feedback about my vocabulary as well as my outline. tks in advance.
Topic: 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?
Arising from modernization, traffic congestion and environmental contamination have been two controversial issues in many developing countries. The co-operation between a country's government and its residents should be the best measurement to this. While rising the cost of petrol generates noticeable merits, i would have to argue that it is not the best way amongst a variety of solutions.
To begin with, increasing the price of haulage power is an exciting possibility but not reliable. Firstly, this measure, absolutely, affects directly to drivers, namely, motor drivers and car drivers. That is to say, as the petrol become costly, there will be a short-term deduction in its consumption which directly affects transport usage. Hence, traffic jam can be decreased considerably which brings about some beneficial impacts to the environment. On the contrary, since people find it hard to travel to work there would be a long-term deduction in national GDP. To put it simply, people need more reasonable means of transport in order to support their work.
On the other hand, there are, obviously, more efficient and more effective cures to traffic growth that we need to take into account. One good answer is to encourage public transport. Take public bus for example. That is to say, those means of transport are economical and efficient in terms of carrying commuters. Moreover, changing our working habit is another possibility. As a result, the density on roads and freeways in rush hour would be in a decline. Giving workers flexible timetables or making use of internet to help people to work at home are good cases in point.
Similarly, environment pollution stemming from traffic growth can be solved largely. In my opinion, the most reliable way out of this beside reducing vehicle density is that government should invest heavily on electrical transportation. In particular, a new project called Tesla has been carried out in some Western countries. In that case, instead of producing contaminated petrol exhausts into the air, our cars would use electricity which is less costly and more friendly to the environment.
To put it in a nut-shell, I would like to reaffirm my position that if governments and people both give a hand to help lower traffic growth and pollution problems, there will be an array of remedies better than rising the petrol's price.
