cars problem nowadays
In the hustle and bustle of today's world, owning a car has become one of the essential parts of many people's lives. Cars grant owners convenience, and also provide ready access to a variety of services and leisure options. Nevertheless, there is still a range of problems that should be identified and addressed.
There are innumerable drawbacks caused by this means of transportation, but one evident minus point is the environmental costs that frequent car use brings about. Vehicles have long been reported as a major cause of air pollution due to the released toxic fumes. The more cars traveling on the roads, the more emission being exhausted, leading to a severely polluted atmosphere. The noise from cars' horns is also an indisputable reason for the increase in noise pollution, especially in urban areas. Not only does the environment have to suffer but also the human's safety. Numerous casualties have been recorded annually resulting from car accidents.
Therefore, it is a must to tackle these issues, and some people support that a strict restriction on the use of cars should be imposed. However, it's not the best option at the time, especially when the need for flexibility is rising high and the car industry's role in a country's economy is becoming dominant. To alleviate the environmentally related impacts, encouraging citizens to travel by public means of transportation (bikes, buses...) or promoting environmentally-friendly cars which run on solar power should be taken into consideration. Another practical solution is to expand and enhance transport infrastructures to reduce the traffic jams and accidents.
To encapsulate, the regular use of cars does result in many problems related to not only the environment but also humanity. Despite the seemingly positive effects of limiting people's car use, it is unfortunately not a permanent cure. Immediate actions should be taken with the view to avoiding severe consequences.
Holt Educational Consultant - / 15458 The prompt restatement is not even remotely related to the original discussion. The questions being asked as the establishing platform for the writer's opinion were also not addressed directly with topical responses in the first paragraph. The opening statement is a failure in terms of responding to the task. The first paragraph has one objective alone, to do a simple rewording of the original topic, then respond directly to the questions within 2 sentences that will establish the succeeding discussion paragraphs. When the writer does not address the concerns of the paragraph properly, he is said to not have met task accuracy requirements. This is an example of an empty restatement. It neither meets the topic paraphrasing nor the opinion response needs to meet receive a decent accuracy score. Stick to the script in the first paragraph.
The author has incorrectly used a possessive apostrophe in this case. Nobody owns the cars in terms of reference. It is just a general description of the object. There is no need for an apostrophe at the end of the plural form of the word (cars not cars'). The paragraph should not have had a 3rd reason presented. The most one should present in these paragraphs are 2 connected reasons (air and noise pollution) that can share the same reasoning. The last reason was not properly connected nor explained anymore. It affected the cohesiveness of the paragraph negatively.
The writer should provide a direct response to the given question "Should people be discouraged to use cars?" The paragraph should kick off with a clear opinion sentence such as "I believe that people should not be discouraged to use cars at this point." Then proceed to explain 2 related reasons for this belief. There is no sense in unnecessarily making the paragraph longer since longer does not always mean better. It is the author's logic and intelligence, not the words written that is being assessed here. Long essays usually mean more mistakes or irrelevant discussion points.
