Topic: Some people believe that air travel should be restricted because it causes serious pollution and will use up fuel resources in the world. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The prevalence of airplane made an impressive improvement to people's life; a public debate, however, has been ignited about whether to limit its use due to the associated environmental contamination and energy consumption. Personally, I believe that it is not unnecessary to slow down the expanding of civil aviation.
Beyond all doubt, flight does bring two main serious environmental concerns to the world. Initially, during flying, it generates large amount of noise, particulates, as well as greenhouse gas, thus, may lead to significant climate change issues such as global warming and ozone reduction. Secondly, it also causes local pollution given that on the one hand, the construction and maintenance of an airport requires intensive energy; while on the other, aircraft and relevant ground transportation would dramatically decrease air quality. As a consequence, in reality, many governments are encouraging passengers to take alternative vehicles, especially for traveling in short and medium distance. Advanced and swift train, for example, is recommended as an appropriate substitute and has been widely implemented around the world: Eurostar in Italy, Super Express in Japan, and High-Speed Railway in China.
Admittedly, in terms of long distance journey, the airplane still ranks the first place in the customers' preferred choice list. Compared to other means of transports, it provides maximum comfort and security with minimum traveling time and cost, which enables convenient global exchanging and trading. Therefore, the status of flight, to a certain extent, is irreplaceable at present.
In conclusion, the proposal of reducing the frequent use of airplane is worthy of consideration since its drawbacks outweigh the benefits. Gratifyingly, with the improvement of technology and environmental consciousness, air travel is likely to turn out to be environmental friendly in the foreseeable future.
word count : 286
The prevalence of airplane made an impressive improvement to people's life; a public debate, however, has been ignited about whether to limit its use due to the associated environmental contamination and energy consumption. Personally, I believe that it is not unnecessary to slow down the expanding of civil aviation.
Beyond all doubt, flight does bring two main serious environmental concerns to the world. Initially, during flying, it generates large amount of noise, particulates, as well as greenhouse gas, thus, may lead to significant climate change issues such as global warming and ozone reduction. Secondly, it also causes local pollution given that on the one hand, the construction and maintenance of an airport requires intensive energy; while on the other, aircraft and relevant ground transportation would dramatically decrease air quality. As a consequence, in reality, many governments are encouraging passengers to take alternative vehicles, especially for traveling in short and medium distance. Advanced and swift train, for example, is recommended as an appropriate substitute and has been widely implemented around the world: Eurostar in Italy, Super Express in Japan, and High-Speed Railway in China.
Admittedly, in terms of long distance journey, the airplane still ranks the first place in the customers' preferred choice list. Compared to other means of transports, it provides maximum comfort and security with minimum traveling time and cost, which enables convenient global exchanging and trading. Therefore, the status of flight, to a certain extent, is irreplaceable at present.
In conclusion, the proposal of reducing the frequent use of airplane is worthy of consideration since its drawbacks outweigh the benefits. Gratifyingly, with the improvement of technology and environmental consciousness, air travel is likely to turn out to be environmental friendly in the foreseeable future.
word count : 286
