Spend money developing public transportation or developing new kinds of cars (IELTS TASK 2)

public vs private transportation

The proliferation of private cars on the roads in many parts of the world has led to serious problems of pollution and may contribute to global warming. Some people think that governments should spend money for the development of public transportation systems in order to help alleviate this problem. Others think it is better to spend money for the development of electric and other types of cars that may cause less pollution.

Do you think it is better for governments to spend money developing public transportation or developing new kinds of cars?

Enhancing number of cars currently becomes controversial problem. The phenomenon is considered as one of the main causes of climate change through pollution emitted. To deal with situation, there are several solutions, one arguments claim that government should develop a good quality public transportation, while others argue it can be done by substitution some new friendly environment cars. In my perspective, I hold the second option because it has high effectiveness to reduce harm gases. However, to build mass transportation is inappropriate ways because it still emits harmful pollution.

To begin with, recently, many researches devote their best effort to engage a new kind of electrical cars. They believe this way can decrease effectively pollution which are produced by conventional cars, where electrical cars transform electricity to kinetically forces and do not emit remain gases. Moreover, creating eco-friendly it supports global vision to eliminate the threat of global warming, where some of national leader agreed to use renewable energy resources such as solar panel, wind turbines, as well as hydropower to produce electricity. Thus, I examine this method could be appreciated from global society because it uses sustainable energy resources which it does not disturb environment and create clean pollution.

However, some environmentalists refuse another idea which it suggests stakeholders to create public transportation facilities, since it could not solve air pollution problems. In fact, public transportation still release immense gases because these use fossil fuel for mobility. In addition, this suggestion has low effect because not every owner who has felt comfortable with their cars will utilize public transportation to do their daily activities which generally are very crowded of passengers. Unfortunately, the cost allocated by government is counterproductive with main goal of project.

To conclude, I believe that the new invention of eco-friendly transportation is the holistic way to minimize climate change effect because harmful pollution that create worst situation of environment is not transmitted by them.

@Ali20
Hello there. Thanks for actively participating in the forum! I hope that my feedback gives you an idea on how to improve your writing.

First and foremost, the first parts of the writing are a bit confusing. The introductory paragraph is a bit too spread out for its purpose of writing. I heavily recommend that you try to keep it more compartmentalized, especially if you're intending to expand it on the latter parts of the text. I would heavily suggest here omitting a huge part of the second sentence because you could have allocated this space instead for the body paragraphs. Being more balanced definitely counts here.

Furthermore, your conclusion also has to be treated in the same light. That concluding remark still needs to be stretched out because it is (now) merely just about your personal opinion - instead of, for instance, providing an extended analysis on the paper itself. Be more specific in this regard.