Individuals typically elect airplane as a relatively convenient, time-efficienct, and economical way of travel for a long time. As aircraft utilising is accompanied by the adverse effects on the environment such as natural resources wasting and air contamination, whether air travel should be strictly prohibited has been a highly controversial issue.
While it is undeniable that air traffic is the major source of non-renewable resources consuming and air pollution, it provides passengers and cargo the safest and easiest mode of transportation. For instance, rescue supplies, such as food, emergency medicines, and makeshift tents must be transported by flights because delivering the goods in the least possible time is extremely important for those who are suffering from disasters. The superiority can also be confirmed by the example of international tourism that is requiring a kind of traffic with high speed, and safety helps our earth shrink its size. Doubtless, airplane is just the most efficient way that fulfills all the strengths above. Additionally, it has generated a host of employment opportunities in all the aspects of the aviation industry, which contributes to address the severe problem of booming population.
Admittedly, vast quantities of greenhouse and toxic gas emissions exhausted by air traffic, which, after all, poses a threat to the ecological equilibrium both nationally and internationally. A telling example would be the increased incidence of skin cancer, eye cataracts, and damage to the human immune system due to the alarming scale of ozone holes. However, as the engine of flight develops and green alternative fuel become more widespread, energy efficiency would be definitely optimized and the poisonous emissions would be minimized.
By way of conclusion, I affirm my position that air travel would not lose its status as a chief mode of transportation, regardless of the troubles created by its burning fuel - waste and pollution. Given the choice, the authorities ought to invest in exploring renewable resources for aircrafts and boosting their effectiveness and efficiency rather than simply ban it altogether.
While it is undeniable that air traffic is the major source of non-renewable resources consuming and air pollution, it provides passengers and cargo the safest and easiest mode of transportation. For instance, rescue supplies, such as food, emergency medicines, and makeshift tents must be transported by flights because delivering the goods in the least possible time is extremely important for those who are suffering from disasters. The superiority can also be confirmed by the example of international tourism that is requiring a kind of traffic with high speed, and safety helps our earth shrink its size. Doubtless, airplane is just the most efficient way that fulfills all the strengths above. Additionally, it has generated a host of employment opportunities in all the aspects of the aviation industry, which contributes to address the severe problem of booming population.
Admittedly, vast quantities of greenhouse and toxic gas emissions exhausted by air traffic, which, after all, poses a threat to the ecological equilibrium both nationally and internationally. A telling example would be the increased incidence of skin cancer, eye cataracts, and damage to the human immune system due to the alarming scale of ozone holes. However, as the engine of flight develops and green alternative fuel become more widespread, energy efficiency would be definitely optimized and the poisonous emissions would be minimized.
By way of conclusion, I affirm my position that air travel would not lose its status as a chief mode of transportation, regardless of the troubles created by its burning fuel - waste and pollution. Given the choice, the authorities ought to invest in exploring renewable resources for aircrafts and boosting their effectiveness and efficiency rather than simply ban it altogether.