Limiting air travel is the most effective method of reducing air pollution. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Limiting air travel is the most effective method of reducing air pollution.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Although some believe that restricting travel by airplane is helpful in reducing air pollution, I am of the opinion that there are more effective solutions to the problem.
On the one hand, there is no denying that reducing air travel can help curb air pollution. The operation of large and heavy planes carrying numerous passengers and cargo over long distances leads to the consumption of substantial amounts of fossil fuel. Consequently, traveling by plane becomes a source of CO2 and other noxious pollutants. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that limitations on air travel could potentially alleviate air pollution to some extent.
However, it is crucial to recognize that restricting air travel alone is insufficient to effectively reduce air pollution. This is because air travel may not be the primary source of emissions. A more comprehensive solution should involve cutting emissions from ground-based vehicles and factories. In many developing countries, where cars, motorbikes, and heavy industry are common, the amount of emissions released by airplanes may be negligible compared to these major emitters. Without the implementation of proper emission policies, such as banning these vehicles or imposing heavy fines on toxic fume mismanagement, the air quality would continue to deteriorate, even if air travel is strictly limited.
In conclusion, while some argue that limiting air travel is the optimal method to reduce air pollution, I believe that it is far from the best one. Instead, several solutions, including prohibiting some ground-based transport means and levying greater monetary punishments on emissions, should be more effective.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"I am of the opinion that" -> "I contend that"
Explanation: Replacing "I am of the opinion that" with "I contend that" adds a more assertive and formal tone, aligning with academic writing conventions.
"there is no denying that" -> "it is indisputable that"
Explanation: Substituting "there is no denying that" with "it is indisputable that" enhances the formality of the sentence by using a more definitive and academic expression.
"curb air pollution" -> "mitigate air pollution"
Explanation: Changing "curb" to "mitigate" maintains the meaning while introducing a more sophisticated and formal term commonly used in academic discourse.
"substantial amounts of fossil fuel" -> "significant quantities of fossil fuels"
Explanation: The replacement of "amounts" with "quantities" and the adjustment to "fossil fuels" instead of "fossil fuel" contribute to a more precise and formal expression.
"noxious pollutants" -> "harmful pollutants"
Explanation: Substituting "noxious" with "harmful" maintains the intended meaning while using a more common and neutral term in academic writing.
"restricting air travel alone" -> "solely restricting air travel"
Explanation: Rearranging the words to "solely restricting air travel" maintains clarity and aligns with a more formal structure.
"may not be the primary source of emissions" -> "might not constitute the primary source of emissions"
Explanation: The replacement of "may not be" with "might not constitute" adds precision and formality to the statement.
"comprehensive solution should involve" -> "comprehensive solution should encompass"
Explanation: Replacing "involve" with "encompass" maintains the idea of a comprehensive solution while using a more formal term.
"cars, motorbikes, and heavy industry" -> "automobiles, motorcycles, and heavy industries"
Explanation: Substituting "cars" with "automobiles" and "motorbikes" with "motorcycles" provides a more formal and precise terminology commonly used in academic writing.
"emission policies" -> "emission control policies"
Explanation: Adding "control" after "emission" contributes to a more precise and formal expression, clarifying the purpose of the policies.
"banning these vehicles" -> "prohibiting these vehicles"
Explanation: Replacing "banning" with "prohibiting" maintains the meaning while using a more formal and commonly accepted term in academic writing.
"levying greater monetary punishments" -> "imposing more substantial financial penalties"
Explanation: Substituting "levying greater monetary punishments" with "imposing more substantial financial penalties" introduces a more formal and elaborate expression.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question: Characteristic of Band 7
- Detailed explanation: The essay adequately addresses all parts of the prompt. It acknowledges the potential impact of limiting air travel on reducing air pollution and provides a balanced view by introducing alternative measures.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, consider providing a more explicit roadmap in the introduction, outlining the points that will be discussed in favor of and against limiting air travel.
Present a Clear Position Throughout: Characteristic of Band 7
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position that limiting air travel is not the most effective solution to reducing air pollution. This stance is consistently developed and supported throughout the essay.
- How to improve: To further strengthen the position, consider providing more specific examples or data to illustrate the limitations of relying solely on restricting air travel.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas: Characteristic of Band 8
- Detailed explanation: The ideas in the essay are relevant, extended, and well-supported. Each point is elaborated upon, and examples are provided to support the arguments.
- How to improve: To elevate the score, aim for even greater depth in the development of ideas. Consider incorporating more varied and nuanced examples or counterarguments to demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the topic.
Stay on Topic: Characteristic of Band 7
- Detailed explanation: The essay remains focused on the topic of limiting air travel and its effectiveness in reducing air pollution. There are no significant deviations.
- How to improve: To enhance coherence, ensure that each paragraph is tightly connected to the main topic. Consider using topic sentences that explicitly link back to the thesis and the overall argument.

Overall Comments:
The essay effectively addresses the prompt and demonstrates a clear understanding of the topic. To improve, focus on providing a more explicit roadmap in the introduction, incorporating specific examples or data to support arguments, and further deepening the development of ideas. Additionally, maintain tight coherence within paragraphs to strengthen the overall structure of the essay. Overall, a well-argued and well-organized response.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically: Characteristic of Band 6
- Detailed Explanation: The essay demonstrates a mostly coherent arrangement of ideas and maintains a clear overall structure. The introduction provides a clear stance on the issue, followed by well-organized body paragraphs that present arguments for and against the idea of limiting air travel. The conclusion summarizes the main points effectively. However, there is room for improvement in the logical progression within paragraphs. Some ideas could be connected more smoothly, enhancing the overall coherence.
- How to Improve: To enhance the logical flow, consider using transitional phrases at the beginning of each paragraph to signal the relationship between ideas. Additionally, ensure that each paragraph has a clear central point and that sentences within the paragraph contribute to the development of that point.
Use Paragraphs: Characteristic of Band 7
- Detailed Explanation: Paragraphing is generally effective, with mostly logical idea sequencing. The essay is divided into well-structured paragraphs, each addressing a specific aspect of the argument. The ideas within paragraphs are developed coherently, and there is a clear progression of thought. However, a few transitions between paragraphs could be smoother for a more seamless flow.
- How to Improve: Pay attention to the transitions between paragraphs. Use transition words or phrases to guide the reader from one idea to the next. Ensure that the opening sentence of each paragraph introduces the main idea, and the closing sentence summarizes or transitions to the next point.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices: Characteristic of Band 7
- Detailed Explanation: The essay exhibits a flexible use of cohesive devices, contributing to overall coherence. There is a commendable variety of linking words and phrases, aiding the reader in following the argument. However, there are instances where the use of cohesive devices is not entirely accurate or where their amounts may be deemed inappropriate for optimal coherence.
- How to Improve: Review the instances where cohesive devices may be inaccurate or inappropriate. Ensure that the chosen cohesive devices precisely convey the intended relationships between ideas. Additionally, strive for a more consistent use of cohesive devices throughout the essay to maintain a smooth and cohesive narrative.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid organizational structure, improvements can be made in the logical progression within paragraphs and the seamless transition between ideas. Further refinement in the use of cohesive devices will contribute to a more polished and cohesive essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary: Characteristic of Band 7
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a satisfactory range of vocabulary, allowing for some flexibility and precision. For instance, it appropriately employs terms such as "curb," "noxious pollutants," and "alleviate air pollution." However, there is room for improvement in diversifying the vocabulary further. The use of more sophisticated and varied expressions could enhance the overall richness of the language and contribute to a more convincing argument.
- How to improve: Consider incorporating a broader array of vocabulary to add depth to your arguments. For instance, instead of frequently using terms like "air pollution," explore alternatives such as "environmental contamination" or "atmospheric degradation" where contextually appropriate.
Use Vocabulary Precisely: Characteristic of Band 6
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally conveys clear meaning, despite occasional limitations in the range and precision of vocabulary. The use of phrases like "reasonable to assume" and "negligible compared to these major emitters" contributes to clarity. However, there are instances where a more precise choice of words could elevate the argument’s sophistication.
- How to improve: Aim for a higher level of precision by carefully selecting words that precisely convey your intended meaning. For example, instead of using the broad term "proper emission policies," you might specify policies such as "stringent regulatory measures" or "comprehensive environmental protocols."
Use Correct Spelling: Characteristic of Band 7
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a high level of spelling accuracy, with few errors that do not significantly detract from overall clarity. This reflects a commendable command of spelling conventions.
- How to improve: Continue this careful attention to spelling, and consider incorporating advanced vocabulary with equal precision to showcase a consistently high linguistic standard.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid command of vocabulary and spelling, there is an opportunity to elevate the language by incorporating a more diverse and sophisticated range of expressions. Additionally, aiming for greater precision in vocabulary choices can enhance the overall effectiveness of the argument. Keep refining your language skills to achieve a higher band score in Lexical Resource.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

Use a Wide Range of Structures: Characteristic of Band 7
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable range of structures, utilizing varied sentence structures with considerable flexibility and accuracy. Complex sentence structures are employed effectively, enhancing the overall coherence and depth of the essay. For instance, the essay incorporates conditional sentences ("Although some believe… I am of the opinion that"), causal relationships ("Consequently, traveling by plane becomes a source of CO2"), and contrast ("However, it is crucial to recognize that…"). The use of these structures contributes to a nuanced and cohesive argument.
- How to improve: To further enrich the diversity of sentence structures, consider integrating more compound-complex sentences or employing rhetorical devices like parallelism or inversion. This can add sophistication to the essay’s structure and elevate the overall quality by creating a more varied rhythm.
Use Grammar Accurately: Characteristic of Band 8
- Detailed explanation: The essay showcases a high level of grammatical accuracy, with minimal errors that do not impede the overall clarity of the message. Sentences are largely error-free, with occasional minor errors that do not significantly affect understanding. An example of such minor error might be the phrase "levying greater monetary punishments on emissions," where the preposition "on" could be revised for clarity ("for emissions" might be more suitable). Overall, the essay maintains a strong command of grammar throughout.
- How to improve: Continue to focus on maintaining this level of accuracy while aiming for even greater precision. Review instances where prepositions or articles might slightly affect the clarity of the sentence, ensuring absolute precision in conveying ideas.
Use Correct Punctuation: Characteristic of Band 7
- Detailed explanation: Punctuation is generally well-controlled throughout the essay. Commas, semicolons, and periods are used effectively to separate ideas and clarify the flow of the argument. However, there might be a few instances where the use of punctuation could be refined for enhanced readability and emphasis. For example, consider using dashes or colons to add emphasis or to introduce a list more distinctly.
- How to improve: Experiment with a wider array of punctuation marks, such as dashes or colons, to provide greater emphasis and clarity where needed. This could elevate the essay’s readability and accentuate specific points.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong command of grammar and sentence structure, showcasing a commendable range of complex structures with notable accuracy. To further enhance the essay, aim to diversify sentence structures even more and refine punctuation choices for increased emphasis and clarity. Great work overall!

Bài sửa mẫu

While some argue that restricting air travel is a effective strategy to mitigate air pollution, I contend that there are more comprehensive solutions to address this issue.

It is indisputable that limiting air travel can help mitigate air pollution. Large planes, carrying numerous passengers and cargo over long distances, consume significant quantities of fossil fuels. As a result, harmful pollutants, such as CO2, are released into the atmosphere. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that imposing restrictions on air travel might help reduce air pollution to some extent.

However, it is essential to acknowledge that solely restricting air travel might not constitute the primary source of emissions. A more comprehensive solution should encompass addressing emissions from ground-based vehicles and factories. In many developing countries, where automobiles, motorcycles, and heavy industries are prevalent, the emissions from airplanes may be negligible compared to these major contributors. Without the implementation of effective emission control policies, such as prohibiting certain vehicles or imposing more substantial financial penalties for toxic fume mismanagement, the air quality would continue to deteriorate, even with strict limitations on air travel.

In conclusion, while some argue that limiting air travel is the optimal method to reduce air pollution, it is indisputable that there are more effective solutions. Instead, a comprehensive approach that includes prohibiting specific ground-based transport means and imposing heavier monetary penalties on emissions should be considered for a more impactful reduction in air pollution.