Some people think that renewable energy sources like solar and wind power should replace fossil fuels such as coal and gas as soon as possible. Others think we should continue to use fossil fuels while it is still cheap to do so. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Some people think that renewable energy sources like solar and wind power should replace fossil fuels such as coal and gas as soon as possible. Others think we should continue to use fossil fuels while it is still cheap to do so. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
The arguments between what energy resources is better for our live, renewable energy like wind and power or fossil fuels, have been rising for a long time. Each energy sources has both benefits and drawbacks, let dive into this two opposite views.
To start with, fossil fuels is more familiar with almost people because of its longevity and cheap price. Especially in a developing country like Vietnam, where most of people’s income have not been high yet, fossil fuels dominate the use of energy.It is more convenient and cheaper to extract, process, transport, manufacture, as we had infrastructures and machines to do this. However, fossil fuels harm our environment seriously, emissions, waste form extracting, processing released into atmosphere can cause some diseases related to lung, breathe, skin.
On the other hand, renewable energy like wind and solar is a very useful replacement in long-term. Although there are some disadvantages like high cost to build new facilities to extract and use in normal life, we can not deny its long-term benefits. In my opinion, these sources are the best for environment and humanity’ s health if it is widely used without any cost barriers. And this beautiful scenario takes a really long time to become reality.
In conclusion, fossil fuels will be replaced by renewable energy sources for better world, better health, but it will not happen overnight.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
-
"what energy resources is better for our live" -> "which energy resources are better for our lives"
Explanation: "What" should be replaced with "which" for grammatical correctness, and "our live" should be "our lives" to correct the noun form and maintain the formal tone. -
"wind and power" -> "wind and solar power"
Explanation: "Power" is not a specific type of energy; "solar power" is the correct term for energy generated from the sun. -
"Each energy sources has" -> "Each energy source has"
Explanation: "Sources" should be singular "source" to agree with the singular verb "has." -
"let dive into this two opposite views" -> "let us delve into these two opposing views"
Explanation: "Let dive" is informal and incorrect; "let us delve" is more formal and appropriate. "This two" should be "these two" for grammatical correctness, and "opposite views" should be "opposing views" for a more precise term. -
"fossil fuels is" -> "fossil fuels are"
Explanation: "Fossil fuels" is a plural noun and requires the plural verb "are." -
"almost people’s income have not been high yet" -> "most people’s incomes have not been high"
Explanation: "Almost people" is incorrect; "most people" is the correct phrase. "Income" should be plural to match the plural subject "people." -
"fossil fuels dominate the use of energy" -> "fossil fuels dominate energy use"
Explanation: Simplifying "the use of energy" to "energy use" enhances clarity and formality. -
"as we had infrastructures and machines to do this" -> "as we have the necessary infrastructure and machinery"
Explanation: "Had" is past tense, which is incorrect in this context; "have" is needed for the present tense. "Infrastructures and machines" should be "the necessary infrastructure and machinery" for precision and formality. -
"emissions, waste form extracting, processing released into atmosphere" -> "emissions and waste generated from extraction and processing, which are released into the atmosphere"
Explanation: This revision clarifies the sentence structure and uses more precise language, improving readability and formality. -
"can cause some diseases related to lung, breathe, skin" -> "can cause respiratory and skin diseases"
Explanation: "Diseases related to lung, breathe, skin" is awkward and incorrect; "respiratory and skin diseases" is a more precise and formal way to express the health impacts. -
"renewable energy like wind and solar is" -> "renewable energy sources such as wind and solar"
Explanation: "Like" is informal and vague; "such as" is more precise and formal. "Is" should be "are" to agree with the plural subject "energy sources." -
"we can not deny its long-term benefits" -> "we cannot deny its long-term benefits"
Explanation: "Can not" should be "cannot" for grammatical correctness. -
"And this beautiful scenario takes a really long time to become reality" -> "This scenario, however, will take a considerable amount of time to become a reality"
Explanation: "And this beautiful scenario" is informal and subjective; "This scenario, however" is more objective and formal. "Really long time" is vague; "a considerable amount of time" is more precise. -
"better world, better health, but it will not happen overnight" -> "a better world and improved health, but this will not occur overnight"
Explanation: "Better world, better health" is informal and lacks conjunction; "a better world and improved health" is more formal and grammatically correct. "It will not happen" should be "this will not occur" for consistency in subject-verb agreement.
Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 5
Band Score for Task Response: 5 – UNDER WORD
-
Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to address both views regarding the use of renewable energy versus fossil fuels. However, it lacks a thorough exploration of each perspective. For instance, while the benefits of fossil fuels are mentioned, the discussion on renewable energy is somewhat superficial, focusing mainly on its long-term benefits without adequately addressing its current limitations or the reasons some may prefer to continue using fossil fuels. The essay also does not explicitly state the author’s opinion until the latter part, which may confuse readers about the overall stance.
- How to improve: To enhance this aspect, the writer should ensure that both views are discussed in more depth. Each side should be presented with clear arguments, including specific examples or statistics that support the claims. Additionally, the writer should explicitly state their opinion earlier in the essay to guide the reader’s understanding.
-
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The position is somewhat present but lacks clarity and consistency. The author states a preference for renewable energy in the conclusion but does not consistently reinforce this opinion throughout the essay. The introduction suggests a debate without clearly indicating the author’s stance, which may leave readers uncertain about the writer’s viewpoint.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear position, the writer should explicitly state their opinion in the introduction and refer back to it throughout the essay. Using phrases like "I believe" or "In my view" can help clarify the position. Additionally, reinforcing the opinion with supporting arguments in each paragraph will create a more cohesive narrative.
-
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents some ideas, but they are not well-developed or supported. For example, while it mentions the environmental harm caused by fossil fuels, it does not elaborate on the specific impacts or provide evidence to back up these claims. Similarly, the advantages of renewable energy are mentioned but not sufficiently detailed or supported with examples.
- How to improve: To improve this aspect, the writer should aim to elaborate on each point made. This could involve providing specific examples, such as statistics on emissions from fossil fuels or case studies of successful renewable energy projects. Additionally, using more varied vocabulary and complex sentence structures can enhance the depth of the discussion.
-
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, discussing renewable energy and fossil fuels. However, there are moments where the focus wavers, particularly in the transition between discussing fossil fuels and renewable energy. The phrase "this beautiful scenario takes a really long time to become reality" is vague and does not clearly relate back to the main arguments.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that every sentence contributes to the overall argument and directly relates to the prompt. Avoiding vague language and ensuring that transitions between points are clear and relevant will help keep the essay on topic. Each paragraph should ideally start with a topic sentence that clearly states what that paragraph will discuss.
In summary, to improve the essay and potentially raise the band score, the writer should aim for a more balanced and detailed discussion of both views, maintain a clear and consistent position, support ideas with specific examples, and ensure that the essay remains focused on the topic throughout. Additionally, addressing the word count requirement will also be essential for achieving a higher score.
Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7
Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7
-
Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear structure, introducing the topic and discussing both sides of the argument. The initial paragraph outlines the debate between renewable and fossil fuels, while subsequent paragraphs explore the advantages and disadvantages of each. However, the logical flow could be improved. For instance, the transition from discussing fossil fuels to renewable energy could be smoother. The phrase "On the other hand" is used, but the connection between the two ideas could be more explicitly stated to enhance clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using clearer topic sentences for each paragraph that directly relate back to the essay prompt. Additionally, employing transitional phrases that summarize the previous point before introducing the next can help guide the reader through the argument more effectively.
-
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is a strength. However, the paragraphs could be more effectively structured. For example, the first paragraph could be divided into two: one focusing on the introduction of the topic and the other detailing the advantages of fossil fuels. This would allow for a more focused discussion within each paragraph and improve readability.
- How to improve: Aim to ensure that each paragraph contains a single main idea, supported by examples or explanations. For instance, the paragraph discussing fossil fuels could be split into two: one discussing its familiarity and affordability, and the other addressing environmental concerns. This would provide clearer focus and enhance the overall coherence of the essay.
-
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "On the other hand" and "To start with," which help to connect ideas. However, there is a limited range of cohesive devices used, and some sentences lack clear connections. For example, the transition between the discussion of fossil fuels and renewable energy could benefit from additional linking words or phrases to clarify the relationship between the two arguments.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, consider incorporating a wider range of linking words and phrases, such as "Furthermore," "In contrast," "Moreover," and "Consequently." This will not only improve the flow of ideas but also enhance the overall coherence of the essay. Additionally, ensure that each sentence logically follows from the previous one to maintain a smooth narrative.
By addressing these areas for improvement, the essay can achieve a higher level of coherence and cohesion, potentially raising the band score in this criterion.
Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6
Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6
-
Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a moderate range of vocabulary related to the topic of energy resources. Terms such as "renewable energy," "fossil fuels," "emissions," and "infrastructure" are appropriately used. However, the vocabulary is somewhat repetitive, with phrases like "fossil fuels" and "renewable energy" appearing multiple times without variation. For example, "fossil fuels dominate the use of energy" could have been expressed with synonyms or paraphrased to enhance variety.
- How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate synonyms and related terms. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "fossil fuels," alternatives like "non-renewable energy sources" or "traditional energy" could diversify the vocabulary. Additionally, using more advanced terms related to energy efficiency or environmental impact could elevate the lexical range.
-
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: There are instances of imprecise vocabulary usage that detract from the clarity of the argument. For example, the phrase "what energy resources is better for our live" contains grammatical errors and awkward phrasing. The term "live" should be "lives," and the structure could be more clearly articulated as "which energy resource is better for our lives." Additionally, "harm our environment seriously" could be more precisely stated as "significantly harm our environment."
- How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on grammatical accuracy and clarity. Revising sentences for grammatical correctness and ensuring that word choices accurately convey the intended meaning will strengthen the essay. Utilizing a thesaurus to find more precise terms can also aid in this improvement.
-
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "let dive" (should be "let’s dive"), "almost people" (should be "almost everyone"), and "breathe" (should be "breathing"). These errors can distract the reader and undermine the overall professionalism of the writing.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the essay carefully, ideally reading it aloud to catch errors. Utilizing spell-check tools and practicing common spelling rules can also be beneficial. Additionally, maintaining a list of commonly misspelled words and reviewing them regularly can help solidify correct spelling in future writings.
In summary, while the essay demonstrates a foundational understanding of the topic and employs relevant vocabulary, there are notable areas for improvement in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling accuracy. By focusing on these aspects, the writer can enhance the overall quality of their writing and potentially achieve a higher band score in the Lexical Resource criterion.
Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5
Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 5
-
Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of sentence structures. Most sentences are simple or compound, such as "To start with, fossil fuels is more familiar with almost people because of its longevity and cheap price." This sentence structure is straightforward but lacks complexity. The use of phrases like "let dive into this two opposite views" indicates a lack of varied sentence forms, which can lead to a monotonous reading experience.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety of sentence structures, the writer should incorporate complex sentences that include subordinate clauses. For example, instead of saying "fossil fuels is more familiar with almost people," the writer could say, "Although fossil fuels are more familiar to many people, their long-term environmental impact cannot be ignored." This not only adds complexity but also improves the flow of ideas.
-
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues. For instance, "Each energy sources has both benefits and drawbacks" should be "Each energy source has both benefits and drawbacks." Additionally, the phrase "let dive into this two opposite views" should be corrected to "let’s dive into these two opposing views." Punctuation errors are also present, such as the lack of commas in complex sentences, which can lead to run-on sentences. For example, "fossil fuels harm our environment seriously, emissions, waste form extracting, processing released into atmosphere can cause some diseases related to lung, breathe, skin" is a run-on sentence that lacks clarity.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement and the correct use of singular/plural forms. Regular practice with grammar exercises and reviewing common grammatical rules can help. For punctuation, the writer should pay attention to the use of commas to separate clauses and items in a list. Reading the essay aloud can also help identify areas where punctuation is needed for clarity.
By addressing these areas, the writer can work towards achieving a higher band score in Grammatical Range and Accuracy.
Bài sửa mẫu
The debate over which energy resources are better for our lives—renewable energy sources like wind and solar power or fossil fuels—has been ongoing for a considerable time. Each energy source has its own benefits and drawbacks; let us delve into these two opposing views.
To start with, fossil fuels are more familiar to most people due to their longevity and low cost. Especially in developing countries like Vietnam, where most people’s incomes have not been high, fossil fuels dominate energy use. It is more convenient and cheaper to extract, process, transport, and manufacture fossil fuels, as we have the necessary infrastructure and machinery in place. However, fossil fuels seriously harm our environment; the emissions and waste generated from extraction and processing, which are released into the atmosphere, can cause respiratory and skin diseases.
On the other hand, renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power present a valuable long-term alternative. Although there are some disadvantages, such as the high costs associated with building new facilities to harness these energies, we cannot deny their long-term benefits. In my opinion, these sources are the best for the environment and humanity’s health if they are widely adopted without any cost barriers. This scenario, however, will take a considerable amount of time to become a reality.
In conclusion, fossil fuels will eventually be replaced by renewable energy sources for a better world and improved health, but this will not occur overnight.