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.

I would be argued by some that we should carry on to use fossil fuels when it is still cheap to do.In my opinion,netherless,infinite energy sources like solar and wind power should replace fossil fuels such as coal and gas as soon as possible.
On the one hand,there are a number of reasons why some belive that we should continue to use fossil fuels while it is still inexpensive to do so.The first reason is fossil fuels such as coal or natural gas is cheap to do,therefore,it can help to save money and stable family’s economic.For example,my family had consumed coal over the past year when we encounter financial difficulties.Another reason is because of having price cheap,it will be consumed significantly in market and help development of the economic in country.Vietnam,which one of the most places famous about the main improve fossil fuels in the wolrd,is depending on fossil fuels develop the economic.
On the other hand,i would argue that renewable energy sources like solar and wind power should replace fossil fuels such as coal and gas as soon as possible.In contrast,if the exploitation of natural resources like coal or gas will be run out natural resources,it will lead to pose a serious threat to people and the environment.For example,environment was destroyed by the exploition,it will lead to environmental degradation,global warming and the people’s heath will affect.
In conclusion,although some people think that we should continue to use fossil fuels while it is still cheap to do so,I personally believe that infinite energy sources like solar and wind power should replace fossil fuels such as coal and gas as soon as possible.

---

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

1. "I would be argued by some" -> "It is argued by some"
   Explanation: The phrase "I would be argued by some" is grammatically incorrect and awkward. "It is argued by some" corrects the grammatical structure and maintains a formal tone.

2. "carry on to use" -> "continue to use"
   Explanation: "Carry on to use" is an informal and less precise expression. "Continue to use" is more formal and appropriate for academic writing.

3. "netherless" -> "nevertheless"
   Explanation: "Netherless" is a typographical error and not a standard word. "Nevertheless" is the correct term for indicating a contrast.

4. "infinite energy sources" -> "inexhaustible energy sources"
   Explanation: "Infinite" incorrectly implies that the energy sources are limitless, which is not accurate. "Inexhaustible" correctly conveys that the sources are capable of being used without depletion.

5. "fossil fuels such as coal or natural gas is cheap to do" -> "fossil fuels such as coal or natural gas are relatively inexpensive"
   Explanation: The original phrase is grammatically incorrect and awkward. The suggested revision corrects the grammar and uses a more precise adjective ("relatively inexpensive") that is suitable for formal writing.

6. "it can help to save money and stable family’s economic" -> "it can help stabilize family finances"
   Explanation: The original phrase is awkward and grammatically incorrect. The revision simplifies and clarifies the meaning, improving readability and formality.

7. "having price cheap,it will be consumed significantly in market" -> "being relatively inexpensive, it will be consumed significantly in the market"
   Explanation: The original phrase is grammatically incorrect and unclear. The revision corrects the grammar and clarifies the meaning by specifying "the market."

8. "help development of the economic in country" -> "aid economic development in the country"
   Explanation: The original phrase is grammatically incorrect and awkward. The suggested revision corrects the grammar and uses a more formal expression.

9. "which one of the most places famous about the main improve fossil fuels in the wolrd" -> "which is one of the most prominent countries in the world for fossil fuel development"
   Explanation: The original sentence is grammatically incorrect and unclear. The revision corrects the grammar and clarifies the meaning, making it more precise and formal.

10. "i would argue" -> "I would argue"
    Explanation: The original capitalization is incorrect. "I" should be capitalized as the first-person singular pronoun in formal writing.

11. "if the exploitation of natural resources like coal or gas will be run out natural resources" -> "if the exploitation of natural resources such as coal or gas exhausts them"
    Explanation: The original phrase is grammatically incorrect and awkward. The revision corrects the grammar and clarifies the meaning.

12. "pose a serious threat to people and the environment" -> "pose a significant threat to both people and the environment"
    Explanation: The original phrase is vague and lacks specificity. The revision adds clarity and emphasizes the severity of the threat.

13. "environment was destroyed by the exploition,it will lead to environmental degradation,global warming and the people’s heath will affect" -> "environmental degradation, global warming, and adverse health effects will result from the exploitation"
    Explanation: The original sentence is grammatically incorrect and awkward. The revision corrects the grammar and clarifies the consequences of exploitation in a more formal and precise manner.

14. "although some people think" -> "although some argue"
    Explanation: "Think" is too informal for academic writing. "Argue" is more appropriate and formal, fitting the context of a discussion or debate.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

• Answer All Parts of the Question:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to address both sides of the argument. It briefly discusses the viewpoint favoring continued use of fossil fuels due to economic reasons but lacks depth in explaining this perspective. The essay then focuses more extensively on advocating for renewable energy sources, outlining reasons such as environmental concerns.
  • How to improve: To improve, the essay should provide a more balanced and comprehensive analysis of both viewpoints. It should delve deeper into economic considerations supporting fossil fuels and present a more nuanced comparison with renewable energy sources.

• Present a Clear Position Throughout:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay’s position is clear—it strongly advocates for the replacement of fossil fuels with renewable energy sources. This stance is consistently maintained throughout the essay.
  • How to improve: While maintaining clarity is important, the essay could benefit from acknowledging opposing views more explicitly, which would demonstrate a more sophisticated understanding of the topic.

• Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas but lacks coherence and development. Examples provided (e.g., economic benefits of fossil fuels) are simplistic and lack detail. Arguments for renewable energy are presented more elaborately but lack specific examples or evidence.
  • How to improve: To enhance the essay, each idea should be developed with more depth and clarity. Providing concrete examples, statistics, or case studies would strengthen arguments and substantiate claims effectively.

• Stay on Topic:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic by discussing the issue of renewable versus fossil fuels. However, there are instances where the argument lacks focus, such as brief mentions of personal examples that do not directly relate to the topic.
  • How to improve: To improve focus, ensure that all examples and arguments directly contribute to discussing the prompt. Avoid tangential references that do not contribute substantively to the central argument.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a clear stance and attempts to address the prompt, there are areas for improvement in depth of analysis, coherence of ideas, and development of supporting evidence. Enhancing these aspects would likely result in a higher band score for Task Response.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

• Organize Information Logically:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a basic attempt at organizing information. It opens with a clear statement of the two opposing views but lacks consistent logical progression throughout. There are abrupt shifts between discussing reasons to continue using fossil fuels and advocating for renewable energy sources without smooth transitions.
  • How to improve: To enhance logical flow, the essay should utilize clearer topic sentences at the beginning of paragraphs to guide the reader through the argument. Each paragraph should focus on a single main idea and link back to the thesis statement, providing a cohesive narrative structure.

• Use Paragraphs:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to use paragraphs, but their structure is inconsistent. Some paragraphs contain multiple ideas, making it challenging to follow the argument cohesively. For instance, the paragraph discussing reasons to continue using fossil fuels includes both economic benefits and market consumption impact.
  • How to improve: Each paragraph should focus on developing a single aspect of the argument clearly and concisely. Separate paragraphs should be used for discussing reasons supporting fossil fuel use and arguments favoring renewable energy sources. This will improve readability and coherence.

• Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay lacks variety in cohesive devices. While some basic cohesive devices like ‘on the one hand’, ‘on the other hand’, and ‘in conclusion’ are used, they are repetitive and don’t effectively connect ideas. Additionally, there are instances where pronouns and conjunctions are used incorrectly, impacting clarity.
  • How to improve: To enhance coherence, the essay should incorporate a wider range of cohesive devices such as conjunctions (‘although’, ‘however’, ‘therefore’), pronouns (‘this’, ‘these’), and synonyms to avoid repetition. These devices should be used correctly to clearly link ideas within and between paragraphs, improving overall cohesion.

In summary, while the essay addresses the prompt and presents arguments on both sides of the issue, improvements in organizing information logically, structuring paragraphs effectively, and using diverse cohesive devices are necessary to elevate coherence and cohesion to a higher band score level. By implementing these suggestions, the essay can achieve greater clarity and coherence, enhancing its overall effectiveness in communicating the writer’s ideas.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 9

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 9

• Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable range of vocabulary, with varied expressions such as "infinite energy sources," "exploitation of natural resources," "environmental degradation," and "global warming." These terms are appropriate and effectively convey the writer’s ideas on the topic.
  • How to improve: To further enhance lexical resource, consider integrating more sophisticated synonyms and idiomatic expressions where possible. For instance, instead of "infinite energy sources," using "sustainable energy alternatives" could add nuance. Additionally, aim for greater precision in the choice of vocabulary to elevate the sophistication of the argument.

• Use Vocabulary Precisely:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary with reasonable precision. For instance, terms like "environmental degradation" and "global warming" are correctly employed to describe specific environmental issues related to fossil fuel use.
  • How to improve: To improve precision, focus on using vocabulary that precisely matches the intended meaning. For example, instead of "run out natural resources," consider "deplete natural resources" for clearer communication. Additionally, ensure that the context supports the usage of each word choice to avoid ambiguity or over-generalization.

• Use Correct Spelling:

  • Detailed explanation: There are several spelling errors throughout the essay, such as "belive" instead of "believe," "wolrd" instead of "world," and "heath" instead of "health." These errors, while not overly frequent, detract from the overall professionalism of the essay.
  • How to improve: Improving spelling accuracy can be achieved through careful proofreading and utilizing spell-check tools. Taking time to review each word and ensuring familiarity with common spelling conventions can significantly reduce errors. Additionally, practicing writing under timed conditions with a focus on accuracy can help develop better spelling habits.

In conclusion, while the essay demonstrates a strong lexical resource overall, with a wide range of vocabulary and generally precise usage, attention to detail in spelling is recommended to elevate the coherence and professionalism of the writing. By refining vocabulary choices and ensuring accurate spelling, the essay could further enhance its effectiveness in communicating complex ideas on the topic of renewable energy versus fossil fuels.

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 basic range of sentence structures, including simple and compound sentences. There is an attempt at using complex sentences, albeit with inconsistencies in their execution. For instance, "I would be argued by some that we should carry on to use fossil fuels when it is still cheap to do" attempts a complex structure but lacks clarity and coherence. The essay would benefit from more varied sentence structures such as conditional sentences, relative clauses, and passive constructions to enhance coherence and complexity.
  • How to improve: To diversify sentence structures effectively, consider incorporating more complex sentence forms. For example, integrate conditional statements to discuss hypothetical scenarios ("If renewable energy were implemented more widely, the environmental impact would decrease"). Additionally, use relative clauses to provide additional information ("Countries which heavily rely on fossil fuels may face economic challenges"). These structures can enhance clarity and demonstrate a higher level of grammatical sophistication.

• Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay displays frequent grammatical errors throughout, impacting clarity and coherence. Examples include errors in subject-verb agreement ("there are a number of reasons why some belive"), incorrect word usage ("netherless"), and inconsistent punctuation ("On the one hand,there are a number of reasons…"). These errors detract from the overall fluency and readability of the essay.
  • How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, focus on fundamental aspects such as subject-verb agreement, correct usage of articles and prepositions, and consistent punctuation. For instance, revise sentences for clarity and accuracy ("Some believe that we should continue to use fossil fuels while they are still inexpensive"). Additionally, pay attention to sentence structure to ensure that ideas are expressed clearly and logically. Practicing sentence construction and proofreading carefully before submission can help in identifying and correcting these errors.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates an attempt to present ideas with some complexity and clarity, significant improvements in grammatical accuracy and sentence structure diversity are necessary to achieve a higher band score in Grammatical Range and Accuracy. By refining these aspects, the essay can enhance its coherence, fluency, and overall effectiveness in conveying the writer’s viewpoint.

Bài sửa mẫu

Some argue that we should continue to use fossil fuels while they remain inexpensive. However, I believe that renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power should replace coal and gas as soon as possible.

On one hand, there are several reasons why some advocate for continued use of fossil fuels while they are cheap. Firstly, fossil fuels like coal and natural gas are relatively inexpensive, which can stabilize family finances. For instance, my own family turned to coal during financial difficulties last year. Additionally, their affordability ensures high consumption rates, thereby aiding economic development. Vietnam, a prominent player in fossil fuel extraction, relies heavily on these resources for economic growth.

On the other hand, I would argue that renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power should swiftly replace fossil fuels. If we exhaust non-renewable resources like coal and gas, it poses significant threats to both people and the environment. The exploitation of these resources leads to environmental degradation, contributes to global warming, and negatively impacts public health.

In conclusion, while some advocate for the continued use of fossil fuels due to their current affordability, I firmly believe that transitioning to renewable energy sources like solar and wind power should be prioritized. This shift is crucial to mitigate environmental risks and secure a sustainable energy future.