Task 2: With the increasing demand for energy sources of oil and gas, people should look for sources of oil and gas in remote and untouched natural places. Do the advantages outweigh disadvantages of damaging such areas?
Task 2: With the increasing demand for energy sources of oil and gas, people should look for sources of oil and gas in remote and untouched natural places. Do the advantages outweigh disadvantages of damaging such areas?
In this day and age, the need for consumption of oil and gas is increasing. Therefore, there are firms that are looking for sources to respond to energy production in distant areas and untouched natural places. This trend would introduce both negative aspects and positive aspects, but I think its drawbacks could be more significant.
On the one hand, there is no doubt that if people explored the sources in alternate sites, it would ensure human – life and the development of distinct economic countries. After having been sources, the quantity of energy will be increased significantly, thus tackling energy issues. Additionally, the price of consumption for energy may be cut down because there are a lot of choices for consuming it.
However, I argue that the disadvantages of this solution would be more considerable. In fact, finding and digging sources, many businesses have spreadly destroyed the environment in remote areas, resulting in the vast quantities of greenhouse gasses released into the atmosphere that caused the unexplained phenomena. Moreover, were people to go on affecting the environment, it would be ecological destruction. Because of requiring the infrastructure, certain energy sources can alter the ecosystem of the place where it is built. Building plantations for oil and gas energy, for instance, can lose the habitat for the flora and fauna.
To sum up, I’m convinced that this trend would introduce both negative aspects and positive aspects, but I think its drawbacks could be more significant. By weighing up both pros and cons of demanding for natural energy sources, people could make the best decision for their life.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
-
"In this day and age" -> "Currently"
Explanation: "In this day and age" is a colloquial expression. "Currently" is more formal and suitable for academic writing. -
"the need for consumption of oil and gas is increasing" -> "the demand for oil and gas is increasing"
Explanation: "The need for consumption" is redundant as "demand" already implies the necessity of consumption. Simplifying to "demand" enhances clarity and formality. -
"there are firms that are looking for sources to respond to energy production" -> "companies are seeking alternative sources to meet energy production needs"
Explanation: "Looking for sources to respond to" is awkward and unclear. "Seeking alternative sources to meet energy production needs" is more direct and precise. -
"distant areas and untouched natural places" -> "remote and pristine natural areas"
Explanation: "Untouched natural places" is vague and informal. "Pristine natural areas" is more specific and academically appropriate. -
"it would introduce both negative aspects and positive aspects" -> "it would present both negative and positive aspects"
Explanation: "Introduce" is less formal and slightly vague in this context. "Present" is more precise and formal. -
"its drawbacks could be more significant" -> "its drawbacks may be more substantial"
Explanation: "Could be" is less definitive and slightly informal. "May be" is more tentative and appropriate for academic writing, while "substantial" is a more precise term than "significant." -
"human – life" -> "human life"
Explanation: The hyphen in "human – life" is incorrect and informal. "Human life" is the correct form. -
"the development of distinct economic countries" -> "the economic development of distinct countries"
Explanation: "Distinct economic countries" is awkward and unclear. "The economic development of distinct countries" is grammatically correct and clearer. -
"After having been sources" -> "After sourcing"
Explanation: "After having been sources" is awkward and unclear. "After sourcing" is more direct and formal. -
"the quantity of energy will be increased significantly" -> "energy production will increase significantly"
Explanation: "The quantity of energy will be increased" is verbose and awkward. "Energy production will increase" is more concise and formal. -
"the price of consumption for energy may be cut down" -> "energy costs may be reduced"
Explanation: "The price of consumption for energy" is redundant and verbose. "Energy costs" is more direct and appropriate for formal writing. -
"there are a lot of choices for consuming it" -> "there are numerous options for energy consumption"
Explanation: "A lot of choices" is informal and vague. "Numerous options" is more precise and formal. -
"spreadly destroyed the environment" -> "have significantly damaged the environment"
Explanation: "Spreadly" is not a word. "Have significantly damaged" is correct and formal. -
"the vast quantities of greenhouse gasses" -> "large amounts of greenhouse gases"
Explanation: "Vast quantities" is slightly informal and less precise. "Large amounts" is more commonly used in formal writing. -
"caused the unexplained phenomena" -> "caused unexplained phenomena"
Explanation: "The unexplained phenomena" is grammatically incorrect. "Unexplained phenomena" is the correct form. -
"were people to go on affecting the environment" -> "if environmental degradation continues"
Explanation: "Were people to go on affecting the environment" is awkward and verbose. "If environmental degradation continues" is concise and formal. -
"it would be ecological destruction" -> "it could lead to ecological destruction"
Explanation: "It would be" is too definitive and less formal. "It could lead to" is more cautious and appropriate for academic writing. -
"Building plantations for oil and gas energy" -> "Constructing oil and gas facilities"
Explanation: "Building plantations" is incorrect and informal. "Constructing oil and gas facilities" is precise and formal. -
"can lose the habitat for the flora and fauna" -> "can destroy habitats for flora and fauna"
Explanation: "Lose the habitat" is less formal and slightly vague. "Destroy habitats" is more direct and appropriate for formal writing. -
"I’m convinced" -> "I am convinced"
Explanation: "I’m" is a contraction, which is too informal for academic writing. "I am" is the correct form for formal essays.
Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7
Band Score for Task Response: 7
-
Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay addresses the prompt by discussing both the advantages and disadvantages of exploring oil and gas in remote areas. The introduction acknowledges the dual nature of the issue, and the body paragraphs present arguments for both sides. However, the advantages are not as thoroughly developed as the disadvantages, which could lead to an unbalanced view. For instance, while the essay mentions increased energy supply and reduced prices, it does not provide specific examples or evidence to substantiate these claims.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should aim to provide more detailed examples and evidence to support the advantages of exploring oil and gas. This could include statistics on energy needs, economic benefits to local communities, or case studies of successful energy projects. A more balanced exploration of both sides would strengthen the overall argument.
-
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The writer states a clear position in favor of the disadvantages outweighing the advantages, particularly in the introduction and conclusion. However, the essay occasionally wavers in clarity, particularly in the transition between discussing advantages and disadvantages. Phrases like "this trend would introduce both negative aspects and positive aspects" could be more precise in articulating the writer’s stance.
- How to improve: To maintain a clearer position, the writer should consistently reinforce their viewpoint throughout the essay. This can be done by using transitional phrases that clearly indicate when shifting from one side of the argument to the other. Additionally, reiterating the main position in each paragraph can help maintain focus.
-
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas regarding the disadvantages of oil and gas exploration, such as environmental destruction and ecological impacts. However, some points lack depth and specific examples. For instance, the mention of "greenhouse gasses" and "ecological destruction" could be elaborated upon with specific instances or consequences of these actions.
- How to improve: To improve the development of ideas, the writer should aim to extend their arguments with more detailed explanations and examples. This could involve discussing specific environmental impacts, such as oil spills or habitat loss, and their long-term effects on ecosystems. Additionally, using data or expert opinions could strengthen the support for their claims.
-
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the implications of exploring oil and gas in remote areas. However, there are moments where the discussion could be more tightly aligned with the prompt. For example, the phrase "By weighing up both pros and cons of demanding for natural energy sources" in the conclusion feels somewhat vague and does not directly address the prompt’s question about whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that each paragraph directly relates back to the central question of the prompt. This can be achieved by explicitly linking arguments back to the question, such as stating how each disadvantage directly counters the advantages presented. A more direct engagement with the prompt throughout the essay will enhance coherence and relevance.
Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7
Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7
-
Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear introduction that outlines the topic and the writer’s stance. The body paragraphs are organized to discuss both the advantages and disadvantages of exploring oil and gas in untouched areas. However, the transition between the points could be smoother. For instance, the shift from discussing the benefits to the drawbacks is somewhat abrupt, which may confuse readers about the flow of the argument. The conclusion reiterates the main points but does not effectively summarize the discussion.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using clearer topic sentences that guide the reader through each paragraph. Additionally, employing transitional phrases such as "On the contrary" or "Conversely" when shifting from advantages to disadvantages can help clarify the relationship between ideas. A more structured conclusion that encapsulates the main arguments without merely restating them would also strengthen the overall coherence.
-
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay utilizes paragraphs effectively, with separate sections for advantages and disadvantages. Each paragraph contains relevant information, but the internal structure of the paragraphs could be improved. For example, the first body paragraph could benefit from clearer examples and explanations supporting the claims made about the advantages of energy exploration.
- How to improve: To improve paragraph structure, ensure that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence followed by supporting details and examples. For instance, in the advantages paragraph, you could elaborate on how increased energy production directly benefits economies, perhaps by including statistics or specific examples of countries that have benefited from similar practices. This would provide a more robust argument and enhance the paragraph’s effectiveness.
-
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand" and "However," to signal shifts in the argument. However, the range of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between sentences and ideas could be clearer. For example, the phrase "After having been sources" is awkward and does not clearly convey the intended meaning, which can disrupt the flow of reading.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a variety of linking words and phrases, such as "Furthermore," "In addition," and "Consequently," to enhance the flow of ideas. Additionally, ensure that all cohesive devices are used correctly and appropriately. Revising awkward phrases for clarity will also improve cohesion. For example, rephrasing "After having been sources" to "Once these resources are extracted" would make the sentence clearer and more coherent.
By addressing these areas for improvement, the essay can achieve a higher level of coherence and cohesion, ultimately enhancing its overall effectiveness and clarity.
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 reasonable range of vocabulary, with terms like "consumption," "energy production," "economic countries," and "ecological destruction." However, the use of phrases such as "distant areas" and "untouched natural places" is somewhat repetitive and lacks variety. Additionally, the phrase "negative aspects and positive aspects" is quite basic and could be expressed in a more sophisticated manner.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should incorporate synonyms and more varied expressions. For instance, instead of repeating "aspects," alternatives like "factors," "considerations," or "implications" could be used. Furthermore, exploring more advanced vocabulary related to environmental issues, such as "biodiversity," "sustainability," or "ecosystem services," would elevate the essay’s lexical quality.
-
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains instances of imprecise vocabulary usage. For example, the phrase "spreadly destroyed" appears to be a misuse of the word "spread," which should be "widely." Additionally, the term "unexplained phenomena" lacks clarity; it would be more effective to specify what phenomena are being referred to, such as "climate change effects" or "environmental degradation."
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on using vocabulary that accurately conveys the intended meaning. This can be achieved by double-checking the meaning of words and ensuring they fit the context. For example, replacing "unexplained phenomena" with a more specific term would clarify the argument. Engaging with a thesaurus or vocabulary-building resources can also help in selecting the most appropriate words.
-
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "spreadly" (which should be "widely") and "requiring" (which is used in a confusing context). While the overall spelling is generally acceptable, these errors detract from the essay’s professionalism and clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread their work carefully, ideally after a short break to gain a fresh perspective. Utilizing spell-check tools in word processors can also help catch errors. Additionally, practicing spelling through writing exercises or flashcards can reinforce correct spelling of commonly used terms in academic writing.
In summary, while the essay demonstrates a foundational understanding of lexical resource, there are clear areas for improvement. By expanding vocabulary range, ensuring precise word choice, and enhancing spelling accuracy, the writer can achieve a higher band score in this criterion.
Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7
Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7
-
Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonable variety of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For instance, the phrase "the need for consumption of oil and gas is increasing" uses a complex structure effectively. However, the essay could benefit from more varied sentence openings and transitions, as many sentences start similarly, which can lead to a monotonous reading experience. For example, the repeated use of "there is no doubt" and "I argue that" could be replaced with more diverse introductory phrases.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety of sentence structures, consider using different sentence starters and incorporating more complex clauses. For instance, instead of starting sentences with "there is" or "I argue," try using participial phrases or adverbial clauses to add complexity. For example, "Despite the potential benefits, I contend that the environmental costs far outweigh them" introduces a more sophisticated structure.
-
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay shows a good level of grammatical accuracy overall, but there are some noticeable errors. For example, the phrase "the price of consumption for energy may be cut down" could be more succinctly expressed as "the cost of energy consumption may decrease." Additionally, the phrase "spreadly destroyed" is incorrect; the correct term should be "widespread." Punctuation is generally accurate, but there are instances where commas are missing, such as before "but" in the first paragraph, which can lead to run-on sentences.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, focus on common errors such as word choice and verb forms. Regularly practicing with grammar exercises can help solidify understanding. Additionally, proofreading for punctuation errors can enhance clarity. For instance, revising sentences to ensure proper comma placement and avoiding run-ons will improve readability. A suggestion would be to break longer sentences into shorter, clearer ones, which can also help with clarity.
In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of grammatical range and accuracy, there are opportunities for improvement in sentence variety and grammatical precision. By diversifying sentence structures and refining grammatical accuracy, the essay could achieve a higher band score.
Bài sửa mẫu
In this day and age, the demand for oil and gas is increasing. Therefore, companies are seeking alternative sources to meet energy production needs in remote and pristine natural areas. This trend would present both negative and positive aspects, but I believe its drawbacks may be more substantial.
On the one hand, there is no doubt that if people explored sources in alternative locations, it would support human life and contribute to the economic development of distinct countries. After sourcing these resources, energy production will increase significantly, thus addressing energy issues. Additionally, energy costs may be reduced because there are numerous options for energy consumption.
However, I argue that the disadvantages of this approach would be more considerable. In fact, through the exploration and extraction of resources, many companies have significantly damaged the environment in remote areas, resulting in large amounts of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere, which have caused unexplained phenomena. Moreover, if environmental degradation continues, it could lead to ecological destruction. The infrastructure required for certain energy sources can alter the ecosystem of the areas where they are established. Constructing oil and gas facilities, for instance, can destroy habitats for flora and fauna.
To sum up, I am convinced that this trend would introduce both negative and positive aspects, but I believe its drawbacks could be more significant. By weighing the pros and cons of the demand for natural energy sources, people could make the best decision for their lives.