The best way to solve the world’s environmental problem is to increase the cost of fuel. Do you agree or disagree?
We live in an era in which the world is bombarded with environmental pollution by people’s actions. It is often said that the effective solution is to push the matter through the enhancement of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas. However, I totally believe that raising public awareness of the environment is a fundamental solution.
There are two advantages if a government goes up prices of non-renewable energy sources. Firstly, fossil fuel power plants might alter environmentally friendly energy sources such as nuclear power or renewable sources and terminate to use of fossil fuels because of expensive and unreasonable for our lives. Besides, if humans do not continue to use fossil fuels, the future of the Earth will not seem bleak. One reason behind this is that these days most engine machinery has released pollutants that have gradually accumulated and led to global warming, the melting of glaciers in both polar regions, the rise in sea levels, the oil spills, and pushing wildlife to be on the verge of extinction. Furthermore, when commuting costs climb rapidly, individuals engage in taking public transport, carpooling, and cycling to work, and school rather than using their private vehicles with expensive prices. Therefore, the environment will reduce the amount of exhaust fumes.
Nevertheless, instead of increasing fossil fuels’ cost, the government should impose stricter punishments on humans who have taken part in environmental degradation in recent decades. Additionally, the community should enhance and create public awareness campaigns. When people are conscious of misbehaviors. they would be willing to take action to tackle environmental pollution and other related issues such as environmental protection programs, community planting, energy conservation, building proper waste disposal systems, and energy-saving home appliances.
In conclusion, I personally believe that increasing the price of non-renewable will address several issues in the short term. However, if humans put an end, they should put heavy pressure on common public awareness.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
Errors and Improvements:
- “bombarded with environmental pollution by people’s actions” -> “affected by environmental pollution due to human activities”
Explanation: Replacing “bombarded with environmental pollution by people’s actions” with “affected by environmental pollution due to human activities” provides a more formal and precise description of the impact of human behavior on the environment.
- “It is often said that the effective solution is to push the matter through the enhancement of fossil fuels” -> “It is often suggested that an effective solution is to address the issue by promoting the use of renewable energy sources.”
Explanation: The phrase “push the matter through the enhancement of fossil fuels” is unclear and informal. The suggested alternative clarifies the proposed solution using more formal language.
- “I totally believe that raising public awareness of the environment is a fundamental solution.” -> “I firmly believe that fostering public awareness of environmental issues is a fundamental solution.”
Explanation: Replacing “I totally believe” with “I firmly believe” adds emphasis and a more formal tone. The alternative also uses more precise language to convey the idea of raising awareness about environmental issues.
- “if a government goes up prices of non-renewable energy sources” -> “if a government increases the prices of non-renewable energy sources”
Explanation: “Goes up prices” is an informal expression. Replacing it with “increases the prices” maintains formality and clarity in describing the government’s action.
- “terminate to use of fossil fuels” -> “cease the use of fossil fuels”
Explanation: “Terminate to use” is awkward phrasing. The suggested alternative, “cease the use,” is more concise and formal.
- “the future of the Earth will not seem bleak” -> “the future of the Earth will not appear grim”
Explanation: “Seem bleak” is less formal. Replacing it with “appear grim” maintains the formality of the statement.
- “these days most engine machinery has released pollutants” -> “in contemporary times, most engine machinery emits pollutants”
Explanation: “These days” is colloquial; replacing it with “in contemporary times” enhances formality. Additionally, “has released pollutants” is modified to “emits pollutants” for conciseness and clarity.
- “commuting costs climb rapidly” -> “transportation costs increase significantly”
Explanation: “Commuting costs climb rapidly” is informal. The alternative phrase “transportation costs increase significantly” is more formal and precise.
- “they should put heavy pressure on common public awareness” -> “there should be a strong emphasis on cultivating public awareness”
Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6
Band Score: 6.0
- Quoted text: “However, instead of increasing fossil fuels’ cost, the government should impose stricter punishments on humans who have taken part in environmental degradation in recent decades.”
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestions: The essay adequately presents a clear position, suggesting an alternative solution to raising fuel prices. However, the idea lacks development, and the consequences of stricter punishments are not explored. To enhance this, the writer could provide specific examples of punitive measures and how they would deter environmental degradation. For instance, introducing fines for illegal dumping or implementing community service for environmental offenders would give depth to the argument.
- Improved example: “However, instead of relying solely on increasing fossil fuels’ cost, the government should consider imposing stricter punishments on individuals involved in environmental degradation. For instance, introducing substantial fines for illegal dumping or mandating community service for those found guilty can serve as effective deterrents. This would not only discourage harmful activities but also contribute to a sense of responsibility among the public.”
- Quoted text: “Additionally, the community should enhance and create public awareness campaigns.”
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestions: While the essay advocates for public awareness campaigns, it lacks specific details and examples to support this suggestion. To improve, the writer should delve into the types of awareness campaigns and how they would impact individuals. For instance, detailing the benefits of educational programs in schools or utilizing social media platforms for widespread awareness could strengthen the argument.
- Improved example: “Additionally, the community should actively engage in creating and enhancing public awareness campaigns. Implementing educational programs in schools to teach students about environmental conservation and leveraging social media platforms for targeted awareness can significantly influence individuals’ behavior. These initiatives not only educate the masses but also foster a collective responsibility towards environmental protection.”
- Quoted text: “In conclusion, I personally believe that increasing the price of non-renewable will address several issues in the short term. However, if humans put an end, they should put heavy pressure on common public awareness.”
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestions: The concluding statement lacks clarity and coherence, making it difficult to discern the writer’s final stance. To improve, the writer should rephrase the conclusion to clearly restate their position and summarize the main points discussed. This will leave a lasting impression on the reader and reinforce the essay’s argument.
- Improved example: “In conclusion, while increasing the price of non-renewable resources may offer short-term benefits, it is crucial for humanity to simultaneously exert significant pressure on fostering public awareness. By combining these strategies, we can address immediate concerns and work towards a sustainable and environmentally conscious future.”
Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
The essay demonstrates a logical organization of information and ideas, with a clear progression throughout. Cohesive devices are used, though there is some under-use, and there are a few instances where referencing could be clearer. The essay effectively presents a central topic within each paragraph. Paragraphing is generally logical, contributing to the overall coherence.
How to improve:
To enhance coherence and cohesion, consider using a wider range of cohesive devices consistently. Ensure that referencing and substitution are clear and appropriate. Additionally, refine paragraphing to eliminate any minor inconsistencies and further strengthen the overall logical progression of ideas.
Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6
Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: This essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task. It makes attempts to use less common vocabulary and shows some awareness of style and collocation. While there are some errors in word choice, spelling, and word formation, they do not significantly impede communication.
The essay employs a mix of vocabulary related to environmental issues, such as “environmental pollution,” “fossil fuels,” “global warming,” “glaciers,” “sea levels,” and “exhaust fumes.” Additionally, it uses phrases like “raising public awareness,” “environmentally friendly energy sources,” and “stricter punishments” to convey ideas effectively.
However, there are some inaccuracies in word choice, such as “push the matter through” (which could be more precisely worded) and “expensive and unreasonable for our lives” (awkward phrasing). There are also spelling errors, such as “altered” instead of “alter,” and some issues with word formation, like “terminate to use of fossil fuels” (should be “terminate the use of fossil fuels”).
Overall, the essay exhibits a moderate level of vocabulary and articulates its points reasonably well, but it could benefit from more precise word choices and improved accuracy in word formation and spelling.
How to improve: To enhance the Lexical Resource score, the essay should focus on using vocabulary more accurately and precisely. Careful proofreading and editing are essential to eliminate spelling errors and improve word formation. Additionally, refining the phrasing of certain sentences to make them more fluent and natural would contribute to a higher score. Expanding the range of less common vocabulary and using it correctly can further improve the lexical quality of the essay.
Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
The essay demonstrates a good command of grammatical structures and accuracy, placing it within Band 7. The writer successfully uses a variety of complex structures, such as conditional sentences (“if humans do not continue to use fossil fuels”), relative clauses (“machinery that has released pollutants”), and compound sentences. The majority of sentences are error-free, with minor errors occurring as ‘slips.’ The essay effectively communicates the writer’s ideas with a good level of grammatical control.
There is evidence of a wide range of structures, as seen in the use of different sentence forms and the incorporation of complex ideas. The essay also exhibits good control of grammar and punctuation, although a few errors are present. For instance, there is a missing article in “raising public awareness of the environment is a fundamental solution,” and the phrase “the oil spills” could be more grammatically accurate as “oil spills.” Despite these minor errors, the overall grammatical range and accuracy contribute to a cohesive and understandable essay.
How to improve:
To enhance the grammatical range and accuracy further, the writer should pay closer attention to article usage and ensure consistency in sentence structure. Additionally, a more precise choice of words and expressions can contribute to a higher level of sophistication in the essay. It would be beneficial to proofread the text carefully to catch and correct any remaining slips in grammar and punctuation.
Bài sửa mẫu
In our current age, the world faces an onslaught of environmental challenges due to human activities. It is often suggested that a viable solution lies in addressing the issue through the escalation of fossil fuel costs, including coal, oil, and natural gas. However, I firmly hold the view that fostering public awareness about the environment is a fundamental remedy.
There are two benefits if a government opts to raise the prices of non-renewable energy sources. Firstly, fossil fuel power plants might transition to more environmentally friendly energy alternatives, such as nuclear power or renewables, as the use of fossil fuels becomes economically impractical. Moreover, discontinuing the reliance on fossil fuels is crucial for the future of our planet. One reason for this is that modern engine machinery releases pollutants, which have steadily accumulated and contributed to global warming, the melting of polar glaciers, rising sea levels, oil spills, and the endangerment of wildlife. Additionally, when transportation costs surge, individuals are more inclined to adopt eco-friendly practices like using public transport, carpooling, and cycling, reducing the emission of harmful pollutants.
Nevertheless, instead of escalating the cost of fossil fuels, governments should enforce stricter penalties for those involved in environmental degradation over the past few decades. Furthermore, communities should intensify efforts to raise public awareness through campaigns. When people are conscious of their environmental impact, they are more likely to take action, participating in initiatives such as environmental protection programs, community planting, energy conservation, implementing proper waste disposal systems, and using energy-efficient home appliances.
In conclusion, I personally believe that increasing the prices of non-renewable energy sources can address several issues in the short term. However, for a lasting solution, heavy emphasis should be placed on cultivating public awareness and encouraging responsible environmental behavior.