The best way to solve the world’s environmental problems is to increase the cost of fuel. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The proposal that escalating fuel costs is the optimal solution to global environmeental problems has sparked considerable debate. While I acknowledge the reasons for this thinking, I disagree with this viewpoint since alternative strategies can offer a more effective and equitable approach.
The way making fuel more expensive can be effective in tackling environmental issues because of some rationales. First, higher fuel costs may discourage excessive consumption, which leads to reduced carbon emissions. This can serve a powerful economic incentive. As the cost of fuel rises, people are more likely to reconsider their travel habits and vehicle usage. This has demonstrated the significant contribution to environmental sustainability. Another reason why I concur this belief is that the increased revenue from fuel costs could be strategically allocated to green initiatives. Governments and organizations could use these funds to incentivize investment in environmental projects and promote the development of renewable energy sources. This financial support serves as a foundation for the innovation and transition to a more sustainable energy landscape, reducing reliance on environmentally harmful practices.
Despite the merits mentioned above, the potential drawbacks of increasing fuel costs should not be overlooked. A primary concern is its potential to disproportionately impact on low-income individuals and developing nations, exacerbating social and economic inequalities. Therefore, rather than depending solely on cost increases, governments and industries should redirect efforts and resources towards investing in renewable energy sources. This alternative approach not only addresses environmental concerns but creates a sustainable foundation for the future. Furthermore, stricter environmental regulations can be implemented and enforced, compelling industries to adopt environmentally-friendly practices without imposing financial burdens on consumers. These arguments seem to be justifiable to support the mentioned point of view.
In conclusion, while there are justifications that increasing the cost of fuel is an ultimate measure aimed at addressing environmental problems, this assumption not only exerts more problems but also is not feasible. As a result, I completelt oppose this belief.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
"environmeental" -> "environmental"
Explanation: Correcting the spelling error from "environmeental" to "environmental" ensures adherence to standard spelling conventions, maintaining the formal tone of the essay.
"The way making fuel more expensive" -> "Increasing the cost of fuel"
Explanation: "The way making fuel more expensive" is ambiguous and lacks clarity. "Increasing the cost of fuel" provides a clearer and more direct description of the proposed action in a formal tone.
"rationales" -> "reasons"
Explanation: While "rationales" isn’t incorrect, "reasons" is a simpler and more commonly used term in academic writing, enhancing clarity without compromising formality.
"concur this belief" -> "support this belief"
Explanation: "Concur" is less commonly used in this context in academic writing. Replacing it with "support" maintains the formality and clarity of the sentence.
"its potential to disproportionately impact on" -> "its potential to disproportionately affect"
Explanation: "Impact on" can be replaced with "affect" without losing meaning but in a more formal and concise manner.
"rather than depending solely on cost increases" -> "instead of relying solely on price hikes"
Explanation: The suggested alternative is more direct and formal, conveying the intended meaning without losing clarity.
"exerts more problems" -> "poses additional problems"
Explanation: "Exerts more problems" is not idiomatic. "Poses additional problems" is a more precise and formal way to convey the idea.
"completelt" -> "completely"
Explanation: Correcting the spelling error from "completelt" to "completely" ensures accuracy in the text.
The essay demonstrates a clear understanding of the topic, but refining certain word choices and expressions enhances the academic tone and clarity of the arguments presented.
Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
Quoted text: "Despite the merits mentioned above, the potential drawbacks of increasing fuel costs should not be overlooked. A primary concern is its potential to disproportionately impact on low-income individuals and developing nations, exacerbating social and economic inequalities."
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestion: This paragraph acknowledges a potential drawback of increasing fuel costs by highlighting its impact on low-income individuals and developing nations. However, it lacks an extended discussion or possible solutions to mitigate this issue. To improve, you could elaborate further on how governments could counterbalance these effects through targeted subsidies, tax breaks for low-income households, or international aid programs aimed at supporting developing nations in transitioning to greener alternatives. Providing practical examples would strengthen your argument by showcasing a more nuanced understanding of the issue.
- Improved example: "While acknowledging the merits of increasing fuel costs for environmental benefits, it is imperative to address the disproportionate impact on low-income individuals and developing nations. To mitigate this, governments can introduce targeted subsidies for essential fuel needs of low-income households or implement progressive taxation policies. Additionally, international aid programs could assist developing nations in adopting renewable energy sources and sustainable practices, thereby lessening the economic burden caused by increased fuel costs."
Quoted text: "Therefore, rather than depending solely on cost increases, governments and industries should redirect efforts and resources towards investing in renewable energy sources."
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestion: This argument is well-stated, advocating for a shift towards renewable energy sources instead of solely relying on increased costs. However, it lacks specific examples or strategies governments and industries could adopt to transition effectively to renewable energy. To enhance this point, elaborate on various renewable energy initiatives such as solar, wind, or hydroelectric power. Discuss how incentivizing private investments in these sectors or implementing research and development grants could accelerate the adoption of renewable energy solutions, thereby mitigating environmental issues without burdening consumers economically.
- Improved example: "Hence, rather than singularly banking on elevated fuel prices, governments and industries must pivot their focus towards robust investments in renewable energy alternatives. Initiatives like subsidizing solar panel installations for households, incentivizing wind farm constructions through tax credits, or facilitating research grants for innovative energy storage solutions can expedite the transition. By fostering an environment conducive to renewable energy innovation, governments can effectively reduce environmental harm without disproportionately affecting consumers financially."
Overall, your essay presents a clear position and adequately addresses the given prompt. However, it would benefit from a deeper exploration of counterarguments and more nuanced solutions to potential drawbacks, enhancing the depth and breadth of your argumentation. Aim to provide specific examples and detailed strategies to bolster your points and offer a well-rounded perspective on the topic.
Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
The essay demonstrates a logical organization of information and ideas, maintaining a clear progression throughout. The introduction sets the stage for the discussion, presenting the topic and the author’s stance. Each paragraph follows a central theme, contributing to the overall coherence of the essay. The use of cohesive devices is varied and generally appropriate, contributing to the overall flow of the essay. The writer skillfully manages paragraphing, with each paragraph presenting a clear central topic.
However, there are instances of overuse and imprecise referencing of cohesive devices. For example, in the sentence "While I acknowledge the reasons for this thinking, I disagree with this viewpoint since alternative strategies can offer a more effective and equitable approach," the transition "since" could be replaced with a more precise cohesive device for smoother connectivity. Additionally, there is a minor repetition issue in the phrase "this belief" towards the end of the essay.
How to improve:
To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on refining the use of cohesive devices, avoiding unnecessary repetition, and ensuring that referencing is clear and accurate. Consider using a variety of linking words and transitions to improve the flow between sentences and paragraphs. Additionally, proofreading for minor issues of repetition can contribute to a more polished and cohesive essay.
Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
The essay demonstrates a commendable range of vocabulary, contributing to the fulfillment of the Band 7 descriptor. There is a noticeable effort to incorporate less common lexical items, and the essay exhibits some awareness of style and collocation. The writer effectively conveys ideas with a sufficient variety of words, contributing to the overall flexibility and precision of the language. While occasional errors in word choice, spelling, and word formation are present, they are not pervasive and do not significantly impede communication.
The essay effectively argues both sides of the issue, presenting reasons in favor of increasing fuel costs while also acknowledging potential drawbacks. The writer uses vocabulary to express ideas coherently and logically, contributing to a well-structured response. Additionally, there is evidence of an attempt to use a broad vocabulary relevant to the environmental context.
How to improve:
To enhance the lexical resource and move towards a higher band score, the writer could focus on refining the precision and accuracy of word choice. Careful proofreading is recommended to eliminate occasional errors in spelling and word formation. Additionally, the incorporation of more sophisticated and uncommon lexical items, along with a more nuanced use of style and collocation, would further elevate the essay’s lexical quality. Continued attention to the balance between vocabulary complexity and accuracy will contribute to a more refined and cohesive expression of ideas.
Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable variety of sentence structures, incorporating both simple and complex forms effectively. The majority of the sentences are error-free, showcasing good control of grammar and punctuation. Complex structures are used to articulate ideas, albeit with occasional errors that do not significantly hinder communication.
How to improve: To enhance the score towards an 8 or 9, focus on refining the complex structures further to minimize the occurrence of occasional errors. Additionally, strive for even greater variety and complexity in sentence structures while maintaining accuracy and clarity. Reviewing and revising for precision in grammar and punctuation can elevate the essay’s overall score.
Bài sửa mẫu
The suggestion that raising the price of fuel is the best solution to global environmental issues has sparked considerable debate. While I understand the rationale behind this idea, I disagree with it because alternative strategies can provide a more effective and fair approach.
Increasing fuel costs can indeed be effective in addressing environmental problems for several reasons. Firstly, higher fuel prices may discourage excessive consumption, leading to reduced carbon emissions. This serves as a strong economic incentive, as rising fuel costs prompt people to reconsider their travel habits and vehicle usage, contributing significantly to environmental sustainability. Another reason supporting this perspective is that the additional revenue generated from increased fuel costs could be strategically allocated to green initiatives. Governments and organizations can use these funds to encourage investments in environmental projects and promote the development of renewable energy sources. This financial support lays the groundwork for innovation and the transition to a more sustainable energy landscape, reducing dependence on environmentally harmful practices.
However, it is essential not to overlook the potential drawbacks of escalating fuel costs. A primary concern is the possibility of disproportionately affecting low-income individuals and developing nations, exacerbating social and economic inequalities. Therefore, instead of relying solely on cost increases, governments and industries should redirect efforts and resources toward investing in renewable energy sources. This alternative approach not only addresses environmental concerns but also establishes a sustainable foundation for the future. Additionally, implementing and enforcing stricter environmental regulations can compel industries to adopt environmentally-friendly practices without imposing financial burdens on consumers. These arguments appear justifiable in supporting the opposing viewpoint.
In conclusion, while there are justifications for considering increased fuel costs as the ultimate solution to environmental problems, this assumption not only raises more issues but also proves impractical. As a result, I completely oppose this belief.