ip.chuawriting
Post bài mới
Thành viên với 10 points trở lên sẽ được sửa bài bởi Team Writing 7.5 từ IELTS Planet - Học IELTS Online.
Bắt đầu nhận xét ở mục "Bài chưa có góp ý" để bắt đầu kiếm point nhé.

2.2k Bài viết

3.1k Góp ý

2k bình luận

13.7k thành viên

The poliferation of private cars on the roads in many parts of the world has led to serious problems of pollution and may contribute to global warming. Some people think that governments should spend money for the developments of public transport systemsin order to help alleviate this problem. Others think it is better to spend money for the development of electric and other types of cars that may cause less pollution.

 

Do you think it is better for governments to spend money on developing public transportation or developing new kinds of cars? Why or why not? Give reasons to your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experience.

 

That a vast majority of people comsume much more than they need to do is a matter of significance. Golden watches, private airplanes, expensive cars, etc. are what the rich use to ostentate their wealth. This is obviously a big part of the cause of dramatic increase in the quantity of private cars activating worldwide which have caused devastating environmental problems that will directly harm humankind. As far as I am concerned, I believe that there is hope for a better future of our environment through rovereign investment on public transportation.

It must be understood that the problem of car overabundance is to be explained by unnecessary usage of that mean of transport. The reality of the situation is that people purchase more cars than they need to, as well as travel by cars too frequently whilst they can just walk or ride an environmental-friendly bicycle. Under these conditions, it is predictable for our environment to be gradually threatened by the large amount of green house gases and harmful noises from the "overpopulation" of cars.

Perhaps some agendas of governmental spending on transportation is needed to alleviate this issue. Some supports the idea of spending money on electric and eco-friendly cars. Maybe the most effective line of reasoning on the part of those who advocate invention investments is to point out that it would be too late for the environment if we just concentrated on creating new means of transportation. Whilst pollution is already happening, spending a lot of money on researches on new typws of cars may take us too long to wait, and that would not solve the problem effectively. In addition, the idea will cost much money which would affect other plans for Mother nature. Thus, it will be a waste of time and money to reduce pollution by this long-term solution.

Notwithstanding some weakpoints in the first idea of investment, the second idea which I advocate is absolutely beneficial, in a both economical and time-saving way. As is self-evident, spending money on the development of public transportation systems is fast enough to reduce the number of cars which would also reduce the amount of pollutants. The solution would not cost as much money as eco-friendly cars researches do. Building metro systems, for example, might take govenments time and a considerable amount of money, but it will be long-lasting as researches on cars may not have immediate results. When a country has had a good system of modern public transportation, which will also help reducing traffic congestion and accidents, researches on cars that cause less damage to the environment then should be made.

In conclusion, I strongly believe that the poliferation of cars that causes pollution and even global warming can only be effectively solve by public transportation investment.

Theo bạn, bài viết này được bao nhiêu "chấm" ?
đã hỏi trong Discussion bởi (33 điểm)
Đã chọn lại chủ đề bởi
share bài về Wall để xem lại ===>

1 góp ý

+2 phiếu
 
góp ý hay nhất

That a vast majority of people comsume much more than they need to do is a matter of significance. Golden watches, private airplanes, expensive cars, etc. are what the rich use to ostentate their wealth. This is obviously a big part of - the cause of dramatic increase in the quantity of private cars - activating worldwide - which have caused devastating environmental problems - that will directly harm humankind. As far as I am concerned, I believe that there is hope for a better future of our environment through rovereign investment on public transportation.

Dẫn đề loằng ngoằng quá!

Câu sau còn khủng khiếp hơn, giống kiểu bạn đang show off từ vựng. 5 cụm độc lập nhau và ít nhất 2 cụm có which/ that chưa kể chỗ activating worldwide cũng là MĐQHRG.

It is undeniable that the number of vehicles has increased dramatically, which is one of the sources of pollution.

Câu chốt được, nhưng vẫn kiểu diễn đạt dài dòng. Mình nghĩ 40' bạn viết được bài này thì chắc Mở Bài mất 10' hơn.

 

In conclusion, I strongly believe that the poliferation of cars that causes pollution and even global warming can only be effectively solved by public transportation investment.

Kết Luận thì ngắn gọn hơn hẳn nhưng lại mắc lỗi lặp từ.

Viết ngược lại đi.

In conclusion, I strongly believe that public transit is vital to... (việc đi lại và góp phần giảm thiểu ô nhiễm).

Theo bạn, bài viết này được bao nhiêu "chấm" ?
đã góp ý bởi (344 điểm)
được bầu chọn là bài viết hay nhất bởi
cảm ơn bạn nhiều. đúng là mình hay mở bài dài thật. Thế bạn nghĩ thân bài ra sao? Có cần sửa nhiều không?
Ngại đọc vì dài quá! :D
Dù sao cũng cảm ơn bạn :)

Tips: Thành viên với 10 points trở lên sẽ được sửa bài bởi Team Writing 7.5 :)
Bắt đầu nhận xét ở mục "Bài chưa có góp ý" để bắt đầu kiếm point nhé :)

Tham khảo các bài viết tương tự

...