Glizdka
Key Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2019
- Member Type
- Other
- Native Language
- Polish
- Home Country
- Poland
- Current Location
- Poland
Could you please check my writing? I found this task here.
Your class has attended a lecture on what governments could do to minimise the impact of CO2 in big cities. You have made some notes below.
Notes:
Opinions expressed during the lecture:
Write an essay for your tutor discussing two of the methods in your notes. You should explain which method you think is better for the local government to consider and support your opinion with reasons.
You can use the opinions provided but you must use your own words as much as possible.
Write your answer in 220-260 words in an appropriate style.
Greenhouse gasses are responsible for climate change. One of the most potent of them is carbon dioxide, which is emitted in large amounts in modern day metropolies. Using cars is a significant portion of CO2 produced in cities. In essay, I am going to discuss two solutions that could be implemented by the local authorities to reduce their cities' carbon footprint.
Restricting the use of motor vehicles in the downtown area is one the ideas. It would greatly reduce the amount of traffic. Combustion engines burn fuel even when the car is motionless, stuck on a backed up road. However, this would necessitate modernization of pedestrian-friendly solutions in the city because people would have to walk more.
Lowering the ticket price of public transport would encourage people to use it more. This is why I might suggest taking that option into consideration. A bus, for example, can transport about 50 passengers in just one vehicle. But designing a successful public transport system needs to be done carefully; otherwise, we will be left with an expensive investment which is used by no citizen.
I think banning cars is a drastic move; nonetheles, if the government builds more pathways and makes it easier to go on foot, this would also promote a healthier lifestyle. Many people consider public transport inconvenient. The second option has a much smaller chance of success in my opinion.
Your class has attended a lecture on what governments could do to minimise the impact of CO2 in big cities. You have made some notes below.
Notes:
- Restrict car use in city centres
- Cheaper public transport
- Congestion charges
Opinions expressed during the lecture:
- "Public transport can be slow and unreliable"
- "Congestion charges would be too expensive"
- "People that work in the city centre will feel discriminated against"
Write an essay for your tutor discussing two of the methods in your notes. You should explain which method you think is better for the local government to consider and support your opinion with reasons.
You can use the opinions provided but you must use your own words as much as possible.
Write your answer in 220-260 words in an appropriate style.
Greenhouse gasses are responsible for climate change. One of the most potent of them is carbon dioxide, which is emitted in large amounts in modern day metropolies. Using cars is a significant portion of CO2 produced in cities. In essay, I am going to discuss two solutions that could be implemented by the local authorities to reduce their cities' carbon footprint.
Restricting the use of motor vehicles in the downtown area is one the ideas. It would greatly reduce the amount of traffic. Combustion engines burn fuel even when the car is motionless, stuck on a backed up road. However, this would necessitate modernization of pedestrian-friendly solutions in the city because people would have to walk more.
Lowering the ticket price of public transport would encourage people to use it more. This is why I might suggest taking that option into consideration. A bus, for example, can transport about 50 passengers in just one vehicle. But designing a successful public transport system needs to be done carefully; otherwise, we will be left with an expensive investment which is used by no citizen.
I think banning cars is a drastic move; nonetheles, if the government builds more pathways and makes it easier to go on foot, this would also promote a healthier lifestyle. Many people consider public transport inconvenient. The second option has a much smaller chance of success in my opinion.
| otal Word Count: | 231 |
| Total Unique Words: | 156 |
| Number of Sentences: | 15 |
| Average Sentence Length: | 15.4 |
| Number of Paragraphs: | 4 |
| Hard Words: | (15.58%) |
| Lexical Density: | 67.53 |
| Fog Index: | 12.39 |
Last edited by a moderator:
