People think that government should increase the cost of fuel for cars and

other vehicles to solve environmental problems. Others say that there are
more effective ways to do this.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
VERSION 1
In this day and age, environmental pollution has been a matter of concern. A
number of people believe that by increasing the fuel price, environmental issues
can be dealt with, while others claim that there are more efficient approaches to
accomplish that aim. From my point of view, higher prices of gas can be a useful
measure, but other measures might be more comprehensive.
On the one hand, I do agree that raising fuel costs can be useful to a certain extent.
Firstly, higher fuel costs can lead to fewer private vehicles in many cities, which
are one of the main pollutants beside factories. When petrol price goes up, people
will have to consider and find a way to balance their living costs more sensibly. As
a result, a large number of people are likely to hesitate to use their own cars or
motorbikes to go to their workplaces or schools and try to use public transport
instead, leading to fewer emissions. Moreover, money raised from higher fuel costs
can be used to improve public transport systems such as buses and subways,
encouraging more residents to use them on a daily basis. Therefore, the greenhouse
effect can be reduced considerably since the number of vehicles has decreased
significantly.
On the other hand, I still hold the view that other measures can be far more
efficient. First of all, the authorities can apply congestion charges rather than raise
petrol prices. If petrol prices went up too much, necessities prices would rise as a
consequence. That will not be beneficial to the economy of a nation. Therefore,
applying charges and taxes for congestion in big cities can be a more economic and
practical way to reduce environmental problems. Moreover, the government can
make use of money raised from charges and taxes like that to improve public
transport to motivate people to use them more. Another solution can be replanning
the national budget to have more money to develop public transport systems as
well as reduce the fee to attract more users. Although the government can still use
money from environmental taxes to improve public transport, that money is still
inadequate if they really want people to use buses or subways instead of their own
vehicles. Therefore, a modification in the national budget will be a smarter
approach than just raising fuel costs.
In conclusion, while I agree that it can be useful to some extent to raise taxes on
fuel, other measures would be more appropriate to help the environment.
VERSION 2
In this day and age, environmental pollution has been a matter of concern. A
number of people believe that by increasing the fuel price, environmental issues
can be dealt with, while others claim that there are more efficient approaches to
accomplish that aim. From my point of view, higher prices of gas can be a useful
measure, but other measures might be more comprehensive.
On the one hand, I do agree that raising fuel costs can be useful to a certain extent.
Firstly, higher fuel costs can result in fewer private vehicles in many cities, which
are one of the main pollutants beside factories. As a result, a large number of
people are likely to hesitate to use their own cars or motorbikes to go to their
workplaces or schools and try to use public transport instead, leading to fewer
emissions. Moreover, money raised from higher fuel costs can be used to improve
public transport systems such as buses and subways, encouraging more residents to
use them on a daily basis. Therefore, the greenhouse effect can be reduced
considerably since the number of vehicles has decreased significantly.
On the other hand, I still hold the view that other measures can be far more
efficient. First of all, the authorities can impose congestion charges rather than raise
petrol prices. If petrol prices went up too much, necessities prices would rise as a
consequence. Therefore, applying charges and taxes for congestion in big cities can
be a more economic and practical way to reduce environmental problems.
Moreover, the government can make use of money raised from charges and taxes
like that to improve public transport to motivate people to use them more. Another
solution can be replanning the national budget to have more money to develop
public transport systems as well as reduce the fee to attract more users. Although
the government can still use money from environmental taxes to improve public
transport, that money is still inadequate if they really want people to use buses or
subways instead of their own vehicles. Therefore, a modification in the national
budget will be a smarter approach than just raising fuel costs.
In conclusion, while I agree that it can be useful to some extent to raise taxes on
fuel, other measures would be more appropriate to help the environment.