please check my task 2

[zibs]

Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve growing traffic and pollution problems.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
What other measures do you think might be effective?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples.

The increase in the number of automobiles plying the road has resulted in traffic congestion and pollution of the environment. Oil price hike will be an effective strategy in tackling these problems but I do not believe that this is the best option. Multiple other methods are available to alleviate this problem and they will be adumbrated in the essay.

Rising fuel prices would mean that fewer people can afford to drive cars. This will result in a decrease in the number of vehicles on the road as was evidenced during the 1970s when fuel price had increased by almost 40%. However, this approach would not be the most optimal as it could have significant economic repercussions. The rise in the price of gasoline would lead to increased transportation cost that would translate into inflation of prices of goods. Hence, we need to employ other ways to overcome the problem.

Short term fixes could include encouraging the practice of carpooling and regular examination of the condition of vehicles by the concerned authorities. About 52% of cars on the road have only one passenger. By increasing carpooling, we would see an immediate improvement in traffic congestion. Further, the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that two-thirds of vehicle owners in the USA do no maintain their cars properly resulting in increased emissions and high level of air pollution. Regular checks by the officials of Ministry of Transportation and Aviation (MOTA) would coerce these car owners into keeping their vehicles in proper condition.

Additionally, upgrading of public transportation system and increasing the use of electric cars would help tackle the problem in the long term. For instance, in Delhi, many residents travel by two-wheelers instead of the metro or public buses primarily because they are overcrowded during rush hours. Therefore, gradually increasing the number of buses and metros would result in a decrease in the usage of motorcycles and scooters. Moreover, electric cars have significantly lower carbon footprint compared to cars that use gasoline. These cars would become less expensive if governments introduce a scheme to subsidize their sales. As a result, the use of these environmentally friendly cars would rise.

To conclude, I believe that there are many ways apart from increasing fuel prices, that are better at tackling the problems posed by the rising number of automobiles. The implementation of these plans will help alleviate traffic problems as well as reduce air pollution caused by vehicular emissions.

[David.IELTS.Examiner]

Hello!

Not a bad essay, but there are some problems that need to be dealt with.

First, your arguments are often assertions with little or no evidence. Car use DID drop slightly during the oil crisis of the 70s, but that was mainly due to fuel shortages. Car ownership did NOT drop. In Europe, petrol prices are high, but car use is still increasing.

Despite claims, there is quite a lot of evidence that electric cars have a greater carbon footprint than petrol ones. The main 'advantage' is that pollution is shifted from cities to the locations of power plants.

Vocabulary is very good with some nice topic-specific items. The range of grammar is good, but a little limited. Accuracy is reasonably good, with relatively few basic errors.

All the best,
David