Car-free cities have become a hot topic in recent IELTS Writing Task 2 exams, particularly when discussing urban planning and environmental issues. This subject has appeared multiple times in the past few years, and its relevance to global sustainability efforts suggests it will continue to be a popular theme. Let’s examine a recent question that captures the essence of this topic:
Some people think that cities should be made car-free to reduce air pollution. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?
This question reflects the growing concern about urban air quality and the role of vehicles in pollution. It’s a complex issue that allows test-takers to showcase their analytical and writing skills. Let’s break down the question and provide sample essays for different band scores.
Analysis of the Question
The question asks for your opinion on making cities car-free as a solution to air pollution. Key points to consider:
- The main focus is on reducing air pollution
- The proposed solution is making cities entirely car-free
- You need to state your level of agreement or disagreement
- You should provide reasons and examples to support your position
Remember, there’s no “correct” answer – the examiners are looking at how well you can articulate and support your viewpoint.
Sample Essay 1 (Band 8-9)
Air pollution in urban areas is undeniably a pressing issue, and the proposal to create car-free cities is an intriguing solution. While I agree that reducing vehicle use can significantly impact air quality, I believe that completely banning cars from cities is too extreme and potentially counterproductive.
Undoubtedly, vehicles are a major contributor to urban air pollution. The emissions from cars, buses, and trucks release harmful pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and particulate matter, which have severe health implications for city dwellers. By eliminating cars, cities could see a dramatic improvement in air quality, leading to better public health outcomes and reduced healthcare costs. Moreover, car-free zones often promote more sustainable modes of transport like cycling and walking, which have additional health benefits.
However, the complete removal of cars from cities presents significant challenges. Firstly, many people rely on personal vehicles for their livelihoods, including delivery drivers, taxi services, and those who commute from areas with poor public transport links. A blanket ban on cars could disproportionately affect these groups and potentially harm the local economy. Secondly, emergency services such as ambulances and fire trucks require swift access to all parts of a city, which could be compromised in a completely car-free environment.
Instead of an outright ban, I propose a more nuanced approach to reducing vehicle-related pollution in cities. This could include expanding public transportation networks, promoting car-free days in cities, implementing congestion charges, and incentivizing the use of electric or hybrid vehicles. Additionally, creating more pedestrian-only zones and dedicated cycle lanes can encourage people to leave their cars at home without completely prohibiting their use.
In conclusion, while the idea of car-free cities is appealing from an environmental standpoint, the practical implications make it a challenging proposition. A more balanced approach that combines vehicle reduction strategies with improvements in sustainable transport options is likely to be more effective and feasible in addressing urban air pollution.
Sample Essay 2 (Band 6-7)
Air pollution is a big problem in many cities, and some people think that banning cars is the solution. I partly agree with this idea, but I also think there are some problems with it.
On the one hand, removing cars from cities could really help to reduce air pollution. Cars produce a lot of harmful gases that make the air dirty and unhealthy to breathe. If we stop using cars in cities, the air would become much cleaner. This would be good for people’s health and could make cities nicer places to live. Also, without cars, there would be more space for things like parks and bicycle lanes, which could make cities more enjoyable.
However, there are some problems with making cities completely car-free. Many people need cars to get to work, especially if they live far from the city or in areas with bad public transport. If we ban cars, these people might lose their jobs or have to move. Also, some businesses need cars to deliver goods or provide services. Without cars, these businesses might suffer.
I think a better solution is to reduce the number of cars in cities without banning them completely. We could do this by improving public transportation so that more people choose to use buses and trains instead of driving. We could also make more areas of the city car-free, but not the whole city. This way, we can reduce pollution without causing too many problems for people who need to use cars.
In conclusion, while banning cars in cities could help reduce air pollution, it might also cause some difficulties. I believe a balanced approach that reduces car use but doesn’t completely ban cars is the best way to tackle this problem.
Sample Essay 3 (Band 5-6)
Air pollution is very bad in cities because of cars. Some people say we should not allow cars in cities to make the air cleaner. I think this is a good idea but also has some problems.
Cars make a lot of pollution in cities. They make the air dirty and hard to breathe. If we stop cars in cities, the air will be much cleaner. This is good for people’s health. Also, without cars, cities will be quieter and safer for walking and cycling.
But banning cars can also cause problems. Many people use cars to go to work or take their children to school. If they can’t use cars, it will be difficult for them. Also, some jobs need cars, like taxi drivers or delivery people. These people might lose their jobs if cars are not allowed in cities.
I think we should try to use fewer cars in cities, but not ban them completely. We can make better buses and trains so people don’t need to drive so much. We can also make some parts of the city where cars are not allowed, but not the whole city. This way, we can have cleaner air but still let people use cars when they really need to.
In conclusion, I think banning cars in cities can help reduce air pollution, but it can also cause problems. We should try to reduce car use in cities but not stop it completely.
Pedestrian-friendly urban area with cyclists and public transport
Explanation of Band Scores
Band 8-9 Essay:
- Fully addresses all parts of the task with a well-developed response
- Presents a clear position throughout the essay
- Uses a wide range of vocabulary with very natural and sophisticated control
- Uses a wide range of complex sentence structures
- Demonstrates a high level of grammatical accuracy
- Ideas are coherent, with clear progression throughout
- Uses cohesive devices effectively
Band 6-7 Essay:
- Addresses all parts of the task, though some parts may be more fully covered than others
- Presents a relevant position, though the conclusions may become unclear at times
- Uses an adequate range of vocabulary with some errors in word choice
- Uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms
- Has generally good control of grammar and punctuation but may make some errors
- Arranges information coherently and there is clear overall progression
- Uses cohesive devices but not always appropriately
Band 5-6 Essay:
- Addresses the task only partially; the format may be inappropriate in places
- Expresses a position but the development is not always clear
- Uses limited range of vocabulary; errors in word choice may cause some difficulty for the reader
- Uses limited range of structures with some attempt to use complex sentences
- Makes frequent grammatical errors
- Presents information with some organization but there may be a lack of overall progression
- Makes inadequate, inaccurate or over-use of cohesive devices
Key Vocabulary to Remember
- Urban planning (noun) – /ˈɜːrbən ˈplænɪŋ/ – The process of designing and organizing urban areas
- Sustainable (adjective) – /səˈsteɪnəbl/ – Able to be maintained at a certain rate or level
- Emissions (noun) – /ɪˈmɪʃənz/ – The production and discharge of something, especially gas or radiation
- Congestion (noun) – /kənˈdʒestʃən/ – The state of being overcrowded, especially with traffic
- Infrastructure (noun) – /ˈɪnfrəstrʌktʃər/ – The basic physical and organizational structures and facilities needed for the operation of a society or enterprise
- Pedestrian (noun) – /pəˈdestriən/ – A person walking rather than travelling in a vehicle
- Incentivize (verb) – /ɪnˈsentɪvaɪz/ – Provide (someone) with a motivation to do something
- Implement (verb) – /ˈɪmplɪment/ – Put (a decision, plan, agreement, etc.) into effect
- Counterproductive (adjective) – /ˌkaʊntərprəˈdʌktɪv/ – Having the opposite of the desired effect
- Nuanced (adjective) – /ˈnjuːɑːnst/ – Characterized by subtle shades of meaning or expression
Conclusion
The topic of car-free cities and their impact on pollution is a complex and nuanced issue that’s likely to appear in future IELTS Writing Task 2 exams. To prepare effectively, practice writing essays on similar topics such as:
- The role of public transportation in reducing urban pollution
- The benefits and drawbacks of pedestrian-only zones in city centers
- The impact of electric vehicles on urban air quality
- How urban planning can create more inclusive cities
Remember, the key to success in IELTS Writing Task 2 is not just about your opinion, but how well you can articulate and support your ideas. Practice regularly, focusing on structure, vocabulary, and coherence. Don’t forget to time yourself to ensure you can complete the task within the allocated 40 minutes.
We encourage you to try writing your own essay on this topic and share it in the comments section below. This is an excellent way to practice and get feedback from others preparing for the IELTS exam. Good luck with your IELTS preparation!