The topic of carbon taxes to reduce pollution is a recurring theme in IELTS Writing Task 2 essays. Based on analysis of past exams and current environmental trends, this subject is likely to appear frequently in future tests. Let’s examine a relevant question that has appeared in recent IELTS exams:
Some people think that the best way to reduce pollution is to increase the cost of fuel for vehicles. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Analyzing the Question
This question focuses on a specific approach to reducing pollution – increasing fuel costs. It’s important to note that while the question doesn’t explicitly mention carbon taxes, increasing fuel costs is often a direct result of such taxes. The task requires you to express your opinion on the effectiveness of this method in reducing pollution.
Sample Essays
Band 8-9 Essay
In an era of escalating environmental concerns, the proposition of raising fuel prices as a means to combat pollution has gained traction. While I acknowledge the potential benefits of this approach, I believe it is only part of a more comprehensive solution needed to address the complex issue of pollution effectively.
Undoubtedly, increasing the cost of fuel for vehicles could yield positive results in reducing pollution. Higher fuel prices would likely discourage unnecessary driving, prompting individuals to seek alternative modes of transportation such as public transit, cycling, or walking. This shift could lead to a significant decrease in vehicle emissions, which are a major contributor to air pollution in urban areas. Moreover, elevated fuel costs might incentivize automobile manufacturers to invest more heavily in developing fuel-efficient and electric vehicles, further reducing the carbon footprint of the transportation sector.
However, relying solely on increased fuel costs to tackle pollution overlooks several critical factors. Firstly, this approach may disproportionately affect lower-income individuals who depend on personal vehicles for work but cannot afford to upgrade to more efficient models. This could exacerbate social inequalities and potentially face public resistance. Secondly, while personal vehicle use is a significant source of pollution, it is not the only one. Industrial emissions, energy production, and agricultural practices also contribute substantially to pollution levels, and these sectors would remain largely unaffected by higher fuel prices.
Therefore, I argue that a more holistic approach is necessary to effectively reduce pollution. This could include implementing stricter emissions standards for industries, investing in renewable energy sources, improving public transportation infrastructure, and promoting sustainable urban planning. Additionally, governments should focus on educating the public about environmental issues and encouraging behavioral changes that reduce individual carbon footprints.
In conclusion, while increasing fuel costs could play a role in reducing pollution from vehicles, it should be part of a broader, multi-faceted strategy. By combining economic incentives with regulatory measures, technological advancements, and public awareness campaigns, we can create a more sustainable and equitable approach to combating pollution.
(Word count: 318)
Band 6-7 Essay
The idea of increasing fuel costs to reduce pollution is an interesting one, and I partially agree with this approach. While it can be effective in some ways, I believe there are also some drawbacks to consider.
On the positive side, higher fuel prices could definitely encourage people to drive less. This would lead to fewer cars on the road and less pollution from vehicle exhausts. People might choose to use public transport more often, or even walk or cycle for short trips. Also, expensive fuel might make people think about buying more fuel-efficient cars or electric vehicles, which are better for the environment.
However, there are some problems with this solution. First, it’s not fair to everyone. Poor people who need to drive to work might suffer a lot if fuel becomes too expensive. They might not be able to afford newer, more efficient cars either. Second, while this might help reduce pollution from cars, it doesn’t address other sources of pollution like factories or power plants.
I think a better approach would be to combine higher fuel costs with other methods. Governments could improve public transportation to give people alternatives to driving. They could also offer incentives for buying eco-friendly vehicles. Additionally, stricter rules for industrial pollution and more investment in clean energy would help tackle pollution from other sources.
In conclusion, increasing fuel costs can help reduce pollution to some extent, but it’s not a complete solution. A mix of different strategies would be more effective and fairer for everyone.
(Word count: 249)
Band 5-6 Essay
I think that making fuel more expensive to reduce pollution is a good idea, but it also has some problems. Here’s why I partly agree with this method.
First, if fuel costs more, people will drive less. This means fewer cars on the roads and less pollution from car exhaust. People might choose to take the bus or train instead of driving their own cars. Also, when fuel is expensive, people might buy cars that use less fuel or electric cars, which are better for the environment.
But there are also some bad things about this idea. If fuel is very expensive, it will be hard for poor people who need to drive to work. They might not be able to pay for the fuel they need. Also, making fuel expensive only helps with pollution from cars. It doesn’t do anything about pollution from factories or other sources.
I think it would be better to use this idea along with other ways to reduce pollution. For example, the government could make public transport better so people have good alternatives to driving. They could also make rules to stop factories from polluting too much. Teaching people about pollution and how to be more environmentally friendly is important too.
In conclusion, making fuel more expensive can help reduce pollution, but it’s not perfect. We need to use many different ways together to really solve the pollution problem.
(Word count: 218)
Explanation of Band Scores
Band 8-9 Essay
This essay demonstrates excellent writing skills and a sophisticated approach to the topic:
- Task Response: The essay fully addresses all parts of the task, presenting a well-developed response with relevant, extended, and supported ideas.
- Coherence and Cohesion: Ideas are logically organized with clear progression throughout. A wide range of cohesive devices is used effectively.
- Lexical Resource: A wide range of vocabulary is used with very natural and sophisticated control of lexical features.
- Grammatical Range and Accuracy: A wide range of structures is used with full flexibility and accuracy.
Band 6-7 Essay
This essay shows a good attempt at addressing the task with some room for improvement:
- Task Response: The essay addresses all parts of the task, though some aspects are covered more fully than others.
- Coherence and Cohesion: There is a clear overall progression, but some ideas may lack logical sequencing.
- Lexical Resource: An adequate range of vocabulary is used for the task, with some attempts at less common vocabulary.
- Grammatical Range and Accuracy: A mix of simple and complex sentence forms is used with generally good control.
Band 5-6 Essay
This essay demonstrates a basic understanding of the task but lacks sophistication:
- Task Response: The essay addresses the task in a general way, but the format is simple and ideas may lack development.
- Coherence and Cohesion: The overall progression is evident, but paragraphing may be inadequate or mechanical.
- Lexical Resource: A limited range of vocabulary is used, with some errors in word choice and spelling.
- Grammatical Range and Accuracy: A limited range of structures is used, with some errors that may cause slight difficulty for the reader.
Key Vocabulary to Remember
- Carbon tax (noun) /ˈkɑːrbən tæks/ – A fee imposed on the burning of carbon-based fuels
- Emissions (noun) /ɪˈmɪʃənz/ – The production and discharge of something, especially gas or radiation
- Incentivize (verb) /ɪnˈsentɪvaɪz/ – To motivate or encourage someone to do something
- Sustainable (adjective) /səˈsteɪnəbəl/ – Able to be maintained at a certain rate or level
- Infrastructure (noun) /ˈɪnfrəstrʌktʃər/ – The basic physical and organizational structures and facilities
- Disproportionately (adverb) /ˌdɪsprəˈpɔːrʃənətli/ – To a degree that is too large or too small in comparison with something else
- Holistic (adjective) /hoʊˈlɪstɪk/ – Characterized by the treatment of the whole rather than just the parts
- Exacerbate (verb) /ɪɡˈzæsərbeɪt/ – Make (a problem, bad situation, or negative feeling) worse
- Carbon footprint (noun) /ˈkɑːrbən ˈfʊtprɪnt/ – The amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere as a result of one’s activities
- Eco-friendly (adjective) /ˈiːkoʊ ˈfrendli/ – Not harmful to the environment
Conclusion
The topic of carbon taxes and pollution reduction is likely to remain relevant in future IELTS Writing Task 2 exams. To prepare, practice writing essays on related themes such as:
- The role of government in environmental protection
- Balancing economic growth with environmental concerns
- The effectiveness of individual actions versus policy changes in addressing climate change
Remember to structure your essays clearly, use a range of vocabulary and complex sentences, and fully address all parts of the question. Feel free to practice by writing your own essay on the given topic and sharing it in the comments section for feedback and discussion.