急需帮忙写篇雅思大作文,5.5标准就行~谢谢谢

发布网友发布时间：2022-05-11 20:45

共2个回答

热心网友时间：2023-10-19 22:30

= =建议买本十天突破雅思写作.

虽然那些句子很扯淡,不过看一看还是有好处.

分析一下好了..

写四段折中,disagree.

开头段很好写,这里不多说.

第二段写*用重税来*这个状况的好处是什么.写短一点,是让步段.

例如,重税之下人们会选择使用其他的交通工具而不是飞机,*得到更多的税收可以用于环保,因此会带来一系列的好处等等.

第三段提出你的观点,其实我们有更好的方法来解决这个问题,例如投资教育,增强人们环保的意识,加强其他公共交通工具的建设,等等.

结尾,even though高税*很有用, i do not believe that is the best or only way来解决这个问题,其实* is supposed to........

大概就是这个样子啦...也不是很难想吧.

热心网友时间：2023-10-19 22:30

The argument that the flights should be restricted is invalid. Clearly, it is unconvincing to compare the volume of pollutants an airplane proces with that generated by an automobile, because an airplane is shared by many passengers while an automobile is usually for one or, at the best, several passengers.
Suppose a visitor drives 1,000 miles, burning 100 liter gasoline and emitting 10 cubic meter carbon dioxide, this very passenger is totally responsible for such an environment problem. But to what extent should another passenger, who travels the same distance by air, take environment responsibility? If the airplane consumes 10,000 liter gasoline and proces 1000 cubic meter carbon dioxide and if altogether 300 passengers share the flight, then traveling by air causes less environmental damage.
Another thing must also be in the list of consideration: the time. Traveling by air saves time. The point is that even if traveling by automobiles consumes less energy and proces less pollutants, traveling by air has a variety of reasons. For instance, a patient is transported by air from where she is injured to the hospital.
The opponents might argue that this is not the “unnecessary flights”. Nevertheless it is ambiguous and vague to use such a term. How to define an “unnecessary” flight? Is there a legal or generally accepted criterion against which the feature of a flight can be clearly and correctly labeled as “necessary” or “unnecessary”? Nay.
Therefore, the argument mentioned in the topic is neither logically sound nor practically significant.

此文可鉴