Clean air is one of the most vital things for the survival of life on the earth. However, these days its quality has deteriorated because of pollution. Many people think that if there is a limitation on the number of flights around, then the situation will improve. In my opinion, this is an impractical and incomplete solution.
To commence with, people think of aeroplanes as the biggest source of air pollution because they fly and a large amount of fuel is required to generate energy to go up in the atmosphere against the force of gravity. Moreover, in order to continue the flight, energy is needed to maintain the relative velocity against the atmosphere. The combustion of this fuel releases 13, 000 tonnes of harmful gases. Therefore, if there is a decline in the rate of the flying, then this combustion will be decreased and there will be lesser harm to the nature.
On the contrary, reduction in the air travel is not the most effective option for resolution. Firstly, the vehicles on the road cause much more damage to the natural habitat as compared to the aeroplanes. For instance, there is a release of 75, 000 tonnes of harmful gases from the vehicles on the road, which is much higher than the release from the aviation. In addition, the fuel used in aircrafts is highly efficient as there is need to keep the aircraft as light as possible. Secondly, it is an impractical solution because it has enabled humans to navigate from one corner of the world to another within few hours. So, there is more usability of aviation.
To conclude, putting restrictions on the rate of aviation is not a viable solution to prevent the air pollution. According to me, discovering cleaner methods of generation of energy not just for the aeroplanes, but road traffic and factories as well, could be much more effective resolution.
Clean
air
is one of the most vital things for the survival of life on the earth.
However
, these days its quality has deteriorated
because
of pollution.
Many
people
think
that if there is a limitation on the number of flights around, then the situation will
improve
. In my opinion, this is an impractical and incomplete solution.
To commence with,
people
think
of
aeroplanes
as the biggest source of
air
pollution
because
they
fly
and a large amount of fuel
is required
to generate energy to go up in the atmosphere against the force of gravity.
Moreover
, in order to continue the flight, energy
is needed
to maintain the relative velocity against the atmosphere. The combustion of this fuel releases 13, 000 tonnes of harmful gases.
Therefore
, if there is a decline in the rate of the flying, then this combustion will
be decreased
and there will be lesser harm to the nature.
On the contrary
, reduction in the
air
travel is not the most effective option for resolution.
Firstly
, the vehicles on the road cause much more damage to the natural habitat as compared to the
aeroplanes
.
For instance
, there is a release of 75, 000 tonnes of harmful gases from the vehicles on the road, which is much higher than the release from the aviation.
In addition
, the fuel
used
in
aircrafts
is
highly
efficient as there
is need
to
keep
the aircraft as light as possible.
Secondly
, it is an impractical solution
because
it has enabled humans to navigate from one corner of the world to another within few hours.
So
, there is more usability of aviation.
To conclude
, putting restrictions on the rate of aviation is not a viable solution to
prevent
the
air
pollution.
According to me
, discovering cleaner methods of generation of energy not
just
for the
aeroplanes
,
but
road traffic and factories
as well
, could be much more effective resolution.