Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

Some people support the idea of imposing taxes on fossil fuels (oil, coal and gas) in order to reduce energy consumption. Others disagree with this approach. Consider the debate and its arguments, and come to your own conclusion.

Some people support the idea of imposing taxes on fossil fuels (oil, coal and gas) in order to reduce energy consumption. Others disagree with this approach. Consider the debate and its arguments, and come to your own conclusion. 65w8
Most people agree that the use of fossil fuels should be reduced to some extent. However, imposing taxes is a controversial tactic which appears to have a number of contradictory effects. We will consider both sides of the discussion in this essay. On the one hand, those who support taxation of fossil fuels promote the idea that higher prices will lead to lower consumption and thus lower emissions. They point to evidence from countries such as Sweden where this appears to be the case, and urge other nations to follow suit. Furthermore, proponents of fuel taxes claim that the funds raised can then be used to subsidise renewable energy projects such as solar and localised biofuel reactors. To the supporters of the idea, these benefits are convincing. However, opponents of fuel tax are able to cite evidence from other countries (including France and Italy) where higher tax has apparently not reduced demand for such fuels. In these cases, the effect has been to force people to pay more for the same volume of energy, which appears to penalise those who can least afford it. Moreover, critics of fuel tax also highlight the difficulty in governments promising renewable schemes without interfering in the entire energy market. If the state was to control the entire market for fuels, they say, this would force suppliers to leave the market, thus reducing competition and efficiency. This argument also appears to be quite powerful. Overall, I would tend to side with the opponents of fuel taxation. It seems to be unreasonable to force vulnerable consumers to pay more for a commodity which is essential to them, without a real infrastructure for renewable energy being in place. It would be more logical to improve availability of renewables first, which would allow consumers to make a genuine choice.
Most
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
people
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
agree
that the
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
use
of fossil
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
fuels
should be
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
reduced
to
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
some
extent.
However
, imposing

taxes is a controversial tactic which appears to have a number of contradictory effects. We will consider both

sides of the discussion in this essay.

On the one hand, those who support taxation of fossil
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
fuels
promote the
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
idea
that higher prices will

lead to lower consumption and
thus
lower emissions. They point to evidence from countries such as Sweden

where this appears to be the case, and urge other nations to follow suit.
Furthermore
, proponents of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
fuel
taxes

claim that the funds raised can then be
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
used
to
Possible spelling mistake. 'subsidise' is British English.
subsidise
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
renewable
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
energy
projects such as solar and
Possible spelling mistake. 'localised' is British English.
localised


biofuel reactors. To the supporters of the
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
idea
, these benefits are convincing.

However
, opponents of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
fuel
tax are able to cite evidence from other countries (including France and

Italy) where higher tax has
apparently
not
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
reduced
demand for such
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
fuels
. In these cases, the effect has been to

force
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
people
to pay more for the same volume of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
energy
, which appears to
Possible spelling mistake. 'penalise' is British English.
penalise
those who can least afford

it.
Moreover
, critics of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
fuel
tax
also
highlight the difficulty in
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
governments
promising
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
renewable
schemes

without interfering in the entire
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
energy
market. If the state was to control the entire market for
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
fuels
, they say,

this would force suppliers to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
leave
the market,
thus
reducing competition and efficiency. This argument
also


appears to be quite powerful.

Overall
, I would tend to side with the opponents of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
fuel
taxation. It seems to be unreasonable to force

vulnerable consumers to pay more for a commodity which is essential to them, without a real infrastructure

for
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
renewable
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
energy
being in place. It would be more logical to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
improve
availability of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
renewables
first
, which

would
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
allow
consumers to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
make
a genuine choice.
What do you think?
  • This is funny writingFunny
  • I love this writingLove
  • This writing has blown my mindWow
  • It made me angryAngry
  • It made me sadSad

IELTS essay Some people support the idea of imposing taxes on fossil fuels (oil, coal and gas) in order to reduce energy consumption. Others disagree with this approach. Consider the debate and its arguments, and come to your own conclusion.

Essay
  American English
5 paragraphs
301 words
5.5
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 6.0
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • Include an introduction and conclusion
  • Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 5.0
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 6.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 5.0
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Recent posts





Get more results for topic:
  • Some people support the idea of imposing taxes on fossil fuels (oil, coal and gas) in order to reduce energy consumption. Others disagree with this approach. Consider the debate and its arguments, and come to your own conclusion.