Some people think that one of the best ways to solve environmental problems is to increase the cost of fuels for cars and other vehicles. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? v.1

Over the past decades, environmental issues have been increasingly recognized. Many solutions are proposed to tackle these problems, one of which is to increase the fuel cost for vehicles in order to cut off the exhaust fumes emitted into the surroundings when people are travelling. From my perspective, I totally disapprove of this idea. It is obviously seen that, in case the authorities incline fuel price, such action merely poses a difficulty to the citizens. People are pressured to spend more money on buying fuels for their transportation demands. Consequently, at that point, they are able to save less money every month. This phenomena is expected to result in the deterioration of living conditions since when a large shortage of money emerges, the residents will not afford as much amenities as they did before. Furthermore, in the long run, this implication could lead to wider social gap because middle-level and below families are severely affected by this trend. On the other hand, many opponents might argue that there are several alternative approaches that need to be put in practice. For commutation, one successful model is to enhance public transportation systems, which encourages the use of people across the country from all levels with fair prices. In fact, the more passengers use public transportation, the more volume of vehicles on the roads drop, which enables fresh air. Therefore, this proposal is believed to not only bridge the social gap, but also avoid the traffic congestion. In conclusion, increasing the price of fuels is not an appropriate method to reduce environmental pollution. Such way imposes more drawbacks than benefits, so the government is supposed to launch alternative policies and laws for the residents to be environmentally-friendly while commuting.