The deterioration of environment attracts much government’s concern. It leads to the controversy about raising fuel cost. While some people argue that this practice can reduce consuming fuel and lessen air pollution, I think it is not the best way to tackle the problems as there are better ways and the price increases could lead to economic issues.
To begin with, several measures could be applied to decelerate the rate of pollution. Firstly, rather than non-renewable resources, government should invest in alternatives such as wind and solar energy. These kinds of power have been proved as effective ways to mitigate carbon dioxide emission in Europe and America. Secondly, enhancing public transportation and reducing travelling cost could encourage people to use public vehicles more; consequently, vehicles’ fume could be reduced. Apart from the government, automobile corporations could contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emission by manufacturing electric products. For instance, electric cars of Tesla use electricity as the main power leads to the decrease in exhaust.
On the other hand, increasing the price of fuel cause a burden on the economy. Fuel cost determines the market price as rising fuel costs could lead to another increase in the price of daily used groceries, food, and other households. As a result, middle and low-class families are unable to afford household expenditure. Therefore, the gap between the poor and the rich is widened which could result in economy economic instability and inflation.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that raising the price of fuel is not the best measure to address environmental problems.
The deterioration of environment attracts much
government
’s concern. It leads to the controversy about raising
fuel
cost
. While
some
people
argue that this practice can
reduce
consuming
fuel
and lessen air pollution, I
think
it is not the best way to tackle the problems as there are better ways and the
price
increases could
lead
to economic issues.
To
begin
with, several measures could
be applied
to decelerate the rate of pollution.
Firstly
,
rather
than non-renewable resources,
government
should invest in alternatives such as wind and solar energy. These kinds of power have
been proved
as effective ways to mitigate carbon dioxide emission in Europe and America.
Secondly
, enhancing public transportation and reducing travelling
cost
could encourage
people
to
use
public vehicles more;
consequently
, vehicles’ fume could be
reduced
. Apart from the
government
, automobile corporations could contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emission by manufacturing electric products.
For instance
, electric cars of Tesla
use
electricity as the main power leads to the decrease in exhaust.
On the other hand
, increasing the
price
of
fuel
cause a burden on the economy.
Fuel
cost
determines the market
price
as rising
fuel
costs
could
lead
to another increase in the
price
of daily
used
groceries, food, and other households.
As a result
, middle and low-
class
families are unable to afford household expenditure.
Therefore
, the gap between the poor and the rich
is widened
which could result in economy economic instability and inflation.
In conclusion
, I
strongly
believe that raising the
price
of
fuel
is not the best measure to address environmental problems.