It is believed that traffic and pollution issues would be best tackled by inflating the price of petroleum. In my opinion, this idea is completely flawed and there are several reasonable alternatives.
Clearly the price of fuel has little to do with pressing problems of traffic and pollution. The inevitable demand for time efficience and safe commuting in the modern world makes the change of fuel prices become rather insignificant, which proves the ineffectiveness of the suggested policy. In other words, even if the price were increased, people would still travel by their preferred form of transport on a daily basis and the problems of traffic and pollution would remain. Additionally, this solution could easily trigger social disagreement and resentment. This, coupled with the reluctance of using expensive fuel to travel every day, could be counter-productive and this proposed idea would become irrelevant.
On the other hand, alternatives to increasing the price of petrol show greater effectiveness. Firstly, governments could implement certain regulations restricting the use of private vehicles such as cars and turn people to using public transportation. This would relieve many roads from heavy traffic congestion by reducing the number of vehicles on the road, which in turn alleviates the problem of pollution caused by exhaust emissions. Secondly, in many cities around the world, cycling has proved to be an effective, environmentally friendly form of alternative transport and should be encouraged more in other major cities. Certain infrastructure, such as separate zones for cyclists, should be created to help avoid the overload of traffic during rush hour when the number of vehicles can exceed the road’s capacity.
In conclusion, I believe that heightening the price of fuel used for travelling to address traffic and pollution problems is somewhat absurd; and that there is a number of other more suitable and effective solutions.
It
is believed
that
traffic
and
pollution
issues would be best tackled by inflating the
price
of petroleum. In my opinion, this
idea
is completely flawed and there are several reasonable alternatives.
Clearly
the
price
of
fuel
has
little
to do with pressing
problems
of
traffic
and
pollution
. The inevitable demand for time
efficience
and safe commuting in the modern world
makes
the
change
of
fuel
prices
become
rather
insignificant, which proves the ineffectiveness of the suggested policy. In
other
words, even if the
price
were increased
,
people
would
still
travel by their preferred form of transport on a daily basis and the
problems
of
traffic
and
pollution
would remain.
Additionally
, this solution could
easily
trigger social disagreement and resentment. This, coupled with the reluctance of using expensive
fuel
to travel every day, could be counter-productive and this proposed
idea
would become irrelevant.
On the
other
hand, alternatives to increasing the
price
of petrol
show
greater effectiveness.
Firstly
,
governments
could implement certain regulations restricting the
use
of private vehicles such as cars and turn
people
to using public transportation. This would relieve
many
roads from heavy
traffic
congestion by reducing the number of vehicles on the road, which in turn alleviates the
problem
of
pollution
caused by exhaust emissions.
Secondly
, in
many
cities around the world, cycling has proved to be an effective,
environmentally
friendly form of alternative transport and should
be encouraged
more in
other
major cities. Certain infrastructure, such as separate zones for cyclists, should
be created
to
help
avoid the overload of
traffic
during rush hour when the number of vehicles can exceed the road’s capacity.
In conclusion
, I believe that heightening the
price
of
fuel
used
for travelling to address
traffic
and
pollution
problems
is somewhat absurd; and that there is a number of
other
more suitable and effective solutions.