Câu hỏi:
07/01/2025 109Câu hỏi trong đề: 2000 câu trắc nghiệm tổng hợp Tiếng Anh 2025 có đáp án !!
Quảng cáo
Trả lời:
Sample 1:
Opinions are divided on whether higher education should be made free of charge for all individuals, eliminating financial barriers, as many consider it a universal right. Although this proposition could yield certain benefits, I believe its associated disadvantages far outshine them.
Admittedly, free university access, in theory, could be beneficial to both personal finances and a nation’s workforce. Regarding the former, university tuition fees are increasingly unaffordable in most countries, and thus add to the financial burden that students and families must bear. Subsidizing these expenses would provide additional funds for the populace to address other essential needs, such as food or healthcare, and help alleviate the wealth gap between social groups. Alleviating financial constraints would also enable students from disadvantaged backgrounds to reach their full potential by pursuing majors that best fit their abilities. This scenario could lead to a more educated and productive workforce, fostering more prosperous economies, as seen in Germany and many Scandinavian nations.
However, I believe such a policy may do more harm than good, due to the significant drawbacks it would cause. One of them is that easier access to higher education could diminish its value and also overwhelm educational institutions with applicants. The surge in university students would reduce teaching quality, and graduates could run into challenges finding appropriate employment because of increased competition. All of this eventually wastes a society’s resources in terms of both finances and labour. Moreover, government budgets would be strained by funding this policy. These pressures could result in higher taxes or cuts to other public service sectors, potentially having unforeseen socioeconomic consequences.
In conclusion, while I acknowledge there are certain potential merits to free university education, it could ultimately waste the resources of taxpayers and put pressure on national budgets. As a result, I believe such a policy should not be implemented.
Sample 2:
The accessibility of tertiary education among young citizens has consistently been a controversial issue, in which several people argue that providing free university education to all students regardless of their financial background is essential. From a personal perspective, I emphatically disapprove of this assumption owing to its unfeasibility and undesirability.
To begin with, offering all high-school graduates places in university proves highly impracticable given its unaffordability. In order to distribute free third-level educational services for such a large number of people, the government is entailed to construct more institutions and infrastructure namely classrooms, libraries and lighting. Such a barrage of prohibitive expenses would substantially reduce the national budget, resulting in the deficiency of financial subsidy for other public sectors such as healthcare and transportation. Furthermore, this large-scale provision could instigate a decline in the quality of training in higher education. Indeed, accommodating the demand for third-level education for all students irrespective of their ability may widen their intellectual disparity, thus rendering academic training for all of them more challenging and causing an overall decline in college quality.
In addition, with regard to employment opportunities, providing all school leavers with free access to higher education maybe furtile and ineffective. Due to the increasingly competitive labor market nowadays, the possibility of graduates securing an appropriate occupation is by no means guaranteed. As such, tertiary diplomas and qualifications cannot certify degree holders’ opportunity of being employed after their graduation. Another pitfall of granting numerous all students admission to university lies in an imbalance in the national workforce. As the majority of bachelors are trained to pursue such intellect-based careers as engineering or software programming, this policy could trigger a severe shortfall of manual labor and craftsmanship workers, thereby deterring the whole country’s economic development.
In conclusion, the detrimental impacts this approach could exert on the young’s career prospects and the national economy testify to its ineffectiveness and impracticability. Therefore, I am convinced that decisions as to tertiary education should be made optional based on each individual’ ability and background.
Sample 3:
Many today would argue that higher education is a basic right that should extend to all, regardless of socioeconomic background. In my opinion, I largely disagree since there is more value in improving the relationships between social classes.
Supporters of this policy point out that every taxpayer is entitled to equal treatment. Those who are wealthy typically receive little financial support from the government unless they have earned a prestigious scholarship. However, such families pay taxes at far higher rates than the average citizen. They have contributed greatly to the federal budget, and it is only just that they should receive an equal allocation of their share of government disbursement for university. Without financial aid, these individuals may feel they are being unfairly treated simply because they are more successful.
Although I recognize the legitimate merits to the argument above, I would generally side with those who believe a system that takes into account financial differences is more sustainable. If average families are not allocated the majority of funding for higher education, then they may not be able to attend these schools at all. This risk does not exist for the more affluent. Over time, this could have dire ramifications for society. The general populace might feel that upward social mobility is nearly impossible and become demotivated. They may also begin to resent the government and higher classes, creating the conditions for social unrest.
In conclusion, despite calls for fairness under the law, certain distinctions should be made for the betterment of society on the whole. Government policy should be aimed at equality of opportunity rather than a reductive understanding of equality.
Sample 4:
Education is a very important part of everyone’s life. Nowadays it is essential for everyone to get a good and high education to become successful in life. Some people think that all people have the right to get a free university education, and their financial background doesn’t matter for their study. In my honest opinion, I agree with this statement to a larger extent, and in some further, in further paragraphs, I will express my opinion with logical facts and points.
First of all, good and quality higher education is the basic need of every person. After completing school, higher education, like university education, played a very significant role in making a successful career. Many people are not able to get this education because of some financial problem, and for that reason, they can’t get high-paid jobs. University education should be made free of costs for everyone by the government so people can easily study without any hesitation and worry about finances while studying. So, they can easily concentrate on their studies and become successful in their life. As an epitome of me, so many Western countries and Arab countries such as Germany, Europe, Dubai, Israel already made university education free for the people of their country; because of that, the earning ratio of people of that country is higher than others.
Moreover, if the person gets higher university education and they get a high paid job, it is good for both the country and the person. For example, the person gets a job in a multinational company, so it increases the economy of the country by spending money in their own country, and it fills up the cost of their free education, which was given by the government as well, and a person can also happily live their life by earning handsome money.
On the other hand, giving free education to everyone is hard for the government. It takes lots of money to make university education free, of course for everyone, and it’s not possible for some poor countries such as Uganda, Zimbabwe. Moreover, if students get free education, then they can’t study in a good manner, and they don’t take education as seriously.
In the end, I would like to conclude by saying that university education plays a major role in one’s life, and government should take the step to make university education free for everyone.
Sample 5:
It is thought that studying at university is everyone’s right, and all tuition fees should be fully paid by the government. The former view is reasonable; however, I disagree that the government should take responsibility for students’ university education fees.
I believe every student is entitled to go to college to acquire tertiary degrees. It is because, from my point of view, knowledge gained at university should be freely imparted to everyone. Furthermore, all students, although different in financial backgrounds, are equal in intelligence and scholastic capability, hence equal opportunities to gain admittance to university.
However, the government is under no obligation to take care of university attenders’ education costs. Providing free tertiary education might either push the government to the verge of bankruptcy or levy higher taxes on citizens because the costs for the government to maintain facilities or employ qualified teachers are certainly exorbitant. Additionally, education quality would also suffer owing to the increased number of students in one class, which prevents teachers from giving out thorough care for everyone. In fact, class size also exerts a fairly significant impact on how each student interacts with teachers and their peers. If there are too many members in one class, they will be afraid to ask questions, for example, which leads to their poor performance at university.
In conclusion, while I agree that it is everyone’s right to pursue tertiary education, it seems to me that the government should not fully pay for study costs. So far, there have been ample opportunities for scholarships or exemptions; and I think that is the best method to support students.
Sample 6:
The right to access university education is a contentious issue, with some believing that the government should make it free for all students. Despite the supporting argument, I am inclined to disagree with this opinion, as this course of action has negative implications.
It is understandable that some people support free university education. The primary reason is that students would be provided with equal opportunities, with those from lower-income households being less disadvantaged in particular. Students who are normally burdened by tuition fees would be relieved of their predicament, allowing them to fully devote themselves to the pursuit of knowledge. Furthermore, such a policy can be the precursor to a highly educated population. Thanks to universalized tertiary education, more people can become academic experts, enhancing the level of discourse in society. It would, therefore, seem that making university education free of charge is a worthwhile goal.
This policy, however, is far from ideal. There would be a new financial burden on the public, since universities require additional funding to teach expanding student cohorts that inevitably result. Taxpayers would be disaffected if their hard-earned money is used to support groups of people whose material contribution to society is deemed nebulous. Another point less talked about is the reduced academic freedom in higher education. Universities which submit to this government policy to receive funding would be significantly influenced by what the bureaucrats decide they could teach. The consequences of this are less manifest in the short term, but eventually, a large part of society will have matured thinking the same way, reducing the diversity of opinion. Based on these points, it could be argued that tertiary education wholly funded by the public is more disadvantageous than it is beneficial.
In conclusion, I believe university education should not be free for all. As well-meaning as this course of action may sound, it would be an inefficient use of resources and not without pitfalls. There can be other measures to improve the level of knowledge among the populace while still leaving the government unburdened.
Sample 7:
The issue of access to university education is highly debated, particularly regarding whether the government should provide it free of charge to all students. Despite arguments in favor, I disagree with this stance due to its negative consequences.
It is understandable why some advocate for free university education. The main reason is to provide equal opportunities, especially benefiting students from low-income backgrounds. Removing tuition fees would relieve these students of financial burdens, allowing them to fully dedicate themselves to learning. Additionally, such a policy could lead to a more educated population, enhancing societal discourse. Thus, making university education free appears to be a worthwhile objective.
However, this policy is far from ideal. It would place a new financial burden on the public, as universities would require additional funding to accommodate the growing number of students. Taxpayers might resent their money supporting individuals whose contributions to society they perceive as unclear. Another less-discussed concern is the potential impact on academic freedom. Universities agreeing to government funding conditions could face restrictions on what they can teach, ultimately limiting diversity of thought in society. Considering these points, publicly funded tertiary education may be more disadvantageous than beneficial.
In conclusion, I believe that university education should not be universally free. Despite good intentions, this approach would inefficiently allocate resources and present significant challenges.
Sample 8:
It is unquestionable that every citizen should have equal opportunities to follow higher education. I believe that the government should allow students to attend university free of charge. However, I disagree with the policy of providing free higher education for all students regardless of their financial background.
Supplying free tertiary education for students is a sensible national investment. Numerous students, if not obliged to pay tuition fees, can afford to cover their living costs; thereby concentrating on academic performance or cultivate their professional skills. Therefore, they may be well qualified for future employment. Additionally, university graduates who have received governmental grants for all university tuition fees can become productive citizens contributing to social betterment. More specifically, after graduation from university, some graduates may become loyal and strong-willed soldiers who could ensure national security and sovereignty or teachers serving to raising people’s intellectual levels and shaping young generations’ behavioral patterns.
However, I oppose the idea of providing tuition fees subsidies for all students irrespective of whether they are rich or poor. Several learners who live in poverty are entitled to free tertiary education although they have no desire to enrich academic knowledge or professional skills. In this case, this policy proves to be a waste of money. Another explanation is that no sooner do national leaders pay all tuition fees for university education than there is high likelihood of a deficiency in state budget for community health services or public transport services which also require a huge amount of fund investment from the government for the benefits of the whole society.
In conclusion, in my view, there are several benefits of free education at university level. However, I disapprove that all students have free higher education opportunities no matter how rich or poor they are.
Sample 9:
Education is the basic right of every human being. Education creates empowerment and makes the people capable of earning their bread and butter. Today we will discuss the importance of education and government policies that shall mandate its access to each human being. As we say that education is priceless, I agree that education up to the university level shall be freely available irrespective of caste, creed and financial status of the family.
To begin with, education is the paramount need of every human being. It evolves the person and provides knowledge to synchronize with changing world and lifestyle. The percentage of educated people in a country decides its global position in the list of powerful nations. Education brings innovation, which eventually drives the growth of the country and attracts foreign investment. Availability of education shall be ensured by the government in all cities and far-flung areas. In fact, it shall be freely accessible by all people up to the university level without any discrimination and limitation.
Further to add above, education enables a person to know their rights, which makes them smart enough to get fooled, especially in the modern era, where the world is rapidly changing, and technology has infiltrated so much into people’s personal life. It provides them with enough understanding to make the right selection when required in cases such as voting for government positions. Uneducated people are the prey of politicians and can be fooled easily by them. Uneducated people can be easily divided in the name of caste and religion, which is not good for any country. An educated person understands the motive behind these tactics and stays away from all these tantrums.
To conclude this, I strongly agree that access to education up to the university level shall be provided free to ensure prosperity and development of the nation and society.
Sample 10:
A group of people thinks that the government should implement a free tuition policy for everyone to pursue higher education. In my opinion, I completely disagree with the idea that it has to be free for the whole world to acquire university education.
There are some understandable reasons why the tuition fees should not be free. Firstly, if the tuition is free, numerous students will take advantage of it which is unfair to serious ones/ which can lower the overall training standard. It is true/ undeniable/ irrefutable that once people pay for school, they partly show their attempts and money awareness. Hence, students with a serious intention deserve to have the right to acquire tertiary education and gain/ obtain the best job prospects ahead. Also, it is better for those that don’t have much ability and ambition to have other alternatives to learning things they cannot understand. Secondly, free higher/ further education can increase the rate of unemployment due to the great number of so-called well-educated people which makes the labour market more competitive. For example, because of the enormous surplus of fresh graduates on a yearly basis, there is a dramatic decline in job opportunities in Vietnam.
On the other hand, the university is already free to some extent. In most schools around the world, they always offer brilliant students full or half-fee scholarships. In addition, there are many organizations nowadays offering potential students scholarships as well as internship and job opportunities. By these ways can government not only motivate their students, but they also help maintain the capital sources to function higher tertiary
In conclusion, despite the great importance of tertiary education, I believe that free tuition policy applied to all students in the university should not be carried out.
Hot: 500+ Đề thi thử tốt nghiệp THPT các môn, ĐGNL các trường ĐH... file word có đáp án (2025). Tải ngay
CÂU HỎI HOT CÙNG CHỦ ĐỀ
Lời giải
Sample 1:
Although fossil fuels still remain the most important energy sources in many places, some countries are now already using alternative sources like solar or wind power. In my opinion, it can be difficult for a country to move towards using alternative energy at first, but this development brings about several benefits in the long run.
On the one hand, the change towards using alternative types of energy would probably put a heavy financial burden on the government and companies as they will have to invest millions of dollars in purchasing and developing new equipment and facilities for harnessing solar, wind or hydro-electric power. For example, the average cost of installing a wind turbine for generating electricity is about $3 million, and an average country would require a wind farm with hundreds of turbines to supply power to all companies and households. In addition, the production cost of large solar panels is still very high, which is why many countries, especially those with a poor economy, are still unable to use this power source.
However, I still believe that shifting towards using alternative energy is a worthwhile investment due to the great benefits it brings. Firstly, fossil fuels are the main cause of air pollution nowadays since petroleum-powered vehicles and factories are releasing tremendous amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere every day. Therefore, replacing coal and petroleum with wind or solar power will help to reduce the level of emissions in the atmosphere and improve air quality. Secondly, fossil fuels, like natural gas or oil, are finite resources and will soon be depleted, which will potentially threaten the economy if there are no alternative sources. This fact emphasizes the need to develop renewable energy to gradually replace traditional sources when fossil fuels inevitably run out.
In conclusion, I hold the view that despite the high initial cost of new equipment and facilities, the switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources is still necessary for the long-term development of the planet.
Sample 2:
The debate around our primary sources of energy has been intensifying in recent decades, with some pushing for more sustainable energy while others arguing that fossil fuels should remain the main source of power globally. I personally think renewable energy production should be encouraged, since it’s important that nations should seek to reduce their own carbon emissions to divert the dangers of climate change as well as build a more sustainable economy.
Firstly, fossil fuel should be discouraged because it could bring about the existential threat of climate change. As a result, biodiversity is at an all-time low, with shifting climates and rising sea levels slowly eroding the delicate tapestry of food webs across the globe. As scientists are convinced this is directly the cause of human activity, such as in agriculture and fossil fuel consumption, renewable energies would help slow this threat immediately and might be our only solution to salvaging the planet.
Secondly, one could argue that renewable energies are more sustainable and would therefore be better for the economy in the long run. While oil and coal are a finite resource and take millions of years to replenish, energy from wind and solar can in theory never run out. Therefore, making a switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy can be a solution that thinks of the longer term, since it could avert an economic crash when oil fully depletes. Many analysts have warned that with the current trajectory, oil could run out by 2050; when this happens, it could sharply affect the biggest economies in the world that are still heavily dependent on oil.
Overall, I argue that the climate effects as a result of fossil fuels consumption combined with the economic benefits of renewable energies mean that we should encourage the development of these forms of energy.
Sample 3:
Fossil fuels, such as coal, oil, and natural gas, have long been the dominant sources of energy in many countries. However, their extensive use has resulted in significant environmental harm, prompting the need for alternative sources of energy. In response to this, many countries are encouraging the adoption of renewable energy sources like wind and solar power. This essay will discuss the reasons behind the promotion of alternative energy sources and argue that it is a positive development.
One of the key reasons for the promotion of alternative energy sources is their potential to mitigate the negative environmental impacts associated with fossil fuels. Unlike fossil fuels, renewable energy sources produce little to no greenhouse gas emissions during operation, thereby reducing the contribution to climate change. For instance, countries like Germany have implemented strong incentives and subsidies to support the development of solar power, leading to a significant increase in the share of renewable energy in their energy mix. This shift towards cleaner sources of energy is driven by the recognition of the urgent need to combat climate change and reduce dependence on finite fossil fuel reserves.
The encouragement of alternative energy sources has numerous positive implications and is a positive trend. It promotes energy diversification, reducing reliance on a single energy source and increasing energy security. By harnessing the power of wind, solar, and other renewable sources, countries can decrease their vulnerability to fluctuations in fossil fuel prices and geopolitical tensions related to energy resources. Additionally, the transition to renewable energy stimulates innovation and job creation. As governments invest in renewable energy infrastructure and technologies, new industries and employment opportunities emerge.
In conclusion, the encouragement of alternative energy sources, such as wind and solar power, is driven by the need to address environmental concerns and promote sustainable development. By reducing greenhouse gas emissions, diversifying energy sources, and fostering economic growth, the adoption of renewable energy brings numerous benefits. Therefore, it is crucial for countries to continue investing in research, technology, and policy frameworks that support the widespread adoption of renewable energy, ensuring a cleaner and more sustainable energy future.
Sample 4:
Fossil fuel, though extensively used, is not eco-friendly, and its usage comes with huge environmental costs. Considering global warming and climate change, and the detrimental effects fossil fuels have on the environment, green fuel, such as solar, hydro and wind power, is increasingly being used in many countries. It is a good thing that many countries have already started using these green power sources.
The promotion of alternative sources of energy has gained significant momentum in numerous countries because of a growing concern about the adverse effects of fossil fuels on the environment such as greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. Governments and environmental organizations recognize the urgent need to transition to cleaner and more sustainable energy options. For instance, countries like Germany have implemented ambitious renewable energy targets, investing heavily in wind and solar power to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels and combat climate change.
The stock of fossil fuels is limited and would get exhausted at a certain point. So, alternative and green sources, which are renewable, would be the main source of our energy in the future. Despite the shift from fossil fuel to green energy being expensive and labour-intensive, green energy like wind and solar energy is renewable, their use should be as much encouraged as possible from right now, and it is a good thing that the trend has already started. Alternative sources of power, such as solar and wind power, do not pollute the environment, have lower carbon emissions and are eco-friendly. So, their use could save the planet from the disaster of global warming which is already visible around us. Wind power and solar power are in use in countries like Denmark, Germany and France, and more and more countries are joining the list. We already have extremely efficient technology to produce solar and wind power, and the trend is quite encouraging.
To conclude, the energy demand is increasing at a fast pace, and the stock of fossil fuels is diminishing. So, we should turn to alternative green energy sources and share the technology and expertise with all nations so that the transition happens all around the world to save our otherwise dying planet due to climate change and greenhouse effects.
Sample 5:
Every year the energy demand is increasing globally. So, the strains on the current and already limited resources are high. Since these energy resources, like fossil fuels, are mostly imported by countries, some countries have opted for alternative sources of energy to enjoy greater energy security. I wholeheartedly believe that it is a positive trend.
Alternative sources of energy offer greater energy security and independence and that is why their production and use is increasing. Relying on traditional energy sources, often imported from other countries, can leave nations vulnerable to price fluctuations and geopolitical tensions. Embracing renewable energy sources, such as hydroelectric, geothermal, or biomass, allows countries to tap into their own natural resources and reduce dependence on foreign energy imports. This is why it has already gained popularity.
Fossil fuels, like coal and oil, are not unlimited. A few countries like Germany and Japan, for example, are completely dependent on the import of such resources. For all these countries, alternative energy, also known as green energy, is the answer for the future, and it is a welcoming trend that many countries have already started producing green energy. By embracing renewable energy options, countries can address climate change, enhance energy independence, create employment opportunities, and drive technological progress. Countries like France and Norway, among others, have invested in the technology needed to produce extremely efficient solar panels to store energy from the sun or produce wind power. The positive impacts of this development are innumerable, and many countries are following in their footsteps.
In conclusion, the use of green energy sources is gaining traction because many countries want to become energy self-sufficient. This is definitely a positive trend as it reduces reliance on energy imports, helps countries fight climate change, advances technology and creates more employment.
Sample 6:
These days, the environment is being severely affected by the excessive use of nonrenewable energy resources, such as petrol, diesel, coal and natural gas. However, eco-friendly and renewable power sources like wind and solar power are being adopted in many countries mainly because they do not harm the environment, and I wholeheartedly think that it is a positive trend.
The shift towards renewable energy sources in many countries is primarily to fight global warming and climate change. Fossil fuels are often the reason climate change is so severe and threatens the existence of humans on the mother planet. Many countries, including Germany, Norway and France, have adopted the use of green energy like solar and wind power to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels to save the environment.
It is a positive trend as it greatly reduces the carbon content of the environment and makes the planet more sustainable. Without extensive use of green energy, we will soon transform our planet into an uninhabitable one. To save our planet from destruction, we need to produce and use more green and renewable energy. Moreover, it is cheaper to produce such clean energy than to extract coal or natural gas which makes these eco-friendly energies affordable to mass people. A recent study by Oxford University reveals that the production of solar power is 30% cheaper than that of fossil fuel. This finding again emphasizes how important it is for all nations to opt for renewable energy sources, and how beneficial it is that many countries have already invested in generating clean power.
In conclusion, even though we have harmed our mother planet to a great extent by indiscriminately using fossil fuels, some countries have already shown us a better way to produce and use power. It is expected that more countries will invest in alternative sources of energy to make the planet green again and make energy affordable for all.
Sample 7:
While fossil fuels have been the backbone of our energy supply for centuries, they have severe harmful impacts on our environment. Therefore, some countries have started relying on green energy to reverse the situation. And it is a positive trend that we have started researching and using alternative sources of energy, also known as green energy, that are sustainable and do not cause long-term damage to our environment.
One of the main reasons alternative energy sources are being used to produce green energy in many countries is their ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which are a major contributor to climate change. According to the International Energy Agency, the use of renewable energy sources can help reduce global CO2 emissions by up to 70% by 2050. This is a significant step towards protecting our planet from the devastating effects of climate change, including rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and loss of biodiversity.
The use of renewable sources to generate energy is a positive development for a variety of reasons. For instance, investing in renewable energy can also create jobs and boost the economy. According to the Renewable Energy and Jobs Annual Review 2020, the renewable energy sector employed around 11.5 million people worldwide in 2019, a 6% increase from the previous year. This growth in employment opportunities can help to stimulate local economies and provide new job opportunities for people in both developed and developing countries. For example, in Germany, the government's decision to phase out nuclear power plants and invest in renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, has created over 300,000 jobs and contributed to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
In conclusion, the shift towards green energy sources is a positive development that can help to protect our environment and create new job opportunities. While it may take time and investment to transition away from fossil fuels, it is a necessary step to ensure a sustainable future for generations to come.
Sample 8:
Many nations are now supporting the adoption of various energy alternatives in order to reduce fossil fuel consumption. In my opinion, though there may be short-term economic downsides, this is a decidedly positive development due to the implications on the environment generally.
Those who feel the sudden adoption of alternative energies is a negative point out the financial repercussions. There are economies around the world that are currently dependent on exporting fossil fuels, in particular in The Middle East, South America, and Eastern Europe. Many of these countries are still developing and have few other natural resources or industries that could replace a decline in the energy sector. The economic effects will extend far beyond exporters though. Both developed and developing nations ranging from the United States and Vietnam to China and Russia exploit oil for private vehicles and various industries. Substituting cheap oil for a more expensive alternative might result in economic catastrophe with wide-ranging repercussions.
However, the environmental effect is overwhelmingly more important for the long-term health of the planet. The economic results of less dependence on fossil fuels will cause short-term problems but the issues caused by climate change are also becoming a present reality. For instance, there has been a rise in the number of cataclysmic natural disasters related to rising ocean temperatures and deforestation. Even more troubling are the less noticed problems such as habitats being destroyed in remote areas like Antarctica and the Amazon Rainforest. Beyond the animals becoming endangered and extinct, it is only a number of years before human life is affected. This existential threat is the reason alternative energies are a pressing need.
In conclusion, despite the economic drawbacks of a sudden shift to alternative power sources, this reorientation will have a markedly positive long-term impact on the environment. Governments should therefore implement and bolster alternative energy initiatives.
Sample 9:
The development of renewable energies like wind power, wave power, or solar energy to replace the electricity generated from burning fossil fuels has become an increasingly popular trend in the world. I believe this is a green movement in the energy sector with countless benefits that people should welcome.
The most palpable advantage one can recognize at once when mentioning renewable energies is that they reduce the burden on the environment. The use of solar power creates no emission at all, and thus provides for the need of power at almost no environmental cost. It is similarly clean and sustainable when wind, wave, and water moving around the Earth eternally can be used in energy production. Also, the independence from fossil fuels in electricity generation saves the world from a rapid depletion of coal, oil and natural gases, and slow down the imminent energy crisis which may even cause wars over energy sources among countries.
Moreover, the production of green energy also benefits individuals and the country as a whole. Thanks to less burning of fossil fuels in thermal energy plants, workers in energy companies face less risks of occupational health problems especially those related to respiratory diseases and may lead to early death. On the large scale of a country, the utilization of wind, wave, sunlight, and even geothermal heat to produce electricity will diversify the energy portfolio of different nations, making them free from reliance on limited natural resources to generate electricity due to their unfavourable geographical locations.
In conclusion, the movement of the world towards more use of renewable energy is completely positive when it solves multiple problems of environmental pollution, dependence on natural resources for energy, and poor health of workers in thermal power plants.
Sample 10:
Governments across continents have turned their attention to more sustainable sources of energy as alternatives to fossil fuels. In my opinion, this could be seen as a progress for the following reasons.
First, there is no arguing that producing energy from buried dead organisms lacks sustainability, which means such production could not guarantee the survival of humans in the long term. In fact, the consumption of energy generated from fossil fuels tends to accelerate in direct correlation with the growth of the world population. With the current rate of exploitation, this valuable resource would dwindle away in no time, leaving no other choice than seeking additional reserves such as nuclear power or hydroelectricity. This is a safe solution to the fear of energy scarcity and ensures the future development of the human race.
Second, dependence on fossil fuel for worldwide energy supply would cause environmental degradation while using solar power, for example, is considered an ultimate choice of energy conservation. The combustion of fossil fuels is the culprit of greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollutants, leading to tremendous damage to the environment. Such suffering of the Earth could not be justified by the growing need of humans. By contrast, this would never be the case when it comes to other alternatives as mentioned above. If governments continue to invest in exploiting those new sources, there will be an unlimited amount of inexpensive energy in the long run.
In conclusion, I believe that the use of other potential energy sources to replace fossil fuels is obviously an important step forward.
Sample 11:
Fossil fuels, such as coal, oil, and natural gas, are extensively used in many countries and cause harm to the environment. The use of alternative sources of energy, including wind and solar power, however, is being encouraged in many countries. Is this a positive or negative development?
In several nations, non-renewable sources of energy, namely coal, petroleum, and gasoline, are used inordinately, which is severely damaging the ecosystem. However, other countries are promoting the usage of non-conventional sources of power, such as wind and solar energy. I personally consider that this has been a positive development because the non-traditional approach will aid in efficient energy output and protect the ecosystem from feasible hazards.
Primarily, the remarkable advantage of the aforementioned alternative sources is that they are renewable. These energy sources have a constant supply of power and there is no requirement for significant raw materials. Although it could be argued that the initial cost of setting up solar panels and wind farms is extremely high, I would assert that once the installation cost has been met with, their maintenance is practically negligible. Apart from this, it is widely accepted that fossil fuels take millions of years to form, and once consumed, they cannot be re-used. To illustrate, if modern individuals burn immense petroleum and coal, these resources are likely to vanish, and future generations would not be capable of using these precious energy sources.
Another major benefit of eco-friendly energy sources is their non-polluting nature. The intensive usage of natural resources forms carbon emissions and emits noxious gases that are nurturing global warming and depleting the ozone layer. Even worse, by inhaling such poisonous gases and carbon fumes, human beings are susceptible to various health ailments such as asthma and lung cancer. However, when energy is harnessed from wind turbines and solar panels there are no such deleterious by-products. Unlike other automobiles, for instance, commuting through a solar car would not emit carbon dioxide.
In conclusion, not only do alternative sources provide an inordinate amount of energy supply constantly, but they also preserve the environment in a very effective way. Therefore, I completely believe that this trend is a wholly positive development and one that authorities ought to promote.
Sample 12:
In this day and age, the consumption of non-renewable resources is burgeoning day by day. Owing to this it reached an alarming rate. It takes millions of years to form. However, some nations are taking a step forward and using non-conventional sources of power. This essay will highlight that this is certainly an optimistic approach that needs to be opted.
At the outset, non-conventional sources can be recycled and utilized again. Although, the use of alternative sources has some hurdles like the initial cost of setting up solar panels and wind farms is very high and these also rely on geographical locations. When masses use this energy source for a long period of time, the energy can be renewed and produced, no extra cost will have more economic benefit than the others. Besides this, the use of renewable energy could help to conserve foreign exchange and generate local employment if conservation technologies are designed, manufactured, assembled, and installed locally.
Moving further, alternative sources- wind power, tidal power, solar power – sources are totally safe for the environment, have lower carbon emission, and are eco-friendly. The research concluded that there are some countries that have utilized alternative sources namely German, France, and Denmark as these nations save the planet from a disaster of global warming. Some countries use automobile cars that work on solar power. Consequently, it has reduced the carbon footprint of such countries and made its greenery.
Based on this study it can be reiterated that the use of alternative sources of energy is an optimistic evolvement, which can save the whole globe from the catastrophic impact of greenhouse emissions as well as global warming. Furthermore, more and more folks should adopt renewable sources to ameliorate the conditions of the environment. In this way, by taking joint efforts individuals can preserve the world.
Sample 13:
Due to the shortage of fossil fuels, whether other natural power resources should be encouraged to harness or not, becomes a paramount concern for many countries. I believe, while this advancement may decrease awareness among people about protecting the fuels, it also solves the problem of the lack of energy sources.
First of all, fossil fuels which are the major energy resources in many nations are facing the threats of becoming obsolete due to the overuse by the human race in daily life. As a result, people should be encouraged to raise awareness of fuel conservation. However, the utilization of alternative natural energy sources could prevent people from doing this by reducing the fears of coal or oil that might be running out. Because there are other sources to use, they would use more energy generated from gas or oil without hesitation. In my personal opinion, the negative sides of using different resources of power could deteriorate the shortage of fuels.
Harnessing alternative power sources (such as solar or wind power), in contrast, could reduce the usage of fossil fuels in generating energy for a range of demanding activities such as heating and driving. While coal and oil mines are limited, natural resources such as wind and solar power are considered unlimited. This wind power or solar energy is consequently able to produce enough energy for human demand without the help of fossil fuels. As a result, it should be encouraged to be utilized in more countries in the world to gradually cut down the usage of fossil fuels.
To sum up, the encouragement of using natural resources (such as solar or wind) for producing energy has both negative and positive sides. However, I deem that humankind should consider using more power from solar or wind and less from coal and gas to protect the remaining parts of fossil fuels.
Sample 14:
Coals, oil, and gas are some fossil fuels that are the most common sources of energy for the majority of countries. On the other hand, some countries encourage the use of renewable resources like wind and solar energy. I believe this is a strongly positive development as we will be in grave danger if the world runs out of these natural non-renewable resources like fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels are used in almost all industries and for running motor vehicles. We can minimize this by using alternatives wherever possible. If it goes on like this, we will soon have such a shortage of these fuels that can pose a threat to running things efficiently. For example, some industries can only run on coal or oil, though this is not the case for cars. Automobiles can easily run on electricity, and so we should limit the use of such fuels. Burning too much of these fossil fuels also contributes to air pollution. Thus, it is important to minimize usage wherever possible.
On the other hand, wind energy and solar energy take comparatively longer time to generate, and they are largely dependent on the sun and the wind. We do not have any control over them, so the production of goods might slow down if there is less generation of energy as we cannot, in fact, control the weather. Perhaps tropical countries, where there is an abundant amount of sunshine and wind, can be encouraged to use these natural sources and not waste fossil fuels. However, for temperate climates, this might not be an option. Dependency on nature can have slower production rates and lead to not meeting the deadline or having scarcity in the market.
On the whole, I believe all the countries should be aware of the hazards of wasting too much of our natural reserves of energy and use them consciously and responsibly. Initiatives such as building consciousness about the issue should be taken to build a more environmentally friendly atmosphere.
Sample 15:
Fossil fuels harm the environment and to save our planet we need to encourage the use of green energy. The use of alternative sources of energy, or ‘green’ energy, is a positive trend of development, and indeed their use should be encouraged further.
As the demand for energy worldwide is increasing the strains on the existing and already limited resources also increase. To solve this problem, we must consider two issues: how to better use the existing, limited fossil fuel resources and how we can encourage the use of alternative energy sources.
It is universally acknowledged that there is a limitation on the use of fossil fuels, especially coal and oil. Some countries are rich in oil deposits like OPEC, whereas China is rich in coal deposits and Russia in natural gas. Others, such as Japan and Germany, are completely dependent on the import of resources. For all countries- resource-rich versus resource-poor, alternative energy should be encouraged and utilised to reduce the dependence on fossil fuels as well as to keep the global environment in balance and ‘healthy’.
The only way is to turn to other sources to get energy supply. Wind power and solar power are at present feasible alternatives. France is one country that has the advanced technology needed to produce extremely efficient solar panels to store energy from the sun. Both kinds of power can reduce a country’s dependence on fossil fuels. Furthermore, they do not pollute the environment and in turn, help keep the ecosystem stable.
To conclude, while fossil fuel resources are diminishing, the energy demand continues to increase year after year. It is a positive trend to develop other alternative sources of power and experiences should be shared and promoted. If this switch to alternative energy is encouraged early enough, then we may yet avoid the pending energy crisis and environmental disaster.
Lời giải
Sample 1:
It is argued that watching television has an adverse impact on children, whereas other people believe that it brings various benefits to them. I personally agree with the second group.
On the one hand, there are a number of reasons why some people think that children’s development would be negatively affected by watching TV. The first reason is that sitting in front of TV screens for too long is detrimental to children’s health. Many kids these days suffer from various health problems such as obesity, eye strain or fatigue due to prolonged television watching. Another reason is that many TV programmes and movies contain violent contents or sexual images which are inappropriate for children to watch. Heavy exposure to violent movies can put a child at a higher risk of violent behaviour, which could ruin their future.
On the other hand, I personally believe that television has an essential role to play in the development of children. Watching educational TV programmes gives children the opportunity to widen their horizons and enrich their knowledge of the world they live in. Planet Earth and Discovery Channel are prime examples. Their programmes not only take the viewer into unknown natural habitats which are home to various plants and animals, but also educate them about the importance of preserving the wonders of the Earth. In addition, many TV shows and channels provide children with limitless knowledge of almost every aspect of life. A programme called ‘Talent show for kids?’, for example, not only gives children enjoyable moments but also informs them about various subjects.
In conclusion, although some people say that watching TV is harmful to children, I would argue that it is very beneficial for them.
Sample 2:
The matter of screen time for children is open to debate, with some arguing against it while others highlight the benefits it could bring. This essay will examine both stances and present my personal opinion on the issue.
There exist certain health risks associated with TV-viewing for children. In terms of physical health conditions, excessive screen time can result in a wide range of health problems, from eye strain and back pain from prolonged periods in front of the TV, to weight gain and lethargy due to lack of exercise. These risks are also present in the adult population, but much more worrying for young children, who often lack self-control and thus are more prone to addiction. Regarding their mental well-being, children could develop behavioural problems from exposure to explicit content on screen, especially when there is no parental control installed on the device. The effects of violent or sexual acts on young minds are well- documented, with disobedience, aggression, and risk-taking tendencies being the most common issues.
Nevertheless, the advantages of watching TV for children should not be dismissed. One of the most significant benefits is language acquisition. The availability of shows in native tongue or foreign languages, coupled with subtitles and audio-visual aids, allows young children to grasp new vocabulary, as well as its usage. In fact, many children in Vietnam have eagerly learned English from watching shows from channels like Disney and Cartoon Network. Aside from language, TV shows also offer knowledge on numerous areas, including science, environment, history, etc. Vivid imagery and amusing delivery of hosts on kids' educational shows can help children better understand difficult concepts like multiplication compared to traditional textbooks.
In conclusion, after considering both sides of the argument, I believe that children stand to benefit academically from TV shows; however, to minimise the potential drawbacks of screen time, parental guidance and supervision are needed.
Sample 3:
It is pointed out that some individuals believe that viewing television apparently has an adverse bearing on children, while others argue that it brings numerous benefits. This essay discusses both points of view before shedding light on why I side with the latter view.
On the one hand, watching television is conspicuously conductive to children in terms of inventiveness and also enhances language development. To begin with, conveying knowledge through television gives children exposure to a plethora of cultures and perspectives, hence fostering creativity through imaginative storytelling. It is apparent that some television programmes such as Cartoon Network often feature interactive activities and problem-solving challenges, and thus inspire children to think outside the box and explore their creativity. Furthermore, the collosal of children's TV programs incorporate repetition, which is a key element in language reception. To elaborate further, repeated interaction with words, sentences and concepts helps reinforce learning and thus linguistic development.
On the other hand, viewing television takes a toll on children in terms of their mental and also physical health. To start with, TV shows have a lot of negative content that cannot be avoided and thus when the children are exposed to this content such as pornagraphy content that directly affects people who are almost in puberty. A propelling testament of the harmful impact that exposure to erotic material can be captivating to their developing minds, potentially evoking sexual desires that could lead to annulment for their mind and also their mental health. Moreover, viewing television can have disadvantages for children due to binge-watching and prolonged exposure to screen time, which may lead to sedentary behavior and a lack of physical activity. As a result, excessive TV watching can impact attention span, interfere with sleep patterns and even nearsightedness.
In conclusion, both perspectives hold their justifications. From my point of view, I firmly believe that prioritizing their health for the long-term life should outweigh the sake of television brings. Ultimately, moderation and content selection are key.
Sample 4:
In today’s modern society, the issue of whether watching television is beneficial or detrimental to children has sparked a controversial debate. While some individuals argue that television viewing has negative effects on youngsters, I firmly believe that it can be an educational tool for children. In this essay, I will present my reasons to support this viewpoint.
Firstly, television offers a wide range of educational programs that can enhance children’s knowledge and cognitive development. Channels dedicated to educational content, such as documentaries, science programs, and historical shows, provide valuable information that can expand children’s understanding of the world. By watching these programs, children can learn about diverse cultures, scientific concepts, and historical events, fostering their intellectual growth. For instance, renowned educational programs like “Planet Earth” or “Cosmos” captivate young audiences and expose them to the wonders of nature and the universe.
Secondly, television can serve as a powerful medium to promote creativity and imagination among children. Many animated series and children’s shows encourage imaginative thinking and storytelling. By watching these programs, youngsters can be inspired to create their own stories, draw pictures, or engage in imaginative play. This imaginative process is crucial for their cognitive and emotional development, allowing them to explore their creativity and express themselves in unique ways. Moreover, educational cartoons often incorporate moral lessons, teaching children important values such as honesty, empathy, and teamwork.
However, it is important to acknowledge the potential drawbacks of excessive television viewing. Parents should exercise responsible supervision and ensure that children have a balanced viewing experience. Excessive exposure to violent or inappropriate content can have adverse effects on children’s behavior and mental well-being. Therefore, parents should guide their children’s television choices, set limits on screen time, and encourage participation in other activities such as outdoor play, reading, or social interaction.
In conclusion, despite the concerns raised by some individuals, I am of the opinion that watching television can be educational for children. The availability of educational programs and the promotion of creativity and imagination outweigh the potential negative effects. However, parental guidance and responsible viewing habits are crucial to ensure a well-rounded development for children. By striking a balance between television viewing and other activities, children can benefit from the educational and imaginative aspects of television while avoiding its potential pitfalls.
Sample 5:
There is much debate regarding the effects of TV viewing on children. In my opinion, when watched in moderation, educational TV shows can be beneficial for children because they help them develop positive values as they grow up.
On the one hand, those who believe that TV viewing harms children in every way may argue that it is a passive activity that encourages sedentary behavior and limits meaningful play. This can lead to a range of problems, such as poor health and cognitive development. However, I believe that this argument is only valid if children spend too much time in front of the screen. Parents can protect their children from the potential dangers of TV viewing by setting reasonable time limits and providing adequate supervision.
On the other hand, there are people who argue that many TV programs are educational and can instill good values in children. For example, Disney movies often portray characters with admirable traits, such as courage, kindness, and perseverance, which can inspire children to emulate these values and become better individuals. This has led me to believe that educational & television programs can be excellent tools for teaching children moral lessons as they grow and develop. Many children find traditional forms of education boring or difficult, but the visual and interactive nature of TV can make learning more engaging and enjoyable.
In conclusion, although prolonged passive television viewing can be detrimental, watching educational TV shows in moderation can have a positive impact on children's development. Such shows can effectively impart valuable lessons and teach positive values in an engaging and entertaining manner.
Sample 6:
The role of television in children's development has been a subject of ongoing debate, with some individuals vehemently opposing it, while others advocate for its potential benefits. From my perspective, television can be beneficial if appropriately utilised.
Those who argue against children watching television often raise valid points. Primarily, they cite the negative impacts on children's physical health as a concern. With prolonged screen time, children are less likely to engage in physical activity, potentially leading to health issues such as obesity. Furthermore, they worry about the influence of harmful content. Children, being impressionable, can easily internalise violent or inappropriate behaviour depicted in certain shows, leading to negative behavioural outcomes.
On the other hand, advocates for children's television viewing highlight its educational benefits. Many television programmes are designed to be both entertaining and instructive, providing children with a wealth of knowledge about the world, aiding their cognitive development. Shows that portray different cultures, wildlife, or scientific concepts can stimulate children's curiosity and broaden their understanding. Television can also teach moral values and social skills through well-crafted narratives and character interactions.
In my opinion, the key lies in moderation and guidance. While unrestricted, unmonitored television viewing can indeed have detrimental effects, a balanced approach can turn television into a valuable educational tool. Parents and caregivers should control the amount of screen time and ensure that the content children watch is age-appropriate and beneficial.
In conclusion, while the concerns about children watching television are justified, its potential as a developmental tool cannot be dismissed. The onus is on parents and caregivers to utilise it judiciously to foster a balanced growth environment for children.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Bộ câu hỏi: [TEST] Từ loại (Buổi 1) (Có đáp án)
Bài tập chức năng giao tiếp (Có đáp án)
Bộ câu hỏi: Các dạng thức của động từ (to v - v-ing) (Có đáp án)
15000 bài tập tách từ đề thi thử môn Tiếng Anh có đáp án (Phần 1)
500 bài Đọc điền ôn thi Tiếng anh lớp 12 có đáp án (Đề 1)
Bộ câu hỏi: Thì và sự phối thì (Phần 2) (Có đáp án)
Trắc nghiệm Tiếng anh 12 Tìm từ được gạch chân phát âm khác - Mức độ nhận biết có đáp án
Bộ câu hỏi: Cấp so sánh (có đáp án)
Hãy Đăng nhập hoặc Tạo tài khoản để gửi bình luận