Câu hỏi:
07/01/2025 162
In the modern world it is possible to shop, work and communicate with people via the internet and live without any face-to-face contact with others. Is it a positive or negative development in your opinion?
Câu hỏi trong đề: 2000 câu trắc nghiệm tổng hợp Tiếng Anh 2025 có đáp án !!
Quảng cáo
Trả lời:
Sample 1:
In contemporary times, many do activities like shopping, working, and interacting with others through the internet without needing in-person interactions. Despite technology's great convenience, it can hinder people from forming profound and significant connections.
The rise of the internet and technology has allowed people to conduct various activities online, from shopping to working and communicating with others. This is because technology offers tremendous convenience, as individuals can buy products and services from the comfort of their own homes, work remotely from anywhere in the world, and communicate with people from different parts of the globe. This has dramatically improved the quality of life for many individuals, especially those living in isolated areas with mobility limitations. Additionally, online communication has brought about greater diversity and understanding, as people can connect with others from different cultures and backgrounds. As demonstrated, the ability to carry out various activities online has numerous advantages and has significantly impacted how people live.
Despite the benefits of online activities, there are also negative consequences associated with the lack of in-person interactions. The impersonal nature of online communication can prevent individuals from building deep, meaningful relationships essential to human connection. Furthermore, when people rely heavily on technology to communicate, they may experience social isolation, especially among younger generations who spend much time on social media. Social isolation has been linked to adverse mental health and well-being effects, such as anxiety and depression. Therefore, balancing online and offline interactions is vital to maintain healthy relationships and social connections in today's digital age.
In conclusion, while there are advantages to the ability to shop, work and communicate with people online, the lack of face-to-face contact can have negative consequences. Therefore, it is essential to balance using technology to our advantage and maintaining personal connections with others.
Sample 2:
Thanks to the wonders of the internet and computer technology, it has become possible in many places around the world to live and work without having to have any face-to-face contact with others. Although there may be some drawbacks to this development, I believe it is positive overall.
One of the main benefits of being able to shop, work, and communicate via the internet is the sheer convenience. Being able to order your groceries, buy new clothes, and even work from home on your computer has saved people countless hours of boredom sitting in their cars, dealing with traffic, commuting to and from their workplace or shops. This has freed up hours in people’s days, making their lives more productive and fulfilling. Furthermore, people can save thousands of dollars in transportation costs each year by staying at home to work or shop online, not to mention the decreased impacts on the environment from the reduced usage of automobiles.
In addition, living without face-to-face contact also has its benefits too. Thanks to social media applications, people are able to develop friendships and networks of like-minded people from all over the world without having to leave their home. Creating these kinds of large networks of people in person is actually not possible to do on a practical level and requires the use of the internet and non-face-to-face communication. Moreover, people can actually develop much deeper relationships with one another without the complications of face-to-face contact. By not knowing the colour of somebody’s skin, or their gender, people can communicate without any unconscious bias affecting their thoughts and words.
In conclusion, living and working without face-to-face communication can save people a lot of time and money, make their lives more productive and fulfilling, and improve their relationships and communication with people.
Sample 3:
In the modern world, it has become increasingly possible to shop, work, and communicate with people without any face-to-face contact. In my opinion, this trend is a positive development as it provides numerous benefits to people's daily lives.
One of the key advantages of being able to shop, work, and communicate without face-to-face contact is convenience. With online shopping, people can purchase products from the comfort of their own homes, without having to spend time and effort traveling to physical stores. For example, this can be particularly beneficial for those who live in remote areas or who have mobility issues. Similarly, working remotely allows individuals to save time and money on commuting and can offer greater flexibility in terms of scheduling.
Another benefit of living without face-to-face contact is the ability to communicate with people from all over the world. The internet has opened up new possibilities for social interaction, allowing people to connect with others from different cultures and backgrounds. This can lead to a greater understanding and appreciation of diversity. For instance, a person living in a small town with limited opportunities for travel or cultural exposure can use the internet to connect with people from different parts of the world. This type of global communication can foster understanding and tolerance, helping to break down barriers and promote peace and harmony between people of different nationalities and cultures.
In conclusion, the benefits of living without face-to-face contact are significant. Convenience, global communication, and enhanced privacy are just a few of the advantages that come with the ability to shop, work, and communicate without physical interactions.
Sample 4:
It is true that in contemporary life, people in many parts of the world are able to do their shopping, work, and communicate with each other via the internet. While there are clear positive aspects of this trend, there are also negative aspects of having less face-to-face contact with other people.
On the one hand, the internet can be very handy in many ways. Many people use it to keep in touch with friends and family, using Facebook, Skype, or WhatsApp to send instant messages or to enjoy a quick chat. Many also use the internet for online shopping, thus saving time and petrol on trips to the supermarket as well as hunting around different sites for bargains. However, it is in terms of work that the internet offers the most potential benefits. More and more people are working or even studying from home, at hours which suit their own schedules. Many hours are saved each week by eliminating the daily commute and the stress of coping with the rush hour.
On the other hand, as social beings, people need personal contact. Firstly, virtual friendships that are formed online may not be genuine. The media carries many horror stories of youngsters who have fallen prey to paedophiles, for example. Secondly, online shopping is not always appropriate, depending on the item. It is best, for instance, to try on clothes before buying, and while a bookworm can find almost any book title that they want online, they will certainly miss browsing the shelves of bookstores. Finally, personal interaction with work colleagues can generate ideas and avoid misunderstandings.
In conclusion, although there are positive aspects of this trend, there are also aspects of face-to-face contact, which it would be a shame to lose.
Sample 5:
With the ongoing development of technologies and now devices, all interpersonal communication and activities can be done through the online world. Despite some obvious benefits in terms of productivity and convenience, the lack of direct contact can potentially be disruptive to people’s daily courses of activity.
It is hard to deny the multiple benefits that the Internet brings to some fundamental aspects of people’s lives. In terms of daily commerce, online shopping allows consumers to make more informed decisions as they can access product reviews online while also being able to compare prices across stores. Moreover, because the Internet helps remove practically any geographical boundaries, users can conveniently communicate in real time from their own respective locations via online communication technologies like video calls and messaging softwares. Lastly, work productivity can be facilitated through remote work, since workers can save themselves the time and energy that might otherwise be lost in commuting trips or on idle chatter in the office.
However, the serious downsides associated with this development could outweigh the aforementioned benefits. Online shopping cannot substitute in-store tactile testing which is especially necessary for products like clothing merchandise or cooking goods that have tangible properties that require physical assessment. Additionally, non-verbal cues and nuances that can only be expressed through face-to-face interactions are often lost on the digital medium, which can diminish the authenticity and depth of conversations. Work-wise, the state of isolation could lead to a decline in their creativity and collaborativeness. Despite the ability to facilitate group work, online communication tools are prone to connection errors and bugs, which can leave participants out of sync at times. It is this lack of continuity in the collaborative process that diminishes the energy and spontaneity needed for streamlined work.
In conclusion, in spite of the many benefits regarding work, commerce and communication, I believe that the trend of taking these aspects into the digital realms can be more detrimental for people’s life in the long run.
Sample 6:
Virtual communication has been rapidly replacing its face-to-face counterpart in several aspects of life. I am convinced that such a trend might have far-reaching negative impacts if people overuse the former and ignore the latter.
Firstly, the consequences in terms of reduced social connections are undeniable. No matter how comfortable and realistic online conversations are, direct day-to-day interactions, which allow for verbal communication cues and eye contact, are instrumental in building sustainable relationships between people. Without such direct interactions, people might become disconnected and isolated from their own community or workplace, thus suffering from declined social wellbeing. On a larger scale, the dominance of e-commerce would mean the disappearance of physical stores and local businesses, which serve as community spaces for people to interact, thus resulting in the loss of a community’s social fabric. This trend could prevent people from developing a sense of belonging to their community.
Secondly, people’s over-dependence on technology and its related problems are also major consequences of this trend. Since a switch to virtual platforms for most daily activities would cause people to be more vulnerable to technological disruptions including device breakdowns, internet outages, or cyber-attacks. These failures can disrupt their work, shopping, and communication, causing frustration and financial losses. Besides that, constant exposure to screens and digital information on a daily basis can lead to digital fatigue and cognitive overload. As a result, many young people spending the majority of their time on the internet tend to have short attention spans, preventing them from concentrating on and performing well in their job and study.
In conclusion, in cases that virtual interactions completely substitute face-to-face ones, the undesired implications in terms hampered social relationships, over-reliance on technology, digital fatigue, and poor concentration would make this a largely negative tendency. It is feared by many that such immersion into the virtual world in many aspects of life would destroy the fabric of human society forever.
Sample 7:
The feasibility of shopping, working and communicating through the Internet is gradually eliminating the necessity of in-person encounters. I believe the merits of this opportunity outnumber its demerits and the lowered volume of traffic in addition to the possibility of long-range communication will be discussed as reasons for this claim in this essay.
One chief benefit of using the Internet as a means of making purchases, working and communicating would be the lowered demand for transport, through eradicating the need for face-to-face contact. Such decreased volume of transportation would result in fewer harmful gas emissions which could significantly contribute to creating a cleaner environment. Furthermore, reduced commuting burden yields more free time for individuals. It could be spent in various ways such as working, studying and socialising with family and friends to name a few, which would be more productive and enjoyable.
Another key merit of using the Internet would be the emergence of state-of-the-art telecommunication applications. These technologies have made it possible for those with access to the Internet to get in touch and send and receive audiovisual content by pushing just a few buttons. This presents a stark contrast to the situation only a few decades ago, when long-distance communication was possible solely through paper-based letters, which could possibly take months to reach the recipient.
There are, however, some drawbacks to online communication, in particular the possibility that the lack of contact brought by technological advancements could potentially weaken human bonds. Taking into consideration that humans are a social species, this could pose a dire threat to our mental health. This predicament, however, would be mitigated by the extra free time technological developments create for us. This free time could be spent with friends and family and in the long run would strengthen our relationships and improve our emotional well-being.
To recapitulate, the Internet's demolishing the need for person-to-person contact brings about numerous benefits. A more sustainable environment as well as more free time generated for individuals, a reduced need to commute in addition to the feasibility of conducting long-distance communication in the easiest way possible, are all instances of the above-mentioned merits.
Sample 8:
It is true that in today’s society, individuals around globe may buy, work, and connect with one another over the internet. Although there are apparent benefits to this trend, there are also drawbacks to having less face-to-face interaction with others.
On the one hand, the internet may be very useful in a variety of ways. Many use it to stay in contact with friends and family, sending instant messages or having a brief conversation via Facebook, Skype, or WhatsApp. Many people also use the internet for online shopping, saving time and money on groceries-picking and scouring other websites for offers. In addition, the internet provides the largest potential advantages in terms of labor work. More and more individuals are working or studying from home, at times that are convenient for them. By removing the daily trip and the stress of dealing with rush hour, several hours are saved each week.
People, on the other hand, need human interaction as social creatures. For starters, online virtual connections may not be real. There are several intimidating affairs on social media about children who have fallen victim to pedophiles, for example. Second, depending on the item, internet purchasing is not always acceptable. For example, it is essential to try on clothing before purchasing them, and although a bookworm can find practically any book title they desire online, they will undoubtedly miss exploring the shelves of bookshops. Lastly, personal connection with coworkers may spark ideas and prevent misunderstandings.
To summarize, although there are advantages to this trend, there are also advantages to face-to-face communication that would be a huge loss to society.
Sample 9:
Today, due to the popularity of the Internet, individuals tend to work, shop, and communicate online rather than in person. In my opinion, this trend is positive since it allows for greater convenience.
In terms of work, the Internet is efficient. Those who work online can significantly reduce their daily commuting time. This not only allows workers to gain extra time to get more work done, but also helps them avoid stress caused by severe traffic which is increasingly common in many urban areas. Additionally, businesses can benefit from this trend as they are likely to incur lower operating expenses. For example, virtual meetings can host nearly unlimited numbers of participants at the same time, removing the need for renting large conferencing rooms. The money saved can then be allocated for improving existing products and services or developing new ones.
Furthermore, shopping and communicating is easier nowadays as a result of the widespread use of the Internet. E-commerce platforms such as Shopee, Lazada, and Tiki allow users to compare products from a variety of online shops in order to be able to choose products with the lowest prices. These platforms also regularly offer attractive promotions as well as warranty policies, all of which used to be unique selling points for brick-and-mortar stores. Regarding personal communication, before the proliferation of the Internet, it was relatively inconvenient or costly for individuals to contact each other, especially when placing international calls. These days, due to the popularity of instant messaging and calling applications such as Messenger, Zalo, and Viber, Internet users regardless of geographical location can remain in touch with their friends and family members much more easily.
In conclusion, the advancement of the Internet results in greater numbers of people working, shopping, and communicating online. I believe this is a change for the better as it provides various conveniences and cost-saving implications. New technology may not be without its drawbacks; however, there is little question about the comforts it also affords the average citizen.
Sample 10:
With the Internet having a huge impact on our shopping, work and communication, we can now live without any face-to-face interaction with other people. Whilst making modern life more convenient in some ways, this situation is a negative trend in the long run.
In this day and age, we can literally stay at home and have almost anything delivered to our homes as most consumer goods are widely available for online purchase. We also have more opportunities in terms of employment because many applications like Skype or Google Hangouts allow employees to work from home. Members of an organization nowadays rely on email and other online platforms to maintain effective communication and ensure their businesses operate smoothly. When it comes to personal relationships, we use Facebook to connect and stay in touch with friends and relatives. The Internet, without doubt, enhances our shopping experiences, makes our workplaces more streamlined and efficient, and facilitates our communication with others.
However, we are faced with a foreseeable and unfortunate consequence due to our reliance on such technology. We are losing direct interactions that are deemed extremely important in this technological era. Children hardly spend time talking to their parents because they are too engrossed in media hype on Facebook. It is common to see both young and old people with their eyes glued to their phones instead of having conversations like they did before the advent of smart devices. This is leading us toward a society where people will turn to favoring virtual interactions and undervaluing real life relationships.
The influence of the Internet on many aspects of our lives is remarkable. However, the benefits it offers do not justify the fact that it is inflicting severe damage on our relationships, which can only flourish on the basis of true communication.
Sample 11:
The Internet is making everyone’s lives easier to live. Nowadays, it is more accessible to do online shopping, work, and facetime without going out through social media. Although they can get the advantage of saving schedules for other things, they will also struggle with a lack of understanding while communicating online. However, the disadvantages outweigh the advantages because people are far better off meeting in person and going out themselves despite the benefits they might gain.
The main benefit of working from home and buying stuff from websites is that it saves hours and money for other things which cannot be done while working on site. Because it gives more turn to stay with closed ones at home and spend quality space with children. And people spent less petrol to go out for these reasons. For example, due to pandemics, everyone depends on laptops or computers for work. Additionally, while malls were closed people were preferring electronic shopping more. For these reasons, individuals strengthen their relationships and improve their social well-being.
One possible drawback is that someone will face is the absence of human interaction and insufficiency in understanding. Because cyberspace will replace the desire for human touch which everyone needed. For instance, I have been living in Canada for two years in a long-distance relationship which sometimes causes misinterpretation of things that cannot be possible while living with someone. Similarly, advice cannot be given by retailers online which is only possible in person and helps to hide true identity to someone by promoting fake products. That’s why face to face interaction is really important to get away with uncertainties.
In conclusion, Advancement in technology releasing an individual’s tension. While a person will no doubt experience some understanding barriers that lead to the main advantage of using Cybernet which is less time-consuming.
Sample 12:
Digital technology and devices are pushing back the frontiers of convenience every day. People today can shop, work and communicate online without meeting in person. This essay will consider both positive and negative aspects of online shopping, communication, and telecommuting, and then state that on the whole, it is a positive development.
The Internet and digital devices, such as smartphones, tablets, and laptops, have revolutionized the way we live and work. People no longer go to physical outlets to shop. They can purchase goods from the comfort of their home. So, they do not need to bother with traffic congestion or wait in long queues at the cash counter to pay for the items purchased by them, and thereby saving time. Likewise, gone are the days when employees worked in their cubicles or followed the routine 9-to-5 office life. Nowadays, they can work from home with the help of cutting-edge devices and technologies. Similarly, online communication eliminates time and space barriers. It enables people to communicate anytime with others from anywhere as long as they have an internet connection.
This trend has some disadvantages too. In the case of online shopping, consumers cannot inspect goods physically or try on the product being considered for purchase, and therefore they can end up making a bad purchase. In the same token, employees may face more disruptions at home compared to the office which can result in low productivity. Besides, the security of a company could be jeopardized due to the remote workplace. But we, as informed users of technology, can overcome these barriers by being more cautious and prudent while using technology.
To recapitulate, people today no longer need physical presence to shop, work or communicate. These activities can be done online, which is much more convenient. Although this convenience has its own costs, it, in my opinion, is a positive development as the informed users can defeat the problems.
Hot: 500+ Đề thi thử tốt nghiệp THPT các môn, ĐGNL các trường ĐH... file word có đáp án (2025). Tải ngay
- Sổ tay Giáo dục Kinh tế & Pháp luật 12 (chương trình mới) ( 18.000₫ )
- Sổ tay Lịch Sử 12 (chương trình mới) ( 18.000₫ )
- Sổ tay lớp 12 các môn Toán, Lí, Hóa, Văn, Sử, Địa, KTPL (chương trình mới) ( 36.000₫ )
- Bộ đề thi tốt nghiệp 2025 các môn Toán, Lí, Hóa, Văn, Anh, Sinh, Sử, Địa, KTPL (có đáp án chi tiết) ( 36.000₫ )
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:
The issue of environmental crisis has been a major concern in recent decades, both globally and nationally. With the increasing urgency of the problem, many organizations have been working tirelessly to find solutions to these issues. However, there is a debate about who should be responsible for addressing these problems. Some believe that tackling an environmental crisis should be the job of a single global governing body, while others argue that the government should be in charge.
Advocates for a global governing body argue that world organizations can do a better job of solving environmental challenges because they have a global perspective and can collaborate with all nations to promote the best potential global development. Furthermore, international organizations have access to funding from many wealthy countries, which can help them quickly solve issues that may be beyond the reach of underdeveloped countries. Moreover, international organizations are not affected by political conditions in the same way that national governments are, allowing them to think and act objectively.
On the other hand, proponents of the government being responsible for environmental issues argue that they are better equipped to understand and address their own country's environmental problems. The government also has a better understanding of how these problems arise, as well as how to involve their people in problem-solving. Furthermore, the government is in charge of the country's education and can ensure that the people have easy access to information. Additionally, foreign organizations may not always be familiar with local difficulties, which can lead to changes in future plans.
In conclusion, both arguments have their merits, and the solution may lie in a combination of the two. If the host country supports and communicates their problems to international organizations and collaborates with them, it could lead to a more comprehensive and effective solution to environmental issues. Global organizations have always been objective in their functioning and have the support of many nations, which can contribute to positive outcomes. However, it is important to recognize the strengths of the government in addressing environmental problems and to utilize their knowledge and expertise to achieve the best possible results.
Sample 2:
The 21st century witnessed the dawn of industrialization, due to which numerous factories were set up. To generate higher revenues these factories increased their production manifold, which has put stress on the environment. Some factions of society contemplate that national authorities should take steps to resolve these, while I agree that international organisations can control this situation, and the following essay will cite the reasons for the same.
Firstly, international organisations can sign an understanding among various geographies to use green energy fuels, consequently the emissions from the set-ups will be cleaner. The G20 nations, for instance, have decided to use water to generate 50% of the nation’s electricity, as opposed to coal, and they will share the surplus power with the deprived nations. Furthermore, the developed nations have more exposure to technology for controlling poisonous emissions, therefore, the learnings can be shared with developing geographies, which can be implemented to lower the contaminations.
Secondly, the global bodies can implement a treaty to do some financial support, which will bolster the weaker nations to swap the setup in their factories with some advanced technologies, which will enable production units to utilize cleaner fuels, hence lower pollution levels. For example, Germany is helping Jordan to set up various dams to generate electricity, as opposed to coal being used. Moreover, because these latest technologies require less space as compared to traditional ones, as a result, the extra land can be used to plant vegetation, and they act as natural air purifiers.
In conclusion, due to the above explanations, I am inclined to say that international bodies have a more crucial role to play to combat the pollution of the atmosphere, as compared to national lawmakers.
Sample 3:
The statement that solving environmental problems is the responsibility of international organisations rather than the national government is a topic of debate. I firmly disagree with this, as even though international organisations have some role to play, the primary responsibility is of the national government only as they are directly accountable to their citizens and can mobilize local resources and increase public participation.
Although Environmental problems are global, they often have local causes and effects that can only be addressed by national governments. They are the closest to the issue, so they have the best potential to understand and address it. They can form policies that reflect their unique environmental challenges and socio-economic context. For example, a country that has abundant forests might prevent deforestation, while a country that has high industrial output might prioritise the reduction of air pollution. Moreover, national governments are directly answerable to their citizens and have a direct right to hold them responsible for the increase in environmental problems. This accountability helps governments to take these issues seriously and make big decisions.
While international governments play a crucial role in facilitating cooperation and setting global standards, they often lack the power to ensure that all of the policies they are forming are implemented or not. They may also not be able to fully grasp the specific circumstances and complexities of each country, leading to the formation of one-size-fits-all solutions that will not be effective. Furthermore, international organizations are often hampered by political considerations and disagreements among various countries’ members, which can slow down decision-making and implementation of environmental initiatives. On the other hand, national governments are sovereign entities, having a greater freedom to act decisively and swiftly in response to environmental crises.
To conclude, while international organisations have a role to play in solving environmental problems, the primary responsibility lies with the national governments. They have the authority, accountability and the capacity to effectively address environmental issues within their borders.
Sample 4:
There is no doubt that environment-related issues ought to be held responsible for by an international organization instead of individual countries. I disagree with this statement for some reasons.
There are numerous environmental issues such as climate change, melting glaciers and intensifying greenhouse effect happening on a global scale. As the argument goes, an international organization would act as a leader, issuing principles for all member countries to conform to or it will have sufficient financial capabilities to support the improvement of the environment. Cited cases are the Kyoto protocol has contributed to the slowing down of climate change on the earth, or the United Nations’ support for Third World countries have helped improve the air quality there. This argument, however, fails to take into consideration the fact that compulsion often backfires if an individual nation has no intention to cooperate, or the incentives provided can make recipient countries over reliant and avoid coming up with innovative ideas to resolve their country’s environmental situation. This in the long term exerts a negative overall global effect.
I side with those who think that each governmental body should take responsibility for addressing domestic environmental problems. Firstly, this practice would have a chain effect, benefiting not only the host country but also neighboring nations. For instance, if China diminishes its emissions by downsizing its industrial activities to a certain acceptable level, the air contamination in Hanoi would be reduced as a consequence. Secondly, the root of a complete resolution of environmental issues comes at grassroots level, only achieved by the efforts of a country’s government. If walking or cycling are promoted amongst those with an inclination to use private vehicles, this can help diminish the colossal volumes of exhaust gas and ameliorate the communal air quality. Or, if people are encouraged to participate in the international Earth Hour when everyone is asked to turn their lights off in sixty minutes, huge amounts of power can be minimized. Enacting such events which are aimed at creating a mindset shift in the public regarding environmental protection and promoting a simple lifestyle can only be conducted by a country’s government.
In conclusion, uprooting environment problems should be the responsibility of each national government rather than an international organization.
Sample 5:
People hold different views about how to cope with environmental problems. While some people argue that it is the duty of international organization, rather than a single country, to solve environment-related issues, I believe that both parties/ sides should join hands in solving this problem.
On the one hand, many countries may share the same environmental concerns; however, they would stem from various causes. Therefore, each nation should implement different policies and measures to address the problem. For example, over-exploitation of natural resources and deforestation are identified as the biggest culprit for desertification in the USA, whereas the growing rate of desertified land in China has been mainly caused by rapid urbanization. In addition, the priority environmental issue is also varied in each country, calling for different approaches and strategies to tackle the problem. To illustrate, in emerging economies such as Vietnam, reducing the worrying level of air pollution from industrial activities is of highest priority.
On the other hand, the problems that each government is experiencing are indeed interconnected, hence, concerted efforts by all nations are necessary. Thus, international organizations such as the United Nations play a vital role in promoting and coordinating global action to reduce carbon footprint and curb the global warming threat. Furthermore, wealthy countries should provide financial and technological support for poor nations in the fight against green issues, since the detrimental effects of environmental problems could spread beyond national borders. In other words, an international effort is needed to yield an efficient environment protection scheme.
In conclusion, while international organizations could exert huge impact on a global scale, the combination of international and governmental efforts would have even more profound influences on the environment.
Sample 6:
It is often argued that sorting out ecological issues should be the responsibility of an international administration, while others believe that individual countries’ governments should solve environmental problems. In my opinion, solving environmental problems should be the responsibility of an international organization rather than each national government because environmental issues are global concerns that affect the entire planet. Therefore, their solutions require global cooperation.
To begin with, the environment is a global problem that requires a global response. To be more precise, a lot of ecological issues are available worldwide, such as climate change, global warming, carbon dioxide emissions and air pollution. Moreover, individual national governments can try their best to solve issues, but their efforts may not have a noticeable impact on the environment without the support of other nations. Therefore, an international organization is trying to make rules which are followed by all nations and can help to reduce the rate of environmental issues worldwide. Furthermore, if an international organization passes away an agreement, then every individual nation must follow the acts and take them seriously without arguing anything. For instance, recently, new rules were made by the United Nations Environment Programme [UNEP] for reducing greenhouse gases, which are followed by all nations in the world because it is an international action.
In contrast, each individual nation better knows about their nation’s own climate conditions. More specifically, every country faces unique environmental challenges that are best understood by its government, and there are specific solutions tailored to these issues. While international organizations address common global concerns, they do not focus on the unique environmental problems of individual nations due to the diversity of issues across countries. For example, in India, a wide range of mountains contain in northern areas, so there are various issues such as melting and snow falling, while in southern India has a lot of forests, so there are various problems like over rainfall and storm. Hence, every nation has different environmental problems, and they know better solutions than an international organization.
In conclusion, although every individual nation is well introduced to various types of problems, and they know solutions in a better way. In my opinion, international organizations are likely more responsible for solving some common global issues, such as global warming and air pollution, because cooperation must be required to solve environmental issues.
Sample 7:
Environmental problems are a major concern for the whole world, and addressing these problems requires a concerted effort from all nations. In my opinion, solving environmental problems should be the responsibility of both international organizations and national governments, as both have a role to play in creating a sustainable future for all.
International organizations, such as the United Nations and its specialized agencies, are important players in addressing global environmental issues. These organizations can provide a platform for international cooperation and coordination on environmental issues, such as climate change, deforestation, and biodiversity loss. They can also facilitate sharing of knowledge, resources, and best practices among countries to achieve common environmental goals.
At the same time, national governments also have a crucial role to play in addressing environmental problems. National governments are responsible for implementing policies and regulations that can protect the environment within their own countries. They can also allocate funding for environmental protection measures, enforce environmental laws, and work with their citizens to promote sustainable practices.
In addition, national governments have more direct responsibility for the well-being of their citizens and the environment within their own borders. They are better positioned to understand the unique environmental challenges facing their own countries and communities and tailor their responses accordingly.
Therefore, while international organizations can provide important support and coordination in addressing global environmental problems, it is ultimately up to national governments to take action within their own countries. This does not mean that international cooperation is not important. In fact, international cooperation is essential in addressing environmental problems that cross national borders, such as air and water pollution and climate change.
In conclusion, solving environmental problems requires a joint effort from both international organizations and national governments. It is essential that both work together to create a sustainable future for all. While international cooperation is important, national governments have a direct responsibility to protect their citizens and their environment and must take action accordingly.
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.