Câu hỏi:
07/01/2025 120Câu hỏi trong đề: 2000 câu trắc nghiệm tổng hợp Tiếng Anh 2025 có đáp án !!
Quảng cáo
Trả lời:
Sample 1:
In this day and age, increasing attention is being directed towards the question of whether residential areas should be developed through the construction of apartments or ground-level houses. While there is no one-size-fits-all answer to the question of sustainable urban growth, personally, I believe that both options have their own merits and can be implemented by authorities depending on specific situations.
On one hand, some cities choose to build taller buildings to fit more people, which has its own benefits. Firstly, it allows cities to maximize land use efficiency, particularly in densely populated urban areas where space is limited. In fact, by going vertical, cities can accommodate more residents, businesses, and amenities within a smaller footprint, thereby reducing urban sprawl and preserving natural landscapes. For example, Hong Kong exemplifies efficient land use through vertical development due to its high population density and limited space. Secondly, tall buildings can serve as iconic landmarks that define a city's skyline and contribute to its identity and reputation on a global scale. Architectural marvels such as the Burj Khalifa in Dubai or the Empire State Building in New York City not only attract tourists but also symbolize economic prowess and innovation.
On the other hand, some cities have decided to spread out by building on wider areas of land, which also comes with its own advantages. First of all, sprawling cities have more room for green spaces, parks, and recreational facilities, which can enhance the quality of life and promote physical and mental well-being among residents. Singapore, known as "A City in a Garden," showcases the successful integration of extensive green spaces throughout its urban landscape, including iconic attractions like Gardens by the Bay, contributing to improved quality of life by regulating temperature, reducing pollution, and promoting physical and mental well-being for residents. Additionally, horizontal development allows for more diverse housing options, catering to a broader range of socioeconomic backgrounds. With lower population densities, traffic congestion and air pollution may be less severe, and public services such as schools, hospitals, and utilities may be more easily accessible to residents.
In conclusion, while both vertical and horizontal development strategies have their merits, the choice between them should be made based on careful consideration of factors such as population density, land availability, environmental impact, and community needs.
Sample 2:
Many cities today are expanding upwards to accommodate surging urban populations. In my opinion, this can help preserve nearby land for other uses and is a better solution than encouraging urban sprawl.
Some would argue that tall cities present challenges for inhabitants and a spread-out city offers better quality of life. Condensed urban areas with lots of tall apartment blocks, like in New York City or Shanghai, are famously difficult to live in due to the effects of overcrowding on sanitation, safety, and traffic conditions. In contrast, decentralised cities like Los Angeles and Nashville allow for the development of unique individual neighborhoods, more space for residential construction and a reduction of the urban issues listed above. Individuals living in these cities often report greater feelings of satisfaction and many ‘transplants’ move to such cities because of the better living standards.
However, those in favour of taller buildings can logically point out the resultant benefits for the area around a city. It is often hard to check the growth of economically important cities and that can lead to massive urban sprawl, as is in the case around Mexico City and Tokyo. By building more skyscrapers, the surrounding area can be preserved or used in another way. Pristine natural lands can be designated as national parks. If the city requires more food to feed its population, there could be proximately located farms with fast delivery times. This surplus land could also be turned into quiet suburban towns to give residents the choice of raising a family outside the city and still earning a good wage and having easy access to the cultural benefits of large metropolises.
In conclusion, horizontal cities facilitate some positive living conditions, but taller cities make more sense in the modern world. It is, nonetheless, important to strike a balance and mitigate the issues caused by growing urban populations with quality infrastructure.
Sample 3:
Rapid urbanization has been a global phenomenon for long, which has caused a serious concern over housing expansion. While some cities tackle this by constructing taller buildings, expanding the area for housing is what other cities adopt. This essay will discuss both of these perspectives in city development before giving my final verdict.
Building housing areas with taller buildings will bring about certain benefits. The most obvious one is that this practice can solve the problem of land scarcity. As more and more people are flocking to cities, the land area required for housing is also ever-increasing. In this case, taller buildings emerge as an optimal remedy because they can accommodate a large number of dwellers yet take up a not too huge area. This can be exemplified by Manhattan in New York city where a multitude of tall apartments have been constructed to furnish this megacity with sufficient housing. Secondly, people living in tall buildings can have a more convenient life. It is because manifold city apartments incorporate various amenities ranging from supermarkets, playgrounds to gyms, pools or banks in the same building. With these services being within walking distance, city dwellers can enjoy different services without much difficulty.
Nevertheless, building houses on a wider area of land also offers considerable merits. To begin with, this city development direction correlates with a more comfortable life for the inhabitants. When growing in this way, the cities can provide houses with wider space, which means that city dwellers can have more privacy and build their houses in accordance with their preferences. For instance, Los Angeles has been expanded in this way, bringing higher living standards to its dwellers since these people can relish better privacy and design their own housing space like having gardens, building pools, making their lives much cozier and more satisfying. Furthermore, expanding housing areas serves as an antidote to overcrowded city centers. Should housing areas like tall apartments be concentrated on just the downtown area, the city center will be overwhelmed with people and other ensuing problems like traffic congestion, overload of public services namely electricity, healthcare and education. Therefore, building houses on a wider area will disperse the population density, augmenting the living quality as well as divesting city centers of the overcrowding issues.
In conclusion, both policies can prove their worth depending on specific circumstances of different cities. Hence, it is imperative that city planners should be flexible in deciding on what solutions to be put into practice for the sake of sustainable urban development.
Sample 4:
The idea of whether to construct a city vertically with skyscrapers or have a horizontal expansion has always been a thorny dilemma. From my perspective, despite several merits that the latter model can offer, cities with vertical construction development prove to bring more significant benefits.
Advocates of horizontal cities often cite the space and privacy of detached houses as solid examples of the great experience that a lateral expansion can offer. When it comes to space, separate dwellings bring along with them distinct amenities such as a lush garden for nature lovers or a spacious yard that perfectly serves the households in need of a playground for their children. Besides, privacy seekers certainly favor separate houses over apartments in a high-rise building due to less noise disturbance from neighbors next door or even upstairs. However, given the burgeoning population in urban areas nowadays, hardly any city can provide enough space for building houses. Even with the policy to expand current land to the suburbs, such extension may never meet the ever-increasing demand for accommodation in metropolises. On top of that, living in a dispersed city is tantamount to more travelling by private vehicles, which will compound the air contamination and trigger more respiratory diseases among city dwellers.
The alternative of erecting multi-storey buildings does not just mitigate the problems arising from horizontally constructed cities, it also brings many significant benefits. Firstly, high-rise buildings prove an optimal solution to the dearth of land to accommodate the acceleration of urban population. One skyscraper which can provide dwellings for hundreds of residents occupies only a fraction of the land that would otherwise be used to erect houses for the same number of people. In addition, living in a complex equipped with myriad facilities such as offices, department stores, and recreational centers will considerably lessen travelling necessities. This not only helps reduce the volume of traffic in the city, and thus alleviating air pollution, but also offers immense convenience to the dwellers as they can get everything within walking distance of one building. As for young adults on a tight schedule, this option seems far more favorable than the idea of living in a house.
In conclusion, although some people may prefer to live in houses due to a number of advantages,
tall buildings have much more to offer, from addressing some of the most pressing problems in urban areas to creating more convenience for the residents.
Sample 5:
While the government in a number of cities decide to construct high-rise buildings to provide housing for their citizens, that in other cities expand their housing areas horizontally. In my opinion, building a vertical city is a better option because it makes better use of land, a limited resource on the planet, and it is also more eco-friendly than a horizontal one.
A vertical city can better optimize land use because land on earth will not grow any bigger, while the human population is ever-increasing. If tall apartments are erected and chosen as a place of residence, a unit of land can accommodate a larger number of residents. For instance, instead of allocating 100 miles square of land for the construction of houses for a population of only 100 households, the government can provide accommodation for ten times as many when constructing a ten-story apartment. Then, more land can be available for other purposes, such as cultivating crops to meet the growing food demands or expanding streets to alleviate traffic congestion, which can address critical issues associated with overpopulation.
Meanwhile, housing areas enlarged in a horizontal direction place a high pressure on the environment and people’s life. As a result of the increasing population of humans, wildlands may be encroached to make room for residential areas. For example, in Brazil, a major part of forests is cleared to build more houses for citizens, which not only endangers wildlife but also puts human civilization at higher risk of natural disasters. With narrowed forests, floods and droughts have taken place more often, damaging agriculture, the economy and other important sectors of this country.
In conclusion, employing the same area of land, vertical cities can house more citizens than horizontal cities which are not only environmentally damaging but also unsustainable in the long run. Personally, municipal leaders should develop their city in a vertical way as soon as possible.
Sample 6:
Creating good housing areas has always been a major concern for urban planners. Some cities build taller buildings to accommodate their growing population, while others opt to spread their housing areas out horizontally. This essay will explore the advantages of both approaches to decide which one is more appropriate.
Expanding vertically is a popular choice in many cities for there is little impact on the surrounding areas. Many cities nowadays are surrounded by farmland. If we choose the second solution, there will be an expansion of urban areas, which means agricultural land will have to be removed or replaced. However, these areas are responsible for food production and provision for the region around them, including the city itself, meaning that there could be problems with food security.
The second choice, on the other hand, also has its advantages. Building higher buildings will certainly increase the population density, which will put a burden on the existing infrastructure of the city. As more people move to these housing areas, roadways will be more and more crowded. Public transport systems will also be under more pressure. Take Hanoi as an example. In recent years, when an increased number of people relocated to the city for better job opportunities, many new apartment blocks, invariably close to the city center, were built to meet the housing needs. As a result, the traffic problem is exacerbated, and buses are always packed with passengers.
In my view, the latter approach to urban planning makes more logical sense. Ensuring food security is possible through other means and can be done by replacing the lost farmland with vertical farming, a solution Singapore has successfully implemented. This is much cheaper than building more and wider roads, which is almost impossible since that would mean the city has to be rebuilt from the ground up.
In conclusion, while building taller buildings does not influence agriculture, it creates several problems that are difficult to solve. Therefore, building houses across a wider area of land, in my opinion, seems more sensible.
Sample 7:
While authorities in some urban centers opt to erect skyscrapers to provide housing for their populace, others opt to expand residential zones horizontally. From my perspective, erecting a vertical city presents a superior choice as it optimizes land usage, a finite resource on our planet, and is also more environmentally friendly compared to horizontal expansion.
A vertical metropolis can enhance land utilization effectively because terrestrial space cannot expand, whereas the human populace is ever burgeoning. Opting for towering apartment complexes as habitation can accommodate a larger populace per unit of land. For example, instead of earmarking 100 square miles of land for housing 100 households, authorities can accommodate tenfold more by erecting a ten-story apartment complex. This frees up more land for diverse purposes, such as agricultural cultivation to meet escalating food demands or broadening thoroughfares to alleviate traffic congestion, thereby mitigating critical issues linked to overpopulation.
Conversely, horizontally sprawling residential zones exert significant pressure on the environment and human livelihoods. Due to burgeoning human numbers, wilderness areas may be encroached upon to make way for residential development. For instance, in Brazil, extensive swathes of forests are cleared to accommodate burgeoning urban populations, jeopardizing wildlife and exacerbating the risk of natural calamities. Diminished forests contribute to increased instances of floods and droughts, wreaking havoc on agriculture, the economy, and other vital sectors in the country.
In summation, utilizing the same land area, vertical cities can house a greater populace compared to horizontal counterparts, which not only inflict environmental harm but are also unsustainable in the long term. Personally, civic leaders should expedite the vertical development of their cities.
Sample 8:
To provide additional housing, some cities construct high-rise buildings while other cities develop land in extensive areas. In my opinion, the latter approach is the best way to solve the housing problem because land in wide areas is usually inexpensive. Besides, high-rise construction can be very costly.
Land in wide areas is relatively low-priced. Only the suburbs of a city have very large parcels of land available for real estate development, and these multi-hectare parcels are generally far cheaper than even one hectare of land in the city center. Lower land prices mean cheaper homes. For example, the average home value in the suburbs of Beijing is 17,000 yuan per square meter versus 58,000 yuan in the city center. Affordable homes are the key to solving the housing crisis because they are exactly what people with low incomes need.
In addition, the higher a building rises, the more expensive the construction is. It takes top architects, high technologies, and reinforcing steel to build residential skyscrapers, and these things can cost a great deal of money. That is to say, these skyscrapers are not where low-income households can afford to live. For instance, about one in four high-rise apartments in New York City sit unsold, while tens of thousands of citizens are homeless. In comparison, low-rise buildings are much cheaper to construct and therefore a much better solution to the affordable housing crisis.
In conclusion, building on extensive areas of land is the optimal method to address the housing problem. For one thing, land in these areas tends to be cheaper and, for another, high-rise construction can be very expensive.
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