Câu hỏi:
07/01/2025 94With the growing population in cities, more and more people live in a home with small or no outdoor areas. Is it a positive or negative development?
Câu hỏi trong đề: 2000 câu trắc nghiệm tổng hợp Tiếng Anh 2025 có đáp án !!
Quảng cáo
Trả lời:
Sample 1:
In recent years, cities around the world have experienced a rapid increase in population, resulting in more people living in homes with small or no outdoor areas. In my opinion, living in a home with limited outdoor space has some negative effects.
First of all, the lack of outdoor areas in homes and the lack of exposure to nature and fresh air can lead to a sedentary lifestyle and have negative health consequences. For example, a person living in a small apartment in a high-rise building in the heart of a city may not have access to a garden or a park to exercise. With limited space to move around in their home, they may be less likely to engage in physical activity, leading to a sedentary lifestyle. This can contribute to obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and other health problems.
Secondly, the absence of outdoor areas can also have a negative impact on social and community life. Without outdoor spaces, it can be challenging for communities to come together and organize events that bring people from diverse backgrounds together. For example, in a small apartment where there is limited access to outdoor space, it can be difficult for residents to host social events or participate in communal activities. This can lead to a sense of social isolation and disconnection from the wider community.
In conclusion, the absence of outdoor areas in cities can have a negative impact on social and community life. It is therefore crucial that policymakers and urban planners prioritize the provision of outdoor spaces and green areas in the planning and development of cities around the world.
Sample 2:
Rising urban population has made more urban dwellers opt for small living spaces. From my perspective, this trend in urban housing poses more threats than benefits.
On the one hand, tiny spaces offer homeowners a simple, frugal and blissfully stress-free lifestyle. First, given the limited space, one would have to make some hard choices about what to keep, and what to get rid of. They don’t feel weighed down by all the frivolous items they used to own or a huge mortgage, and they spend less time and money cleaning and maintaining their home, which allows more time and money for leisure activities. In addition, living in a tiny home can help save money in many different ways. People would be able to trim their monthly expenses on heating, cooling, property taxes, or home maintenance; and hence, put a little extra each month in the savings account.
However, opponents of this housing trend would argue that smaller spaces may be linked to health risks and privacy issues. Although micro-apartments may be fantastic for young professionals in their 20’s, they definitely can be unhealthy for older people who face different stress factors that can make tight living conditions a problem. Home is supposed to be a safe haven, and a resident with a demanding job may feel trapped in a claustrophobic apartment at night. Another main concern of putting people in tightly packed living situations is the fundamental lack of privacy to all residents, exerting negative influences on their well-being. There might be a trickle-down effect for children raised in these spaces, who might find it difficult to find a quiet, private room to read and complete their schoolwork.
In short, living in a tiny home does have compelling benefits, but it is not without its challenges as well. Taking the potential health risks and crowding challenges, I believe micro-living may not be the urban panacea we’ve been waiting for. All in all, tiny spaces should be seen as a negative development.
Sample 3:
It is true that an increasing number of people in urban areas are living in houses with cramped space and few or no outdoor areas. I think this is a negative development for some reasons below.
Firstly, stuffy living conditions can affect people’s moods. When there is little space for us to move around the house, we just lose our temper and get irritated being surrounded by four brick walls. Worse still, some space outside at the porch such as a garden with beautifully grown flowers can be a good remedy for people’s stress and anxieties. Without such spaces, the tension level just rises dramatically as when taking a look outside, what we can see is the bumper-to-bumper traffic with cars honking and dust drifting everywhere in the air, making house owners moody all day.
Secondly, convenience and productivity also suffer as a consequence. Families with many generations living under the same roof would often complain about the lack of privacy when their houses are too small and narrow. The kids will feel humiliated and ashamed if they plan to invite their friends over for playing, or the father may have to abandon his hobby of playing saxophone so as to save others the nuisance of loud noises from his instrument. As for me, sometimes I cannot concentrate on my schoolwork, seeing others walk back and forth in the house. This just makes me get distracted and I often have to wait for others to sleep and then do my homework.
In conclusion, from what I think and from my personal experience, living in a small house is too disadvantageous, so this is definitely a negative development on the whole.
Sample 4:
These days, it is quite common that city dwellers do not always reside in a place with a spacious outdoor area because of the increasing urban population. As far as I am concerned, I believe that this is a beneficial development. The main reason why I consider this trend positive is that if city people live in a place where there is only a small or no outdoor area, the housing shortage can be mitigated. If residential areas are full of high-rise apartment buildings rather than houses, living space can be secured. In this case, people pouring into cities from rural areas for various purposes will not suffer from poor living conditions.
Another benefit is related to the environment. Compared with building houses with large outdoor space, constructing apartments in a high-rise building occupies less land, which is not necessarily at the cost of excessively destroying the habitats of different species of flora and fauna on the earth. This, in fact, is an effective and sustainable way for human beings to achieve their goals while being able to preserve the balance of the ecosystem.
Admittedly, when people’s homes have no big outdoor areas, the fun of life can be spoiled. If people want to do exercise, they have to go out to the nearby park or gym. Children are forced to go to the playground for interesting games, such as playing frisbee. People are unable to invite friends to come for barbeque parties on weekends. In contrast, all the activities can be performed within their own property if there is a big outdoor area.
In conclusion, I believe that although inconvenience may be caused to people’s life, the positive influences are more noticeable, which include the resolution of housing shortages in cities and the contributions made to the environment during urban development. Therefore, governments in cities should be encouraged to give priority to offering people homes with small or no outdoor areas.
Sample 5:
In contemporary urban landscapes, the surge in population density has led to a notable trend: an increasing number of individuals are residing in compact accommodations, often devoid of substantial outdoor areas. This phenomenon has elicited polarised opinions regarding its implications. While some view it as a concerning development, others contend that it may carry certain benefits.
On one hand, the dwindling availability of spacious housing with ample outdoor space raises legitimate concerns because limited living quarters can contribute to feelings of claustrophobia and stress among residents. This arises as the absence of outdoor areas may impede opportunities for recreation and relaxation, potentially compromising residents' overall well-being. As a consequence, individuals might find it challenging to establish connections with nature, which is integral to mental and physical health.
Conversely, proponents of this trend argue that compact living can foster resource efficiency and a sense of community. In densely populated areas, smaller dwellings often translate to shorter commutes and reduced carbon emissions, factors of utmost importance given the issue of city pollution. Moreover, the proximity of neighbours in compact housing units can facilitate social interactions and mutual support networks, thereby promoting a stronger sense of belonging and solidarity among residents.
In conclusion, the phenomenon of residing in small houses without substantial outdoor space presents a complex tapestry of advantages and drawbacks. In my view, while it may contribute to feelings of confinement and limit opportunities for outdoor activities, the potential to foster community cohesion and environmental sustainability is of upmost importance in today's world, and therefore overall, it is a positive development.
Sample 6:
The globe has experienced a paradigm shift in migration in this era of globalization, with more rural residents becoming city dwellers these days. From antiquity to the present, choosing where to live has been a major preoccupation. Although urbanization is the watchword of the day, few people feel that it is the best location to flourish, while others prefer rural living. Let us compare and contrast the advantages and disadvantages of living in a city and in the countryside.
Recent technological developments have aided urban living in a variety of ways. Cities have more obvious modes of transportation and communication than villages. In addition, urban industries and businesses provide a wealth of chances for professionals and entrepreneurs. Younger generations prefer to live in the city, where they may be surrounded by luxury, rather than in the countryside. Another significant factor to consider in this regard is the recent shift in the medical profession; many of these modern facilities are only available in urban areas. In addition to all of this, the city has evolved into a social hub for the wealthy and privileged, allowing one to have the luxury of knowing them. Celebrities and politicians, for example, are more likely to be found at social clubs or parties than at a country gathering.
As previously said, there are several reasons for one's choosing to live in a city rather than a village in today's world; nevertheless, one of them that deserves special attention is the level of education that a city provides. Education is said to liberate people from societal stigmas. In comparison to the rural side, metropolitan living is always associated with a well-organized and qualified educational system. When compared to a hamlet, a city would be the preferred location for finding efficient schools, universities, and research centers.
In the end, both urban and rural habitation have their advantages and disadvantages; however, choosing a place to live should be prioritized based on individual requirements. An ideal example would be an IT professional who should become a part of a city for his career advancement, whereas a farmer would fit in a rural sector for his livelihood. I've lived in a city since I was a youngster, and I'd like to continue in the same boat for the rest of my life.
Sample 7:
To accommodate increasing urban populations, many cities are extending higher today. This, in my opinion, is a better option than supporting urban development since it may help conserve surrounding land for other uses.
Some say that towering cities provide problems to residents and that a more spread-out metropolis provides a higher quality of life. Because of the consequences of overpopulation on sanitation, safety, and traffic conditions, large metropolitan places with many towering apartment buildings, such as New York City or Shanghai, are notoriously difficult to live in.
Decentralized cities, on the other hand, such as Los Angeles and Nashville, allow for the creation of unique local neighborhoods, greater room for residential buildings, and a reduction in the aforementioned urban difficulties. Individuals who live in these places frequently report higher levels of happiness, and many "transplants" relocate to these cities because of the higher living standards.
Those in favor of taller structures, on the other hand, can reasonably point to the benefits to the surrounding region. It is frequently difficult to control the expansion of economically significant cities, which can result in huge urban sprawl, as is the situation in the areas around Mexico City and Tokyo. The surrounding region can be maintained or repurposed by adding more buildings. National parks can be created from pristine natural areas. If the city requires additional food to feed its people, nearby farms with quick delivery periods may be available. This undeveloped area may be developed into peaceful suburban villages, allowing families to raise a family outside of the city while earning a high salary and having easy access to the cultural amenities of big cities. To summarise, horizontal cities provide certain benefits to residents, but higher cities make more sense in today's environment. Nonetheless, striking a balance and providing excellent infrastructure to minimize the difficulties created by expanding urban populations is critical.
Sample 8:
Many people in metropolitan settings are said to prefer small space living without access to the outdoors. Personally, I feel that this inclination has both advantages and disadvantages.
Living in a tiny place has a number of financial benefits. Mass migrations from rural regions to megacities have increased population density in many nations, resulting in high housing prices. As a result, renting tiny flats rather than houses with customized outside spaces would be more cost-effective for new inhabitants, particularly those with low incomes.
A modest apartment in Da Nang, for example, can cost approximately 70,000 dollars, but a moderate-sized house with open space costs at least 200,000 dollars. Furthermore, individuals who live in tiny apartments do not need to spend a lot of money on appliances or house upkeep, allowing them to save a little extra money each month. Despite the advantages listed above, I feel that minor accommodation might cause residents to suffer. For starters, living in this sort of environment can lead to a loss of privacy, which can have a detrimental impact on an individual's independence.
For example, because I share a tight flat in a high-rise building with my sister and uncle, it's tough for me to spend time alone. Second, outside areas such as front yards are great for exercising and planning family activities like barbeque parties. People who live in a residence with no open areas are less likely to engage in such activities, leading to a sedentary lifestyle. To sum up, I believe that living in tiny houses or flats with little open space has both positive and negative consequences.
Sample 9:
As cities’ populations rise, an increasing number of people live in apartments with limited or no outside space. It is, in my opinion, a detrimental development since it harms people’s health and productivity.
To begin with, living in a small place can lead to a variety of health issues. There is little doubt that a lack of outside space impairs cross-ventilation in the room, which promotes respiratory illnesses. Utilizing time in such an atmosphere for an extended amount of time is a difficult undertaking since it fosters lethargy. The metro cities of India are prominent instances, where the corona pandemic spread was greater than in other locations due to a shortage of room within the residences.
Furthermore, it results in a significant drop in convenience, which significantly reduces people’s production. It is a well-known truth that families with many generations living in the same house frequently lack privacy when the house is tiny and narrow. They are hesitant to invite visitors to their houses for festivities. Aside from that, the youngsters do not have a peaceful environment in which to learn. And, when one of the family members falls ill, the other member’s life becomes difficult owing to a shortage of room. To provide an example, during my undergraduate years, I moved to a small flat with four other convicts; during that period, my focus level dropped significantly, resulting in low marks.
To summarise, living in a home with a tiny or no outdoor area is a risky strategy since it influences people’s physical and emotional well-being. Additionally, it lowers their productivity.
Sample 10:
It is evident that an increasing number of city dwellers are living in cramped conditions with barely any open air due to population growth. Apparently, this can be considered as one of modern developments, but nevertheless poses negative impacts on these urban residents.
That reduction in living space means lower expenses do not seem to be an unseen advantage, for the price or rental fee for homes are undeniably charged in accordance with their sizes. Plus, they possess more affordable utilities, for example they need to spend less on bills for water, gas, or electricity on a monthly basis. Another point worth mentioning is that residential areas with tighter home space tend to be more populated, which, to some extent, has a great social aspect. This, interestingly, brings about the sense of community typical for rural regions, strengthening life-long connections between local inhabitants.
Looking deeper into the problem, however, there lie several adverse effects beneath the prevalence of such living conditions, especially with the lack of outdoor spaces. These residential areas can sometimes be overcrowded, leading to the feeling of being trapped for people in their own property. Under no circumstances should this issue be ignored, for domestic violence and substance abuse may well be the result. Furthermore, children fostered in tightly packed situations can also suffer from certain mental health problems. Without the chance of participating in outdoor activities, they are prone to end up becoming withdrawn or cannot achieve the optimal level of concentration for their study.
With that being said, when it comes to tiny housing, the consequences are indeed insidious, which outweigh some convincing advantages. Certainly, governments are expected to introduce new initiatives to allocate population in a more proper way.
Sample 11:
With the growing population of cities, more city dwellers are having to live in cramped houses with no outdoor spaces. In my opinion, this trend brings about both positive and negative aspects, however, I believe its advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
On the one hand, there is no denying the fact that when living in a tiny home without big windows and sufficient green space nearby, residents will be prone to some negative feelings. This is due to the fact that residents do not have any space for recreational activities, such as watering flowers or playing with their pets, after dealing with a heavy workload or stressful day. They therefore may feel exasperated within their apartments, and this can lead to a number of mental health problems such as depression.
However, although living in tiny houses possesses some downsides, the potential benefits are also numerous. The initial advantage is that living in a small house prevents frivolous spending on items that are only used to fill a space rather than to fulfil a function, helping people to be more disciplined with money. Along with buying less stuff because they have no room for it, they will also avoid wasting time on maintaining all that stuff. Small houses, moreover, encourage family bonding, creating an environment where family members can get organized and make the home a happy place. In comparison to larger accommodation, where there are separate rooms for each member, small homes offer a common living space for the whole family, which will provide more opportunities for the family to talk and share stories and feelings.
In conclusion, although small houses can be possibly detrimental to the occupant’s feelings, I still believe that living in limited space seems to be more beneficial to city dwellers when it comes to good financial management and family bonding.
Sample 12:
Due to the growing population in cities, a rising number of individuals live in accommodations with small or no outdoor areas. In my opinion, it is a negative development because it negatively affects people’s health and declines productivity.
To begin with, spending life in accommodation with little space could invite numerous health problems. There is no denying this conviction that lack of outdoor space affects the cross ventilation in the room that causes respiratory disorders. Utilizing time in such an environment for long period is a daunting task, as it encourages laziness. The metro cities of India are the prime examples, where due to lack of space inside the houses, the corona pandemic spread was higher than in other areas.
Moreover, it leads to a sizeable reduction in convenience that declines people’s output substantially. It is an accomplished fact that families with many generations living in the same accommodation would usually lack privacy when their house is small and narrow. They find it uncomfortable to invite people to their homes for celebrations. Apart from this, the children do not get a serene environment for study. And, when some family member goes unwell, the other member’s life becomes challenging, due to lack of space. To quote my experience, during my college years, I shifted to a small flat with four inmates. During that time, my concentration level declined considerably, resulting in poor grades.
To conclude, spending life in an abode with a small or no outdoor area is an imprudent approach because it impacts the physical and emotional well-being of people. Furthermore, it reduces their output too.
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