首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Beijing is contemplating charging congestion fees for cars that enter the city center during peak hours in a bid to ease the tra
Beijing is contemplating charging congestion fees for cars that enter the city center during peak hours in a bid to ease the tra
admin
2021-08-06
68
问题
Beijing is contemplating charging congestion fees for cars that enter the city center during peak hours in a bid to ease the traffic condition and improve the air quality in the capital. Heated discussions on the effectiveness of congestion fees are aroused among people. The following are opinions from different sides. Read the excerpts carefully and write your response in about 300 words, in which you should:
1. summarize briefly the different opinions:
2. give your comment.
Marks will be awarded for content relevance, content sufficiency, organization and language quality. Failure to follow the above instructions may result in a loss of marks.
BadBreath(the US): Drastic measures must be taken or imposed in order to deal with the horrendous pollution problems throughout China. They can place enormous tariffs on cars to minimize traffic volume and pollution. Then, continue expanding the subway to the best of their ability.
Brendan(the UK): The congestion charge was introduced in London in 2003 in a bid to reduce inner-city traffic volume and prevent pollution. The congestion charge of about £11.5 is required to enter the zone. In the 12 years since the congestion fees have been levied, traffic volume and pollution have fallen sharply. The policy can be named as one of the most successful policies.
Matt(China): I support the move! I have to endure road congestion every day to and from work: I don’t know whether this congestion charge will be an effective solution to this problem or not, but I sure hope so! The ways of managing cars that are currently in force are unreasonable since they cost a lot in fees even for people who don’t drive cars. It would be better to change to a situation where those who drive cars bear high costs, while those who do not drive cars pay no money at all.
Britomart(China): There’s another very significant factor, which our city’s officials seem to be ignoring. Congestion fees are no barrier to the very wealthy, to whom fees and regulations are negligible. If anything, higher rates simply serve to show off that they are the elite, to whom money is irrelevant.
Strangerl23(the US): Such fees are just more income for the government. People who need to drive will pay the fee. No such fee can ever stop or deter anyone from driving. You know why? Driving is not a luxury as you imagine. To many people, driving is a necessity. Why don’t you ban cars? This would work greatly.
Arun(Singapore): The congestion charge is almost proven not to work all by itself. It has to come backed up with extensive public transport systems. Singapore has a decent public transport system and that is why the congestion charge works. Singapore has a metro stop almost every two blocks(in the central districts)and buses every 5 minutes to feed them. The inherent solution itself comes with the way the city is designed so that people travel less. China could solve part of the problems with ramping up the density of residential areas around their work places.
PatrickInBeijing(Germany): Congestion fees might make more sense if they are coupled with other programs. Several people have noted to improve mass transit. How about lower fees for cars with multiple passengers and higher fees for cars with only one person? Multiple passenger cars could also be given priority at toll booths. Electric cars could get reduced fees, while large cars that produce more pollution would pay more. There are a number of ideas which could help. Keep in mind that it is not just about congestion, but about pollution and that not all cars pollute equally.
Write your response on ANSWER SHEET FOUR.
选项
答案
Should Congestion Fees for Cars Be Charged? In the wake of a spell of hazardous smog, Beijing’s traffic authority announced that the city is likely to charge congestion fees for car owners. Should congestion fees be the problem-solver? People’s opinions vary a lot. Although they all unanimously agree that drastic measures should be taken, to solve the horrendous traffic and pollution problems is much more difficult than to propose a policy. Some support the government in view of London’s successful experience in 2003, and they claim the fees collected could be used to expand public transportation. But others point out that congestion fees will not deter people from driving, as driving is not a luxury but a necessity. On the contrary, it makes those who drive feel a sense of superiority. Besides, congestion fees make no sense without the support of some other programs, such as the extension of public transport system, the balance on different types of car driving, and so on. Sorting out all the fluffy clues, my main contention is that the congestion charge does not guarantee a solution to traffic and pollution problems without the support of other programs. First, the public transport system should be well-extended and well-developed. The key to solving the congestion problem in metropolises in China is to balance the fast growing demand on transportation and the insufficient supply of transportation resources. Second, there should be different considerations about the charge. For example, cars with multiple passengers or energy-saving cars should get reduced fees, and electric cars should be charged free. Third, vehicle emission may not be the main source of the notorious smog problem in China. London smog is not controlled by only one policy of collecting congestion fees. The government must make sure that the fees are spent on the improvement of the dwelling environment of its people. Otherwise, it will surely arouse complaints and discontent from its citizens. In a word, we should not combine air pollution with congestion problems in big cities. Comprehensive considerations and joint efforts by the government, and researchers from institutions and the public are all needed.
解析
本题讨论征收交通拥堵费是否可以解决城市交通拥堵和空气污染问题,命题是社会各界关注的焦点。本题要求简要概括所给材料中的各种观点,并发表自己的看法。在具体的写作过程中,考生可以开篇点明该社会问题,并提出论点:征收交通拥堵费是否可以解决问题;第二段简要梳理各方观点;第三段重点阐述自己对这一问题的看法,并说明理由;最后一段总结全文,重申观点。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/LDIK777K
0
专业英语八级
相关试题推荐
Thoseofusinvolvedintheinternationalizationofhighereducationrelyonaseriesofassumptionsthatareoftennotsupport
Withtheeffectsofglobalization,increasesintechnologyandthepaceoflifeinvademoreandmoreareasofeverydaylife,an
Humansarethoughttoberesponsibleforalargenumberofenvironmentalproblems,rangingfromglobalwarmingtoozonedepleti
我喜爱湖。湖是大地的眼睛,湖是一种流动的深情,湖是生活中没有被剥夺的一点奇妙。早在幼年时候,一见到北海公园的太液池,我就眼睛一亮。在贫穷和危险的旧社会,太液池是一个意外的惊喜,是一种奇异的温柔,是一种孩提式的敞露与清流。我常常认为,大地与人之间有
AudienceofWritingAudienceisaveryimportantconceptforwriting.Youneedtoanalyzeyouraudienceintermsofthefollo
Working-classfamiliesintheUnitedStatesareusuallynuclear,andmanystudiesindicatethatworking-classcouplesmarryfor
……合中国旧历的三伏,一年最热的时候。
我想有必要在这里先谈一谈德国的与博士论文有关的制度。当我在德国学习的时候,德国并没有规定学习的年限,只要你有钱,你可以无限期地学习下去。德国有一个词儿是别的国家没有的,这就是“永恒的大学生”。德国大学没有空洞的“毕业”这个概念,只有博士论文写成,口试通过,
A、Puttinghisideasacrosstoothers.B、Solvingthornyproblems.C、Explainingsolutionstoothers.D、Planningaheadofcolleague
由小学到中学,所修习的无非是一些普通的基本知识。就是大学四年,所授课业也还是相当粗浅的学识。世人常称大学为“最高学府”,这名称易滋误解,好像过此以上即无学问可言。大学的研究所才是初步研究学问的所在,在这里做学问也只能算是初涉藩篱,注重的是研究学问的方法与实
随机试题
A.脑出血B.肾固缩C.两者皆有D.两者皆无动脉粥样硬化症
功能失调性子官出血是指
A.红细胞管型B.白细胞管型C.上皮细胞管型D.透明管型E.蜡样管型正常人尿中可以偶见的管型是
下列对历史文物遗产保护区阐述不正确的一项是()。
在权变理论中,把下属作为权变的变量,即认为下属的成熟水平是选择领导风格的依赖条件,这一理论是()。
合唱歌曲通常包括_________(歌词、朗诵词)、_________(合唱声部、领唱声部)与_________三个部分。
一位著名企业家从百折不挠的拼搏经历中总结出了“冰淇淋哲学”,即卖冰淇淋必须从冬天开始,因为冬天顾客少,会逼迫你降低成本,改善服务。如果能在冬天生存,就再也不会害怕夏天的竞争。根据本段文字,“冰淇淋哲学”主要强调了()。
河北井陉有座山,叫苍岩山;山上有座庙,叫福庆庙;临门有副对联:“殿前无灯凭月照,山门不锁待云封”。王维山水诗,据说最得“空寂”神致,但“寂寞掩柴扉,苍茫对落晖”(《山居即事》),还是暴露了“掩柴扉”的人。而“山门不锁待云封”,好像更有“空山无人,万物随缘”
以下语言中,本身不能作为网页开发语言的是()。
Thehumofconversation______asthechairmanmountedtherostrum.
最新回复
(
0
)