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
52
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
Languageisnotmerelysomethingthatisspreadoutinspace,asitwas—aseriesofreflectionsinindividualmindsofoneandt
Inrecentyears,railroadshavebeencombiningwitheachother,mergingintosupersystems,causingheightenedconcernsaboutmo
Thehealth-careeconomyisrepletewithunusualandevenuniqueeconomicrelationships.Oneoftheleastunderstanding【S1】______
BillGatesmaybeoneofthesmartestguysinthecountry,butevenhe’sannoyedathavingtorememberasortofpersonalpass
Wehaveseenthatthemerephoneticframeworkofspeechdoesnotconstitutetheinnerfactoflanguageandthatsinglesoundof
PASSAGETHREEWhatdouserstakeGoogleandFacebookforintheirlifeaccordingtoPara.3?
冬天,一个冰寒的晚上。在寂寞的马路旁边,疏枝交横的树下,候着最后一辆搭客汽车的,只我一人。虽然不远的墙边,也蹲有一团黑影,但他却是伸手讨钱的。马路两旁,远远近近都立着灯窗明灿的别墅,向暗蓝的天空静静地微笑着。在马路上是冷冰冰的,还刮着一阵阵猛厉的风。留在枝
AudienceofWritingAudienceisaveryimportantconceptforwriting.Youneedtoanalyzeyouraudienceintermsofthefollo
A、Puttinghisideasacrosstoothers.B、Solvingthornyproblems.C、Explainingsolutionstoothers.D、Planningaheadofcolleague
华裔电脑名人王安博士说,影响他一生的事发生在他6岁之时。一天他外出玩耍,经过一棵大树时,突然有一个鸟巢掉在他的头上,里面滚出一只嗷嗷待哺的小麻雀。他决定把它带回去喂养,连同鸟巢一起带回了家。走到家门口,突然想起妈妈不允许他在家里养小动物。他轻轻地
随机试题
分权制的优点有()
在20世纪90年代,江泽民就对全面建设小康社会、实现第三步战略目标,进行了前瞻性的战略思考。他在十五大报告中初步勾画了实现第三步战略目标的蓝图。其中第二步是()
被称为亲细胞抗体的免疫球蛋白是
草地的承包期为四十年至五十年()
下列选项属于资本项目的有()。
同业拆借资金不能用于()。
2019年1月1日,A公司经批准新建一条新型产品生产线。A公司将该工程出包给B公司,价款为3000万元。相关资料如下:(1)A公司为建造该工程于2019年1月1日借入专门借款2000万元,借款期限为3年,年利率为9%,每年年末支付利息。该工程的建造还占
2015年,我国快递业务量完成206.7亿件,实现业务收入2770亿元。全年同城快递业务量完成54亿件,同比增长52.3%;实现业务收入400.8亿元,同比增长50.7%。全国异地快递业务量完成148.4亿件,同比增长47.1%;实现业务收入1512.9
下列各项中符合元朝历史的有()①设置宣政院管辖藏族地区②设置理藩院掌管少数民族事务③设置澎湖巡检司,加强对琉球的管辖④全国划分为25个省级行政区域和蒙古盟旗等
AHowtoUseaPaintingKnife使用画刀的方法Paintingwithaknifeisabitlikeputtingbutteronbreadandproducesquitea(1)resu
最新回复
(
0
)