托福写作范文之政府提高燃料成本是减少污染的最好办法

　　2014年6月28日托福考试独立写作题目，英文题目The best way to reduce air pollution is for the government to raise the cost of fuel.

　　独立写作题目：

　　The best way to reduce air pollution is for the government to raise the cost of fuel.

　　托福独立写作范文：

　　A Traffic congestion is becoming an enormous problem in urban areas nowadays. As incomes rise, cars become more affordable, and more and more people rely on them to get to work, city roads are becoming clogged with commuters during morning and evening rush hours. One proposed solution is to turn driving during rush hour into a privilege that must be bought. While there are certain downsides to this idea, I think it has some merit.

　　One advantage of this system is that it would help the environment by reducing fuel consumption. Many who commute by car do not actually need to. They just prefer it because it saves them from having to squeeze up against other people on the bus or subway. But if driving during peak traffic hours became more expensive, it would encourage more commuters to use public transportation systems, thereby largely reducing per capita gasoline usage. As a result, air pollution would be reduced a great deal, and everybody could enjoy cleaner air.

　　Another advantage of this system is that it could serve as a large source of funding for the government for developing infrastructure. While many would likely switch over to public transportation under such a scheme, inevitably there will also be many who choose to pay for the privilege of driving to work. With this steady stream of income, the government can spend more money on developing roads and additional public transportation infrastructure in order to lessen congestion and pollution even further. As time goes on, more efficient public transportation systems can be put in place, and eventually, driving privileges during rush hour will not have to be taxed because most people will want to use subways or buses anyway.

　　Of course, such a system is not without flaws, especially in the early stages of its implementation. One issue is that it would be difficult to ensure fairness. Some people have no choice but to commute by car because there are no bus or subway stations where they live. For these people, the fee would be unfair. Another issue is setting the appropriate prices. If they are too high, public transportation systems could be overwhelmed by the influx of new passengers. If they are too low, traffic may hardly decrease. The first issue might be addressed if the government coordinated with companies to verify work and residence addresses. Those who have to commute to or from areas without public transportation access can be exempt from paying for driving privileges. The second issue could be resolved by setting a low starting price, and then gradually adjusting upwards until a “sweet spot” is found. Even if the price starts too low, the worst thing that could happen is that traffic levels stay the same.

　　Overall, though using fees to discourage peak-hour driving has its shortcomings, the advantages seem to outweigh these issues. With some time and effort, such a scheme could lead to a cleaner and more efficient commuting experience.