IELTS Writing Task 2 sample answer (band score 8-9)
IELTS Essay # 456 - The best way to solve traffic and pollution problems
- Details
- Last Updated: Monday, 14 April 2025 12:11
- Written by IELTS Mentor
- Hits: 463809
IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay:
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve the growing traffic and pollution problems.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
What other measures do you think might be effective?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Write at least 250 words.
Sample Answer 1: [Disagreement]
Many people argue that increasing fuel prices is the most effective way to mitigate traffic congestion and pollution. I disagree with this opinion because I think that it will have a devastating impact on the economy and country. In this essay, I will describe more effective solutions rather than increasing the gasoline price.
A spike in fuel prices is likely to have serious repercussions on the economy. This is because higher fuel cost is passed on to the consumers through increased prices for commodities and services. This, in turn, leads to inflationary pressures and causes slow economic growth. In India, for example, a significant increase in gasoline prices in 2023 triggered the highest inflation rates in decades, causing a strain on household budgets and overall productivity. For this reason, I believe this is not the best way to deal with the pressing issue.
There are other effective ways to curb traffic chaos and vehicle pollution. Firstly, the government should make large-scale investments in public transportation. This is because extensive public transport networks encourage commuters to choose buses, trams, or trains over private automobiles. London is a good example that has invested substantially in its underground system, a rapid transit system, providing an efficient and affordable alternative to driving. This decreases traffic on the road, thereby lowering emissions per capita. Secondly, implementing congestion pricing is another viable solution to these issues. The authority ought to charge private cars for entering congested areas during peak hours to discourage individuals from using private vehicles and encourage alternative means of transport. In consequence, it can effectively manage congestion and reduce pollution.
To conclude, I believe that increasing the price of fuel is not the best way to curb the traffic and pollution problems because it may raise inflation. I believe that investment in public transportation and the implementation of congestion pricing would be the most practical solution to these problems.
Model Answer 2: [Agreement]
In recent decades, traffic congestion and environmental degradation have become major challenges in many cities around the world. Some people argue that increasing the price of petrol is the most effective method to address these issues. I agree with this viewpoint to a large extent, as higher fuel prices can significantly reduce vehicle usage. Nevertheless, complementary measures are also needed for long-term success.
Raising the cost of petrol is an effective deterrent against excessive car use. When fuel becomes expensive, people are more likely to reconsider non-essential journeys, carpool with others, or shift to more sustainable modes of transport. This not only reduces traffic congestion but also decreases harmful emissions from vehicles. For example, following a steep fuel price hike in Norway in 2017, the country reported a noticeable decline in private vehicle use and a sharp rise in public transport usage, contributing to improved air quality in urban areas.
However, while increasing petrol prices may yield results, it should be implemented alongside other long-term strategies. One such measure is implementing congestion charges in city centres. For instance, London’s congestion pricing has successfully discouraged unnecessary driving within the city core, leading to reduced traffic and pollution levels. Another effective approach is to introduce stricter vehicle emission standards. By encouraging the use of hybrid or electric vehicles and phasing out older, high-emission models, governments can directly target the pollution problem without solely relying on fuel price adjustments.
In conclusion, increasing petrol prices is a powerful and immediate tool to combat traffic and pollution. However, for lasting change, it must be part of a broader strategy that includes regulatory reforms and urban planning aimed at promoting cleaner, more sustainable transport habits.
Model Answer 3: [Disagreement]
In recent years, escalating traffic congestion and environmental pollution have become pressing concerns for many urban areas, and some argue that increasing the price of fuel is the most effective solution to these issues. However, I strongly disagree with this view, as it unfairly affects low-income groups and fails to address the root causes of traffic and pollution. Instead, I believe that more sustainable and inclusive measures like investing in reliable public transport - should be adopted.
Raising fuel prices would disproportionately impact individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds who rely on private transport due to inadequate public transit systems. These individuals may be forced to sacrifice other basic needs to afford fuel, while wealthier people would continue using their vehicles without hesitation. For instance, in many developing countries, where public transportation in many cities is unreliable, people have no alternative but to use private motorbikes or cars. Increasing petrol prices would worsen inequality without significantly reducing vehicle usage. Moreover, such a measure does little to change commuting habits or reduce traffic in the long run. Drivers often adjust their budgets rather than their behaviour, especially in the absence of practical alternatives. Therefore, the solution lies not in price hikes but in long-term infrastructural changes.
One effective alternative to reducing traffic congestion and pollution is to invest heavily in reliable and accessible public transport systems. When people have access to clean, punctual, and affordable options such as trains, trams, and buses, they are more likely to leave their private vehicles behind. For example, cities like Seoul and Singapore have significantly reduced congestion by offering efficient metro and bus services that are integrated, affordable, and widely accessible to all commuters. Another viable solution is to promote cycling and walking by developing dedicated bike lanes and pedestrian-friendly infrastructure. Encouraging non-motorised forms of transport not only reduces air and noise pollution but also improves public health. For instance, Amsterdam has successfully cultivated a cycling culture by investing in an extensive network of safe bike paths, resulting in reduced traffic congestion and a cleaner urban environment.
In conclusion, increasing petrol prices may have a limited short-term effect but is neither equitable nor sustainable. A combination of investment in public transport and the promotion of greener travel alternatives offers a more effective and inclusive path to solving traffic and pollution problems.
Idea Generation for this IELTS Essay:
Essay Question:
Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve the growing traffic and pollution problems.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
What other measures do you think might be effective?
Essay Type:
Opinion Essay with Two-Part Question.
The main question of this essay:
A) Do you agree or disagree that increasing the price of petrol is the best solution to traffic and pollution?
B) What are other effective measures to tackle these problems?
Arguments in favour of increasing petrol prices:
1. Discourages excessive car usage:
When fuel prices rise, people are more likely to reduce non-essential driving, carpool, or use public transport. This leads to fewer cars on the road and reduced emissions. For instance, after fuel taxes increased in Norway, many citizens began using electric vehicles and public transport more frequently.
2. Encourages investment in cleaner alternatives:
Higher petrol costs can push consumers and businesses towards more sustainable options such as electric vehicles and renewable energy. For example, in countries like the Netherlands, high fuel prices have led to increased government funding for green transport initiatives.
3. Promotes behavioural change:
Increased petrol prices can shift public attitudes toward more sustainable lifestyles, such as walking or cycling for short distances. For instance, many residents in urban areas have started using electric scooters and bicycles as a result of rising fuel prices.
Arguments against increasing petrol prices:
1. Financial burden on lower-income families:
Fuel price hikes disproportionately affect those with limited incomes who depend on cars for work or daily life. For example, in rural areas with no public transport, raising petrol prices could worsen living conditions for already struggling families.
2. Not a long-term solution:
People may still continue to drive despite the high cost, especially when alternative transport is not viable. For example, in parts of the US, even with fluctuating fuel prices, car usage remains high due to a lack of efficient public transport.
3. Inflation and increased cost of living:
Higher petrol prices can lead to a ripple effect, increasing the cost of goods and services due to higher transportation expenses. For example, groceries and public transport fares may become more expensive, especially affecting low-income families.
4. Negative impact on small businesses:
Businesses that rely on transportation, such as delivery services and tradespeople, may face higher operational costs, affecting profitability and possibly leading to job losses. For instance, local delivery companies may need to raise prices, making them less competitive.
5. Rural and remote area dependency:
In areas with limited or no public transport, people have no alternative but to rely on their cars. Raising fuel prices in such areas can isolate communities and reduce access to essential services. For example, farmers and rural workers may struggle to manage rising transportation costs.
Other effective measures to reduce traffic and pollution:
1. Improve public transportation systems:
Investing in efficient, affordable, and reliable public transport can significantly reduce the number of private vehicles on the roads. For instance, cities like Tokyo and Singapore have successfully reduced traffic congestion through advanced metro systems.
2. Promote cycling and walking:
Creating dedicated cycling lanes and pedestrian pathways encourages healthier and more eco-friendly commuting. For example, Copenhagen's extensive bike infrastructure has made it one of the world’s most bicycle-friendly cities.
3. Implement congestion charges and car-free zones:
Cities can reduce traffic by charging vehicles to enter busy areas and designating zones where cars are prohibited. For example, London’s congestion charge has led to a notable reduction in car usage within the city centre.
4. Encourage remote working and flexible hours:
By allowing employees to work from home or avoid peak hours, companies can help reduce traffic congestion. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, many cities observed significant drops in traffic due to remote working arrangements.
5. Support carpooling and ride-sharing programmes:
Governments and companies can promote shared transport options to reduce the number of vehicles on the road. For example, apps like BlaBlaCar and UberPool help commuters reduce fuel consumption and emissions.
Sample Answer 4: [Partial Agreement]
Escalating traffic congestion and environmental pollution have become pressing challenges in many urban areas. Some believe that increasing fuel prices is the most effective solution to these problems. While I agree that this measure can contribute to reducing both traffic and pollution, I believe that other, more comprehensive strategies should also be considered.
Increasing the price of fuel may reduce the excessive use of private vehicles, particularly in urban centres. When petrol becomes more expensive, individuals are more likely to reconsider their transportation choices, turning instead to public transport, cycling, or carpooling. Furthermore, this measure may encourage the use of cleaner energy alternatives, such as hybrid and electric vehicles, thereby reducing environmental degradation. For instance, countries like Norway have seen a significant increase in electric vehicle usage partly due to high fuel costs and incentives for clean energy. However, this solution can disproportionately affect low-income populations, making transportation less affordable and increasing the cost of essential goods due to higher distribution expenses.
Aside from raising fuel prices, other practical solutions should be implemented. Governments could impose limits on fuel consumption by restricting the use of petrol-driven vehicles on certain days and promoting the use of eco-friendly alternatives such as bicycles or electric buses. Additionally, public awareness campaigns can play a crucial role in changing attitudes toward sustainable living. For example, educational initiatives in schools and public media can promote car-free days and highlight the environmental costs of over-reliance on fossil fuels.
In conclusion, while increasing petrol prices can contribute to mitigating traffic and pollution issues, it is not a stand-alone solution. A combination of regulatory measures, public education, and investment in sustainable transport infrastructure would be far more effective in addressing these complex challenges.
In recent decades, automobile ownership has become increasingly accessible to the middle class, which has led to a dramatic rise in the number of vehicles on the road. A sharp increase in petrol prices would likely force many drivers to reconsider the frequency of their car usage. As a result, more people may shift towards public transport, which remains one of the most efficient and sustainable ways to reduce urban traffic congestion and vehicular emissions. Additionally, higher fuel prices could accelerate the adoption of eco-friendly vehicles such as electric cars or those powered by CNG or LPG. While this may not immediately resolve traffic congestion, it can significantly reduce the environmental impact of urban transportation over time.
However, increasing fuel prices alone may not be a comprehensive solution. Governments can also consider alternative policies such as limiting the number of private vehicles per household or offering incentives for purchasing electric vehicles. Moreover, schemes like the odd-even number plate system, where vehicles are permitted on certain days based on their registration numbers, can help ease congestion during peak hours. Public awareness campaigns promoting carpooling and responsible driving habits would also contribute positively.
In conclusion, raising the price of petrol can play a role in addressing traffic and pollution problems by discouraging excessive use of private vehicles and promoting greener alternatives. However, this strategy must be part of a broader, well-balanced policy framework to ensure long-term effectiveness and minimal economic disruption.
From an economic standpoint, the law of demand suggests that as the price of a product increases, its consumption tends to decrease. Applying this principle to petrol, a higher cost at the pump would likely discourage unnecessary private vehicle use. Consequently, fewer cars on the road would lead to a reduction in both traffic congestion and air pollution. For example, the city of Whitehorse in Canada increased fuel prices significantly, resulting in a notable decline in vehicle usage and earning it recognition for having some of the cleanest urban air in the world.
In addition to raising fuel prices, enhancing public transportation is a vital component of a long-term solution. When governments invest in reliable, affordable, and efficient public transit systems, individuals are more likely to opt for these services over their personal vehicles. Countries like Japan and China have demonstrated this successfully through their high-speed rail networks and well-coordinated urban transit systems. These improvements have helped reduce traffic bottlenecks and improve air quality in densely populated cities.
In conclusion, while traffic and pollution require a multifaceted approach, increasing petrol prices can serve as a powerful deterrent against excessive car use. When supported by an effective public transportation system, this strategy can yield substantial environmental and social benefits.
Admittedly, some people believe that increasing fuel prices could discourage private vehicle use and subsequently reduce traffic and pollution. While this might be true to a limited extent, the reality is that petrol remains a necessary commodity for millions of commuters who lack alternative transportation options. As a result, a price hike may not significantly reduce consumption but rather burden middle- and low-income families. Furthermore, increased petrol prices could lead to higher transportation costs, which in turn may raise the prices of goods and services and it will negatively affect the economy as a whole.
However, the transition to sustainable energy sources offers long-term benefits without creating economic hardship. The adoption of electric vehicles powered by solar or wind energy, for example, can drastically cut emissions and reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. If public transportation systems are upgraded to operate on clean energy, fares could become more affordable, thereby encouraging more people to use buses, trains, and trams. This shift would not only alleviate traffic congestion but also contribute to cleaner air and a healthier urban environment.
In conclusion, increasing petrol prices is an ineffective and short-sighted strategy to combat traffic and pollution. Instead, a more practical and forward-thinking solution lies in promoting the use of renewable energy in transportation, which can lead to lasting environmental and economic benefits.
Over the past century, cities around the world have experienced a dramatic rise in traffic congestion, leading to severe environmental pollution. Some experts argue that increasing the cost of petrol is the most effective way to combat these problems. While I agree that this approach could bring noticeable improvements, I also believe that a combination of alternative measures would be more effective in the long run.
Increasing petrol prices will reduce fuel consumption and car usage. For instance, in countries like Iran — where petrol prices have historically been low due to abundant oil reserves — the introduction of higher fuel prices has led to a decline in private vehicle use in recent years. As a result, more people have begun to rely on public transport options such as buses and metro systems. This shift not only reduces congestion but also cuts down harmful emissions from vehicles, contributing to better urban air quality.
However, raising petrol prices alone may not be a comprehensive solution. Governments should also invest in the development of efficient and eco-friendly public transportation systems. Encouraging the use of electric buses, trams, and metro lines can offer sustainable alternatives to private cars. Additionally, promoting the use of renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and hydro-power, can significantly reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Equally important is raising public awareness about the environmental consequences of overusing non-renewable energy. Educational campaigns and community-based initiatives can play a vital role in shifting societal attitudes towards energy conservation and sustainable transport.
In conclusion, while increasing the price of petrol can be an effective tool to reduce traffic and pollution, it should be part of a broader, multi-faceted strategy. Governments must adopt long-term policies that promote clean energy, improve public transport, and foster environmental awareness among citizens to tackle these pressing urban challenges effectively.
I personally believe that gasoline prices should be increased to tackle the ever-increasing traffic and pollution issues. A large number of vehicles that runs on the streets contributes to traffic jam and as well as pollution. Moreover, most of the car owners on the road are wealthy. So the petrol price does not matter to them in most cases. The rocketed price of petroleum means less use of personal vehicles, especially for middle-class car owners. Improving public transportation, on the other hand, would bring more or less, direct or indirect, better transportation facilities for all. So, instead of increasing the fuel price only, the authority should put more emphasis on enhancing the public transportation facilities.
I also believe that this solution must be accompanied by other attempts such as providing higher quality and quantity in public transportations . People need mobilisation as well as they need food and housing. So the government should see these as a basic need for their service. For instance, the security of commuters is important. They want to be secure so government should provide security officers in appropriate numbers that could lead to convenience in reaching their destinations. They also need enough vehicles with short-scheduled arrivals so they will not come late to attend their meetings, for instance. Finally, there should be an improvement in the quality of roads as well as the stations. As a result, more people will start using public transport rather than private cars and it would reduce traffic and pollution problems to a great extent.
To conclude, pushing the price of oil up is a good idea to deal with the traffic congestion problems, but enhancing public transport facilities is also required in that case.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the statement?
What other measures do you think might be effective?
It is undeniable that nowadays tremendous growth of vehicles has become a major issue for traffic and air pollution. Considering this, some analysts insist that increasing the price of petrol could be the best way to solve the traffic congestion. However, I staunchly disagree with the recommendation due to some notable reasons. I will also recommend a better solution to curb the issues.
It is true to some extent that a higher petrol price is a way to solve growing traffic congestion in the short run. It could be a significant factor to deter people from purchasing more cars and thus reduce the pollution problems and traffic congestion. Further, people who use private vehicles should bear higher fuel costs to travel. Therefore, they will be forced to use their cars as less as possible or use public transport in many cases.
However, a higher petrol price would also mean that all prices of consumer goods would also rise sharply. For example, food, clothes, fruits, medicine and important necessities would become most costly due to increasing petrol prices. So a far better and more practical solution to curb the traffic issue is to enhance public transport. If they are made available and have superior quality, many would take public transport rather than drive a car. Moreover, more scientific research should be done to invent and produce eco-friendly cars that would rely on electricity and solar power rather than fuels. It would solve the pollution problem to a great extent and the result would be lasting and significant.
In conclusion, a higher petrol price has a short-term impact on improving the traffic jam and pollution problems. So we need better public transport and eco-friendly vehicles as a lasting and practical solution.
Nowadays, in the city areas, the traffic and pollution (sound and air) are increasing day by day. One of the main reasons is the increasing number of vehicles. But we can reduce those problems by imposing different taxes on vehicle imports and ownership. For instance, in the context of reducing the number of private vehicle users, the Nepalese government has imposed more than double tax on imported vehicles. This step was taken so that vehicle prices automatic go high and people use public transportation rather than owning private cars. Likewise, the government also can reduce public vehicle fares to attract people for using public vehicles instead of private ones. The government also can use "odd and even numbers" rules in vehicles. This way the vehicular movement will be automatically reduced to half than it is now. We can also encourage people to use carpooling while travelling to schools, colleges, and work. If the movement of vehicles is low, then the traffic problem will be manageable and the noise and air pollution will automatically decrease. Finally, the government also can encourage people to use electric vehicles to solve pollution.
On the other hand, if the price of petrol increases, it will affect transportation costs. If the transportation cost is higher, then the price of goods will automatically increase. It will directly affect ordinary people and the overall economy of the country.
To conclude, increasing petrol price to reduce growing traffic and pollution could be effective to a tiny extent but it is ineffective in the long run. So that we can use other options to get rid of the problem.
Please send out the best IELTS materials, please. My email address is abdulazizjuraqu lov@gmail.com.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the statement?
What other measures do you think might be effective?
Governments seek different strategies to lower the traffic congestion and some claim that imposing more taxes on fuel prices might be the best solution as it would lead to fewer cars on roads and fewer emissions as a result. However, I do not agree with the proposition as I believe that raising awareness about the environment in addition to improving the infrastructure can have better results in lowering the traffic rate; hence, carbon dioxide emissions.
To start with, citizens generally do not like the power exercise that some governments use to change the ways citizens behave toward a certain issue. The governments are supposed to be comprised of people that are elected and who stand side by side with citizens. Therefore, the decisions taken toward national issues should be agreed upon and should lead to the benefit of everyone. Increasing fuel prices to lower the density of traffic is not a rational decision; almost everyone is leaving their houses for work and they will keep their schedule no matter what happens. Thus, it is better to enhance the infrastructure to absorb the increasing number of vehicles.
The opponents of this claim express that raising the fuel price might direct some to switch to public transportations instead of their private cars. In my opinion, those, who have already invested in buying a car, will not easily take such decisions. Besides, many car owners have children to be dropped and picked up from schools; using public means is not practical nor convenient for them.
Moreover, governments, through awareness campaigns, can promote the use of more sustainable alternatives as means for transportations , such as electric or hybrid cars. These kinds of solutions cost less for society. They can also lower the tax on these cars. and increase the tax tokens on petrol-usage cars. In this way, people will not feel that the government is personally targeting their pockets.
In conclusion, it is everyone’s responsibility to look for sustainable solutions to lower air pollutions and reduce traffic jam. Governments should take a friendly role to spread awareness and develop roads and highways so that they can support more cars. Finally, electric and hybrid cars should be promoted.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the statement?
What other measures do you think might be effective?
Nowadays, traffic congestion is a major problem all over the world. Many nations have raised fuel prices to avoid bad traffic as well as air pollution as it discourages people to use private vehicles. There are other ways to reduce traffic and pollutions as well.
First and foremost, increasing fuel price, without a doubt, discourage many people from owning and using their own cars as it becomes expensive. It means fewer vehicles on the roads and less traffic congestion. But the impact of increasing petrol and diesel prices also grows the price of basic commodities. This affects the lifestyle and purchasing capacity of middle and underprivileged people. For instance, essential items such as fruits, vegetables, medicines, rice, and even sometimes water are transported from one place to another through various transportation systems and they become costlier due to increased fuel price. Also, commuting becomes expensive due to fare hike in public transports.
Another way to reduce traffic and pollution is that the government has to provide an efficient number of public transportation like buses, trains and enhance their facilities. The authority has to encourage people to use public transports instead of using private cars. Secondly, infrastructures like flyovers, bridges should be built to manage the traffic, especially in developing countries. Next, a carpooling system is also a better way to decrease traffic. Last but not least, the government has to enact some rules and regulations such as even and odd method to reduce traffic problems.
To conclude, a hike in fuel prices can not be a good approach to control traffic congestion. Rather the government should take other initiatives like enhancing public transports and enacting other methods to bring the best possible results.
Report