Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
😁4😱3
📝 TASK 2: Airplanes use more fuel and cause more pollution than cars do. In such a case, non-essential air travel should be discouraged in order to make the environment better rather than limiting car use.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Improved mobility that has taken place in the last decades is one of the essential factors behind many societal developments, yet their use is often being questioned as most modes of transportation have had negative ramifications on the environment because of their heavy reliance on fossil fuels. On a relative note, some people argue that unnecessary flights should be discouraged rather than restricting personal car usage as airplanes consume more fuel. I strongly disagree with this view, since limiting individual vehicle usage can have far-reaching impacts.
On the one hand, airplanes exacerbate environmental degradation significantly faster than personal vehicles. Airplanes are one of the most environmentally damaging modes of transport and emit a disproportionately high level of greenhouse gases, especially given that they release carbon dioxide at high altitudes, accelerating global warming at a higher rate than personal cars. Compared to individual vehicles, their fossil fuel consumption is incomparably higher, and this can further explain the given argument. For example, a single car uses about 8 liters of petrol per hour, while commercial jets, like the Boeing 777, consume more than 8,000 liters during the same length of time. This clear demonstration of the fuel intensiveness of airplanes means that their unnecessary use should be heavily restricted rather than limiting individual car usage.
On the other hand, the cumulative environmental damage of cars should not be overlooked. Millions, if not billions, of cars are used globally on a daily basis, and most of them are still traditional cars, not electric vehicles, and they operate by using fossil fuels only. They consistently contribute to greenhouse gas emissions on a larger scale. Thus, given the sheer number of cars used daily, it can be concluded that discouraging personal vehicle usage can be a more sustainable solution to mitigate environmental problems.
Additionally, reducing people’s reliance on their own cars can promote long-term behavioral change. Since airplanes are mainly used by privileged individuals, not by ordinary people who occasionally rely on air travel, limiting their use cannot urge people to break their established habits, like excessive plastic usage, that damage the environment. However, when people are encouraged to avoid using their own cars and to use public transport, ride bicycles, or walk, they can become more environmentally conscious in their everyday actions. Their increased environmental awareness can make a more meaningful contribution to environmental protection, demonstrating the impact of reshaping people’s environmentally harmful behavior.
In conclusion, restricting non-essential air journeys rather than individual car use can enable emission reduction, as airplanes consume considerably more fuel than personal vehicles. Nonetheless, considering the significant number of cars people use daily, I still contend that the overall effectiveness of limiting personal vehicle usage can be far more notable, as their cumulative effect can be more disastrous and the restriction on their usage can urge people to become more environmentally conscious citizens.
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
👍3🔥1👏1🤩1
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥7
📝 TASK 2: The increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to the natural environment. What are the causes of this? What can be done to solve this problem?
Because of the ever-expanding production of consumer goods, environmental conditions have seriously deteriorated. While there are several reasons behind this ever-growing issue, certain practical solutions can be proposed.
One contributing factor to this problem is the overexploitation of natural resources. With improved living standards and the increasing promotion of luxurious lifestyles on social media, today’s unhealthy materialistic culture has arisen. In an attempt to meet this rising consumer demand, companies have been unearthing raw materials on an industrial scale using fossil fuels in many manufacturing processes, further contributing to excessive greenhouse gas emissions, the main culprit behind climate change and other ecological problems. For example, global tech giants, such as Apple and Samsung, release new models of their gadgets every year, even though no noticeable improvement has been made, simply to satisfy people’s desire for novelty caused by social media-driven consumerism. The given issue is also contributed to by the fact that most consumer products are non-biodegradable. The mass production of plastic and low-quality, short-lived goods that often remain unrecycled has led to significant waste accumulation even in the most remote parts of the globe, such as the farthest corners of the oceans, threatening marine life as well.
Another key reason behind environmental degradation is weak environmental regulations. Governments, especially those of developing nations, usually attract foreign investors by granting them rights not to prioritise environmental standards. The case of Kazakhstan can clearly exemplify this. The country has not only introduced tax incentives for foreign businesses, but also allowed them to operate in previously untouched areas, boosting the tourism industry in mountainous regions and stimulating economic growth, yet harming these areas. This nation, however, is currently experiencing severe levels of air pollution with extremely high rates of PM2 particles, which shows the validity of the given argument.
Addressing this problem requires a multifaceted approach from both individuals and governing bodies, but the role governments play is more significant. Through public awareness campaigns, governments can improve people’s environmental awareness, potentially turning them from blindly fashion-following individuals into environmentally conscious citizens. This can encourage people to break their established habits of making unnecessary purchases and using excessive amounts of plastic products. For instance, in Uzbekistan, public TV companies have produced specific programmes that explore the existing ecological problems in the country and their root causes, which has made a positive difference in the use of plastic packaging in recent years.
Equally important is the stricter punishment that the government can enforce. Governing bodies can introduce carbon limits and punish those who do not follow the imposed environmental rules, violate sustainability standards, and engage in pollution-intensive manufacturing. Additionally, officials can offer tax incentives and allocate financial resources to businesses that obey environmental regulations, invest in recycling infrastructure, and adopt cleaner technologies. This can create an environment in which manufacturing processes are mostly environmentally friendly, as is the case in Taiwan. There, companies are freed from taxes based on how many recycled materials they have used every year, making it one of the plastic-free nations in Asia.
Because of the ever-expanding production of consumer goods, environmental conditions have seriously deteriorated. While there are several reasons behind this ever-growing issue, certain practical solutions can be proposed.
One contributing factor to this problem is the overexploitation of natural resources. With improved living standards and the increasing promotion of luxurious lifestyles on social media, today’s unhealthy materialistic culture has arisen. In an attempt to meet this rising consumer demand, companies have been unearthing raw materials on an industrial scale using fossil fuels in many manufacturing processes, further contributing to excessive greenhouse gas emissions, the main culprit behind climate change and other ecological problems. For example, global tech giants, such as Apple and Samsung, release new models of their gadgets every year, even though no noticeable improvement has been made, simply to satisfy people’s desire for novelty caused by social media-driven consumerism. The given issue is also contributed to by the fact that most consumer products are non-biodegradable. The mass production of plastic and low-quality, short-lived goods that often remain unrecycled has led to significant waste accumulation even in the most remote parts of the globe, such as the farthest corners of the oceans, threatening marine life as well.
Another key reason behind environmental degradation is weak environmental regulations. Governments, especially those of developing nations, usually attract foreign investors by granting them rights not to prioritise environmental standards. The case of Kazakhstan can clearly exemplify this. The country has not only introduced tax incentives for foreign businesses, but also allowed them to operate in previously untouched areas, boosting the tourism industry in mountainous regions and stimulating economic growth, yet harming these areas. This nation, however, is currently experiencing severe levels of air pollution with extremely high rates of PM2 particles, which shows the validity of the given argument.
Addressing this problem requires a multifaceted approach from both individuals and governing bodies, but the role governments play is more significant. Through public awareness campaigns, governments can improve people’s environmental awareness, potentially turning them from blindly fashion-following individuals into environmentally conscious citizens. This can encourage people to break their established habits of making unnecessary purchases and using excessive amounts of plastic products. For instance, in Uzbekistan, public TV companies have produced specific programmes that explore the existing ecological problems in the country and their root causes, which has made a positive difference in the use of plastic packaging in recent years.
Equally important is the stricter punishment that the government can enforce. Governing bodies can introduce carbon limits and punish those who do not follow the imposed environmental rules, violate sustainability standards, and engage in pollution-intensive manufacturing. Additionally, officials can offer tax incentives and allocate financial resources to businesses that obey environmental regulations, invest in recycling infrastructure, and adopt cleaner technologies. This can create an environment in which manufacturing processes are mostly environmentally friendly, as is the case in Taiwan. There, companies are freed from taxes based on how many recycled materials they have used every year, making it one of the plastic-free nations in Asia.
🔥4👍1🍓1
Jakhongir Aliy | W 8.0 l S 7.5
📝 TASK 2: The increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to the natural environment. What are the causes of this? What can be done to solve this problem? Because of the ever-expanding production of consumer goods, environmental conditions…
In conclusion, excessive resource exploitation, the use of fossil fuels, and non-strict environmental rules are the main explanations for the ecological imbalance caused by the ever-increasing production of consumer goods. To mitigate this issue, educating people on the severity of environmental degradation and supporting environmentally conscious brands are what the government should do.
🔵
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥8🎄2👍1🏆1🍓1
Task 2: In many countries, the cost of using public transport is rising rapidly. What are the causes of this problem? What solutions can be implemented to address it?
The price of public transport tickets has been on the rise in many countries. While this trend is driven by a combination of multiple factors, several effective solutions can be proposed.
One key reason behind rising public transport fares is increasing operational expenses. Because of the changing international economic climate, especially in terms of global energy price fluctuations, transport providers face an excessive financial burden when paying for fuel, maintenance costs, and upgrading projects. Additionally, given the seriousness of environmental degradation, the need to switch to electric vehicles has risen, putting extra financial pressure. These factors have necessitated an increase in ticket prices so that the public transportation sector can remain financially viable, as is the case in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. There, about a thousand electric buses were purchased from China in 2023, after which public transport fares grew by 40%.
Another explanation for this increase is the absence of government funding. As with other public goods, public transportation systems were also invested in by governing bodies in the past, yet this trend has changed because of the limited financial capabilities of the government. Responsible authorities have redirected funding to improving other areas, such as education and healthcare infrastructure, that often attract the attention of the wider population. This cutback, however, has made it impossible to keep transport fares unchanged in cities like New York. In this metropolitan area, where mobility has become a huge problem because of traffic congestion, more than 20% of city dwellers have become unable to pay for their monthly commuting expenses on public transport as a result of this negative change.
To address this problem, one effective way would be taking advantage of cutting-edge technology to maximize the efficiency of the existing infrastructure. Through transitioning to digital ticketing systems and optimizing routes, administrative waste can be reduced and operational efficiency can be boosted without compromising service quality. The case of Kazakhstan can exemplify this clearly. In this country, public transport infrastructure has become more accessible and affordable to the general public after the introduction of digital payment systems, reducing unnecessary spending on conductors. Therefore, it can be concluded that relying more on automation rather than human labor can mitigate this problem.
Equally important is restoring transport subsidies. Governments, through imposing carbon taxes and congestion charges on private vehicles, can generate new revenue streams to invest in public transportation systems, further discouraging the use of individual cars and contributing to environmental preservation. In Sweden, for instance, this taxation system has been applied for several years, which has led to a 50% reduction in public transport ticket prices.
In conclusion, increased operational costs and budget constraints are the main drivers behind rising public transport fares. To prevent excessive fare increases, up-to-date technology should be incorporated when receiving ticket payments, and the provision of sustained public transport funding should be prioritized. These measures can enable the reduction of administrative waste and the automation of processes that are otherwise costlier.
🔥14❤2✍2👍1👏1🍓1🍾1🆒1😎1
Jakhongir Aliy | W 8.0 l S 7.5
Task 2: In many countries, the cost of using public transport is rising rapidly. What are the causes of this problem? What solutions can be implemented to address it? The price of public transport tickets has been on the rise in many countries. While this…
Ko’ramiz bu essay tovuqchalik hurmat olarmikan😅
😁9🤷♀5🔥2🤣2🍓2⚡1🤔1💯1💋1🆒1🙉1
Mayli bugun task 1 yozolmadim anyway ertaga nasib ⚡️ yani bugun 😅
Have a good night🙌 vaqtimizga baraka berursin
Have a good night
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥10❤6
Butun umr Harry Potter kinosiga tushunmay o'tsam kerak boru
💯4😁3
📝 TASK 2: Some scientists think that there are intelligent life forms on other planets and messages should be sent to contact them. Other scientists think it is a bad idea and would be dangerous. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Some scientists believe that intelligent life forms live on other planets and that they should be contacted, while other scientists argue that doing so may have negative consequences. Establishing communication links with an alien civilization can be disadvantageous, but I firmly believe that such contact can be significantly more advantageous in some areas of life.
On the one hand, contacting advanced life forms in other parts of the universe can accelerate human progress. In cooperation with technologically superior civilizations, humanity can gain unprecedented knowledge in science, especially when it comes to colonizing other planets like Mars, helping our species to deal with problems like overpopulation. Additionally, humans can learn how to address alarming global issues like global warming, a shortage of international food supplies, and loss of biodiversity by developing more sustainable technologies and effective agricultural methods. All scientific advancements can contribute to improvements in living standards, enabling humans to stimulate progress in areas like technology, space exploration, and agriculture.
On the other hand, establishing contact with an extraterrestrial civilization may have some negative implications. Even though this is often considered to be stereotypical, because of our unawareness of the moral standards of alien life forms, it is still possible that alien civilizations may present hostility towards humanity, possibly trying to colonize our planet or even annihilate it. When technologically unequal societies come into conflict, the one with superior technological or weaponry capabilities usually wins. It has even been seen in human history, when European nations with more advanced weapons controlled undeveloped nations in Africa and exploited them. Given the irreversible nature of such colonization, it can be concluded that sending signals to unknown life forms on other planets is premature and irresponsible.
However, I still maintain that humans have to contact alien life forms, since we are already sending radio signals into outer space, which already reveal our location. Many space companies, like NASA, have already been sending their satellites to faraway places to explore other planets, even far outside of the Solar System. For example, NASA launched the satellite called Voyager 1 as far back as 1977, and this very space probe is travelling 25.3 billion kilometres away from our planet at a speed of 17 km per second. Therefore, sending signals to extraterrestrial beings is the next step in terms of exploring space, which started decades ago.
In conclusion, contacting alien life forms may be regarded as reckless, as it can pose serious risks because of our potential technological inferiority to them. Nonetheless, I still contend that we should contact them so that concerning problems, like environmental degradation and global hunger, can be resolved. This is because they may have achieved technological advancements that are far ahead of ours, potentially offering further progress for us as well. In addition, we have already been revealing information about our location in the universe, which makes it pointless to argue against establishing links with an alien civilization.
👏4❤🔥1🎉1🍓1
Uxlashdan oldin miyani sal ishlatib uxlaylar shu essayni o’qib)
😁6❤🔥1🍓1🆒1