Air travel is one of the main reasons for increasing air pollution these days. So restricting air travel is the only way to prevent air pollution. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Response
Some people suggest that air travel is one of the main culprits for escalating air pollution these days, and restricting air travel is the only possible way to control air pollution. While air travel undeniably contributes to air pollution, it cannot be singled out as the sole culprit and its curtailment, while tempting, presents an overly simplistic solution to a complex environmental challenge.
Firstly, attributing air pollution solely to air travel fails to acknowledge the substantial contributions of other sectors. Ground transportation, particularly fossil-fuel-powered vehicles, remains a major source of emissions. Industrial activities, from energy production to manufacturing, also spew substantial pollutants into the atmosphere. Focusing solely on aviation misses the wider picture and risks neglecting crucial areas for emissions reduction. For instance, investing in electric vehicles and public transportation infrastructure could yield far greater benefits for air quality than solely limiting flights.
Moreover, restricting air travel would impose significant economic and social consequences. Global connectivity, facilitated by air travel, fuels international trade, fosters cultural exchange and drives tourism-dependent economies. Imposing severe limitations on these air-borne links could stifle economic growth, isolate communities, and hinder global collaboration in fields like medicine and research. For example, restricting medical evacuation flights during a pandemic could drastically worsen its impact, highlighting the potential downsides of a blanket ban on air travel. Instead of resorting to draconian measures, a comprehensive approach that promotes cleaner technologies and operational improvements within the aviation industry holds greater promise.
In conclusion, while air travel's contribution to air pollution cannot be ignored, attributing it as the sole culprit and proposing its radical curtailment is a misguided approach. Focusing solely on restricting flights overlooks the wider canvas of air pollution sources and risks jeopardizing global connectivity and economic progress. A multi-pronged strategy that embraces cleaner technologies, operational improvements within aviation, and targeted efforts in other sectors offers a more effective path towards cleaner air quality.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use natural collocation Original: escalating Suggested revision: worsening Why it matters: 'Worsening air pollution' is a more natural collocation for a deteriorating environmental problem.
- 2. Use the right preposition Original: of Suggested revision: from Why it matters: The sectors are the sources of the contributions, so 'from' expresses the relationship correctly.
- 3. Improve the collocation Original: spew substantial pollutants Suggested revision: emit substantial amounts of pollutants Why it matters: The revision uses a more precise formal verb and a natural quantity phrase.
- 4. State the opportunity clearly Original: crucial areas for emissions reduction Suggested revision: crucial opportunities to reduce emissions Why it matters: The revised phrase states the intended opportunity more directly and naturally.
- 5. Place limiter clearly Original: than solely limiting flights Suggested revision: than limiting flights alone Why it matters: Moving the limiting adverb removes awkward focus and makes the comparison clearer.
- 6. Use standard spelling Original: air-borne links Suggested revision: airborne links Why it matters: 'Airborne' is conventionally written as one unhyphenated word.
- 7. Use formal example marker Original: fields like medicine Suggested revision: fields such as medicine Why it matters: 'Such as' is the more formal way to introduce examples in academic prose.
- 8. Clarify the pronoun Original: worsen its impact Suggested revision: worsen the pandemic's impact Why it matters: The possessive pronoun has an unclear antecedent, while the explicit noun removes ambiguity.
- 9. Correct the verb pattern Original: attributing Suggested revision: identifying Why it matters: 'Attribute' does not take the pattern 'attribute something as,' whereas 'identify as' does.
- 10. Use precise wording Original: wider canvas of air pollution sources Suggested revision: broader range of air-pollution sources Why it matters: 'Range' is more precise than the figurative and slightly strained use of 'canvas' here.
- 11. Correct the collocation Original: cleaner Suggested revision: better Why it matters: Air can be cleaner, but the quality itself is described as better rather than cleaner.
- 12. Sentence rewrite Original: While air travel undeniably contributes to air pollution, it cannot be singled out as the sole culprit and its curtailment, while tempting, presents an overly simplistic solution to a complex environmental challenge. Suggested revision: Although air travel undeniably contributes to air pollution, treating it as the sole culprit and curtailing it would be an overly simplistic response to a complex environmental challenge. Why it matters: The rewrite removes the interrupting phrase and gives the two coordinated actions a clear parallel structure.
Suggested Rewrites
- escalating worsening
- of from
- spew substantial pollutants emit substantial amounts of pollutants
- crucial areas for emissions reduction crucial opportunities to reduce emissions
- than solely limiting flights than limiting flights alone
- air-borne links airborne links
Why this response received Band 8.5
The response directly challenges the claim, develops two substantial lines of reasoning, and sustains a persuasive position with well-chosen examples. Its main limitation is minor repetition and occasional imprecision, such as the medical-flight example's unclear reference, rather than any major gap in coverage. The highest priority is to tighten repeated points in the conclusion and refine the few awkward collocations or ambiguous references.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The position is direct and fully developed through relevant analysis of alternative pollution sources and the consequences of restricting flights.
Make the medical-flight example more directly representative of the broader social costs of restricting ordinary air travel.
Coherence and Cohesion
The response is skilfully organised, with clear paragraph purposes and cohesive progression from causes to consequences and alternatives.
Condense the conclusion so it synthesises the argument without repeating several phrases and claims from earlier paragraphs.
Lexical Resource
A wide, precise vocabulary is used flexibly, with only occasional awkwardness or unnecessary repetition.
Refine isolated expressions such as "cleaner air quality" and reduce repeated use of "solely" for still greater precision.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A wide range of complex structures is handled accurately, and the few errors or ambiguities do not impede communication.
Check pronoun references and constructions such as "attributing it as" so every complex sentence remains fully precise.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
Air travel is one of the main reasons for increasing air pollution these days. So restricting air travel is the only way to prevent air pollution. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.