아이엘츠 라이팅 AI 첨삭
- Discussion
The government should impose a fee on drivers who use their vehicles during rush hour to help cut down on air pollution from exhaust fumes. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
스코어팩토리 AI가 에세이를 평가하였습니다.
Evaluation
Task Response: [8.5]
The student presented a clear position on the topic and supported the argument with relevant examples, all while fully addressing all aspects of the task.
Coherence & Cohesion: [8]
The essay is logically organized and through the use of appropriate cohesive devices, the points made in the essay are well linked and clearly communicated.
Lexical Resource: [8]
The student demonstrated a wealth of vocabulary across the essay. There's a variety of words used correctly to explain the points and add more precision to the arguments.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy: [8]
A wide range of complex grammatical structures are used and the vast majority of sentences are error-free.
Overall: [8.12]
Task Response: [8.5]
The student presented a clear position on the topic and supported the argument with relevant examples, all while fully addressing all aspects of the task.
Coherence & Cohesion: [8]
The essay is logically organized and through the use of appropriate cohesive devices, the points made in the essay are well linked and clearly communicated.
Lexical Resource: [8]
The student demonstrated a wealth of vocabulary across the essay. There's a variety of words used correctly to explain the points and add more precision to the arguments.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy: [8]
A wide range of complex grammatical structures are used and the vast majority of sentences are error-free.
Overall: [8.12]
스코어팩토리 AI가 작성한 모범답안입니다.
The government should impose a fee on drivers who use their vehicles during rush hour to help cut down on air pollution from exhaust fumes. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Essay:
The idea of imposing a rush hour toll on drivers to reduce air pollution is divisive, nevertheless, I strongly endorse such a scheme for its potential benefits on the environment and society.
The first major advantage of a rush hour fee would be to encourage motorists to switch to public transportation or carpooling. By doing so, the number of road vehicles, and hence the volume of harmful emissions, could be substantially reduced. The case of London, where congestion charges led to improved traffic flow and air quality, serves as evidence to the success of such a measure.
Another significant benefit is the potential for financial resources garnered from these fees to be used to promote environmental initiatives. For example, they could be used to fund green projects aimed at further reducing environmental pollution. The experience of Stockholm, wherein the revenues from a similar scheme were used to enhance green spaces and subsequently improve air quality, exemplifies this.
In conclusion, introducing a rush hour charge would not only lessen road congestion, but also support environmental sustainability by funding green projects. It seems, therefore, that the benefits of such a scheme greatly outweigh any drawbacks.
Word count: 202
Essay translated in Korean:
운전자들에게 전성기 요금을 부과하여 대기 오염을 줄이는 것은 의견이 분분하지만, 이 합리적인 제안에 저는 그 환경과 사회에 미치는 잠재적인 이익 때문에 강력하게 찬성합니다.
전성기 요금의 첫 번째 주요 이점은 운전자들이 대중교통이나 합승을 이용하도록 장려하는 것이다. 이렇게 해서 도로 차량의 수와 따라서 유해 방출량이 크게 줄어들 수 있다. 이러한 조치의 성공을 증명해 주는 사례로는, 혼잡 요금이 도시의 교통 흐름과 공기 질을 개선한 런던이 있다.
또 다른 중요한 이점은 이 요금에서 얻을 수 있는 재정 자원을 환경적인 이니셔티브를 촉진하는 데 사용될 수 있다는 점이다. 예를 들어, 이를 환경 오염을 더 줄이는데 목적을 둔 녹색 프로젝트에 투자하는 데 사용할 수 있다. 이를 보여주는 사례로는, 유사한 스킴에서의 수입이 녹지 공간을 개선하고, 그 결과 공기 질을 개선하는 데 사용된 스톡홀름의 경험이 있다.
결론적으로, 전성기 요금을 도입하는 것은 도로 공원을 적게 하는 것뿐만 아니라 녹색 프로젝트를 지원하는데 사용되는 수단을 통해 환경의 지속성을 지원하므로, 그 이점이 어떤 단점을 크게 앞서는 것으로 보인다.
Good expressions:
1. Is divisive - 의견이 분분하다
2. Endorse such a scheme - 이런 계획을 지지하다
3. Serve as evidence to the success - 성공을 증명하는 증거가 되다
4. Garnered from these fees - 이 요금에서 얻은
5. Greatly outweigh any drawbacks - 어떤 단점을 크게 앞서다
The idea of imposing a rush hour toll on drivers to reduce air pollution is divisive, nevertheless, I strongly endorse such a scheme for its potential benefits on the environment and society.
The first major advantage of a rush hour fee would be to encourage motorists to switch to public transportation or carpooling. By doing so, the number of road vehicles, and hence the volume of harmful emissions, could be substantially reduced. The case of London, where congestion charges led to improved traffic flow and air quality, serves as evidence to the success of such a measure.
Another significant benefit is the potential for financial resources garnered from these fees to be used to promote environmental initiatives. For example, they could be used to fund green projects aimed at further reducing environmental pollution. The experience of Stockholm, wherein the revenues from a similar scheme were used to enhance green spaces and subsequently improve air quality, exemplifies this.
In conclusion, introducing a rush hour charge would not only lessen road congestion, but also support environmental sustainability by funding green projects. It seems, therefore, that the benefits of such a scheme greatly outweigh any drawbacks.
Word count: 202
Essay translated in Korean:
운전자들에게 전성기 요금을 부과하여 대기 오염을 줄이는 것은 의견이 분분하지만, 이 합리적인 제안에 저는 그 환경과 사회에 미치는 잠재적인 이익 때문에 강력하게 찬성합니다.
전성기 요금의 첫 번째 주요 이점은 운전자들이 대중교통이나 합승을 이용하도록 장려하는 것이다. 이렇게 해서 도로 차량의 수와 따라서 유해 방출량이 크게 줄어들 수 있다. 이러한 조치의 성공을 증명해 주는 사례로는, 혼잡 요금이 도시의 교통 흐름과 공기 질을 개선한 런던이 있다.
또 다른 중요한 이점은 이 요금에서 얻을 수 있는 재정 자원을 환경적인 이니셔티브를 촉진하는 데 사용될 수 있다는 점이다. 예를 들어, 이를 환경 오염을 더 줄이는데 목적을 둔 녹색 프로젝트에 투자하는 데 사용할 수 있다. 이를 보여주는 사례로는, 유사한 스킴에서의 수입이 녹지 공간을 개선하고, 그 결과 공기 질을 개선하는 데 사용된 스톡홀름의 경험이 있다.
결론적으로, 전성기 요금을 도입하는 것은 도로 공원을 적게 하는 것뿐만 아니라 녹색 프로젝트를 지원하는데 사용되는 수단을 통해 환경의 지속성을 지원하므로, 그 이점이 어떤 단점을 크게 앞서는 것으로 보인다.
Good expressions:
1. Is divisive - 의견이 분분하다
2. Endorse such a scheme - 이런 계획을 지지하다
3. Serve as evidence to the success - 성공을 증명하는 증거가 되다
4. Garnered from these fees - 이 요금에서 얻은
5. Greatly outweigh any drawbacks - 어떤 단점을 크게 앞서다
제출한 라이팅
Essay:
In relation to imposing a rush hour fee on drivers to mitigate air pollution levels, there is a significant division of opinion. I, however, am strongly in favor for it because of the substantial benefits to our environment and society.
Firstly, imposing a rush hour fee could incentivize motorists to either carpool or rely on public transport alternatives as a way to circumvent these extra charges. This idea, if executed, could result in less congested roads and a substantial reduction in harmful emissions. In support of this, we can look at London, where the introduction of a congestion charge had a positive impact on traffic and air quality.
Secondly, the finances generated from this fee could provide substantial funding for environmental projects. For example, by allocating these funds appropriately, governments could invest in green initiatives that help to further decrease pollution levels. A salient example of this can be found in Stockholm, where they have utilized revenues from a similar scheme to enhance the city’s green spaces, which in turn has positively impacted the air quality.
In summary, implementing a rush hour fee could serve a dual purpose - it could decrease traffic congestion while promoting environmental sustainability through the funding of green initiatives. This proposal, therefore, is not only important but, in my opinion, quite essential.
In relation to imposing a rush hour fee on drivers to mitigate air pollution levels, there is a significant division of opinion. I, however, am strongly in favor for it because of the substantial benefits to our environment and society.
Firstly, imposing a rush hour fee could incentivize motorists to either carpool or rely on public transport alternatives as a way to circumvent these extra charges. This idea, if executed, could result in less congested roads and a substantial reduction in harmful emissions. In support of this, we can look at London, where the introduction of a congestion charge had a positive impact on traffic and air quality.
Secondly, the finances generated from this fee could provide substantial funding for environmental projects. For example, by allocating these funds appropriately, governments could invest in green initiatives that help to further decrease pollution levels. A salient example of this can be found in Stockholm, where they have utilized revenues from a similar scheme to enhance the city’s green spaces, which in turn has positively impacted the air quality.
In summary, implementing a rush hour fee could serve a dual purpose - it could decrease traffic congestion while promoting environmental sustainability through the funding of green initiatives. This proposal, therefore, is not only important but, in my opinion, quite essential.
공유
목록으로 돌아가기 😎
