A lot of my IELTS students struggle with how many ideas they need and how to structure their essay.
This article with explain clearly what you need to do and why. If you want to read some examples of different essays you can click here.
Let’s look at an example:
Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Don’t miss out on my new Patreon exclusive essays here if you want to really improve on IELTS!
Dave
Clear position
The first thing to remember is for the question above you don’t need to discuss both sides but you can if you want.
Therefore you have a choice about whether to discuss the ‘agree’ side, the ‘disagree’ side or discuss both sides. We’ll examine these options later.
Even if you choose to discuss both sides you must clearly state whether your opinion is agree or disagree. This is very important for your Task Achievement score.
You can see from the table below that if you don’t clearly choose a side, you will not score above a 5 for Task achievement – no matter how good the rest of your writing is.
Band Score |
Official IELTS description(Task Achievement) |
What it means |
7+ |
“Presents a clear position throughout the response” |
Your overall opinion is very clear and is well supported by all your reasons and examples in your whole essay. |
6 |
“Presents a relevant position, although the conclusions may become unclear or repetitive.” |
Your overall opinion is good but you don’t always clearly support it with reasons or have clear conclusions. |
5 |
“Expresses a position but the development is not always clear and there may be no conclusions drawn.“ |
You have an overall opinion but you often don’t support it with reasons or have conclusions. |
4 |
“Presents a position but this is unclear.” |
You have an opinion but you don’t explain or support it clearly. |
So to summarise, for the question above you must have a clear position and you have three possible options:
1. Strongly agree. You think it’s better for governments to spend money on rail rather than roads. You discuss only this side.
2. Strongly disagree. You think it’s better for governments to spend money on roads rather than rail. You discuss only this side.
3. Discuss both sides. You discuss both sides but you have a clear opinion about rail or road.
Clear essay structure
As you can see from the table above a clear position throughout your essay is very important for your Task Achievement.
So I always recommend to my IELTS students that they give their opinion in the introduction as well as the conclusion (for all Task 2 questions).
Technically, it’s OK to write a very general introduction and leave your opinion to the end.
But I strongly suggest that you don’t do this because it’s not as clear.
Also, you might run out of time before you’ve got to your conclusion, so overall it’s a risky strategy.
Therefore my suggested IELTS Task 2 essay structure is four paragraphs – an introduction, two main (or body) paragraphs and a conclusion.
The opinion is presented in the introduction and re-stated in the conclusion, and each body paragraph should only discuss one main idea.
Now let’s look at the options in more detail.
Possible Essay structures
1. Strongly agree – you feel rail is much more important than roads.
You need two good reasons why rail is more important.
Paragraph 1 (intro) |
Paraphrase the question and state your overall opinion(you feel rail is more important) |
Paragraph 2 (body 1) |
Explain and support your first reason why rail is more important. |
Paragraph 3 (body 2) |
Explain and support your second reason why rail is more important. |
Paragraph 4 (conclusion) |
Re-state your overall opinion (rail is more important) and summarise your main reasons. |
2. Strongly disagree – you feel roads are much more important than rail.
You need two good reasons why roads are more important.
Paragraph 1 (intro) |
Paraphrase the question and state your overall opinion(you feel roads are more important) |
Paragraph 2 (body 1) |
Explain and support your first reason why roads are more important. |
Paragraph 3 (body 2) |
Explain and support your second reason why roads are more important. |
Paragraph 4 (conclusion) |
Re-state your overall opinion (roads are more important) and summarise your main reasons. |
3. Discuss both sides – You think one side is good but overall the other side is more important.
You need one good reason for each side.
In the example below you feel the reason for supporting rail is more important than the reason supporting roads.
Paragraph 1 (intro) |
Paraphrase the question and state your overall opinion(you feel roads are important but rail is more important) |
Paragraph 2 (body 1) |
Explain and support your reason why one side is important. |
Paragraph 3 (body 2) |
Explain and support your reason why the other side is important. |
Paragraph 4 (conclusion) |
Re-state your overall opinion (you feel roads are important but rail is more important) and summarise your main reasons. |
So in summary, one thing that all three options have in common is that each essay clearly chooses a side and that is clear throughout the essay.
None of these options ‘sit on the fence’ (stay in the middle), because you should never write a 50/50 essay.
You should never say “Both roads and rail have benefits and drawbacks.”
That is not a clear conclusion, so you will definitely lose marks for your Task Achievement.
Also, you shouldn’t say “Overall I think roads are important and rail is also important so governments should spend money on both.”
Technically this is OK as your opinion is clear, but some examiners might not agree so this is risky.
So the safest strategy is to choose a side, even if that isn’t your real opinion.
Now it’s your turn! Put your answers in the comments.
Look at the question below then compare your ideas with this sample answer (written by an ex-examiner).
Plastic shopping bags are used widely and cause many environmental problems. Some people say they should be banned.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Nowadays, the topic of plastic bags and their adverse effect on environment, has become hot news, which has led many activists and social groups to promote tackling of such item in our everyday life.
As far as I am concerned, I strongly concur with taking serious measures to ban plastic bag usage because if we proceed with such pace our global home will be set into serious risk which will in turn be reflected in global population’s health and wellbeing.
Truth be told, plastic shopping bags have always been widely used by everyone but in the recent decades due to rapid increase of world’s population their usage and disposal have reached concerning levels which is seriously causing devastating and unreversed damage to our planet.
Given the fact that plastic needs years and even decades to degrade, substantial upraise of this product in our environment has released considerable amount of pollutants in the air, water and land putting into risk marine creatures’ lives and human’s wellbeing as well. Everyone must have come across to the widespread video of a diver filming the detrimental truth of marine creatures in the Indonesian waters suffocated by the vast amount of plastic underneath the surface of the sea.
As a matter of fact, not only does plastic endanger water habitat but it also has damaging effect on soil fertility putting into risk the quality of our food products which will obviously impact human’s physical and mental health in the future.
On grounds of such concern, scientist have long repeatedly pointing out the urgent necessity of plastic replacement with eco-friendly products such as paper or canvas containers, which remain way more effective and environmentally healthy. On the other hand numerous people around the planet are joining environmental activists who are taking substantial steps to tackle such phenomenon as soon as possible.
To conclude, I strongly concur with fact that plastic bag should be banned in every country around the world as increasing amounts of non-biodegradable material will soon affect our health and the wellbeing of future generations. Serious steps should be taken by governmental and social actors to prevent such process from becoming irreversible.
Well written Flor!
You don’t need so many introductory sentences. Try to follow my structure more closely – 2 sentences for the introduction, 4-5 for the next two paragraphs and then 2 for the conclusion.
Otherwise really strong vocabulary throughout!
Some of your ideas seem to jump around and it would be better to have clear topic sentences and then develop your answers with specific examples.
Is that clear?
If question ask
Do you agree or disagree?
Not to what extent.
Can we still discuss both the sides?
When is it important to state an advantage and reject it?
Yes, you can. You can talk about each side and then choose one overall.
I would highly recommend that approach because then you will be able to talk about two different main ideas.
But you can also choose one side and simply defend that one. It is a matter of choice.
Some people consider acknowledging the other side to be a stronger structure but for IELTS both are fine and equal.
Is that clear?
Yes, It is clear.
I have one more question related conclusion.
In discuss both views and give your opinion and agree or disagree questions.
These questions are type of questions.
How we have to state our main points?
Do we have reject which the proponents support? And say other idea is more important?
Or we only have to state the main reason why we support this idea?
I am asking this because there is no consistent pattern in the sample essays.
Hi Mani – great questions!
You do not have to repeat your main ideas – stating your overall opinion is the important part.
Just say your opinion and the main reason why – keep it simple!
There is no consistent pattern because it is only important to follow the rules of the ban descriptors.
They ask that candidates have a clear position – there is more than one way to do that do the structure will not always be identical depending on the question and writer.
Just make sure you have a clear position/opinion!
With the changing times, plastics have become an important accessory of human life, which is produced at large scale, all over the world. The characteristics of plastic has made it one of the widely used item. Few people believe that it should be banned while others think that it should be not be banned. In my opinion, I feel that a plastic has an adverse effect on the environment and on the animals as well as the marine life.
Plastics are so widely used that they are often thrown into the garbage, drains etc. Though gazillions of plastics are sent for recycling but few are still left behind, not properly disposed. The same approach is adopted by the industries or large/ small scale companies resulting in throwing of plastics into sea, in large chunks. This further ends up in a mammals body or at times wrapped around its body, leading to physical injuries and finally results in death. This pattern is observed in the developing countries, also the under developed countries, where lack of awareness is one of the major reason for damage to the other living beings. Educating the people would benefit these countries enormously.
Banning plastic would mean that we have increased the rate of survival of the other living beings along with the humans. This would not only improve the food chain, which has been disturbed lately but will also result in ecological balance. Burning it in excess, often releases harmful gases, changing the composition of atmosphere, resulting in damage the ozone layer. Air pollution would be another consequence of burning it and may result in health issues.
At last, it would be beneficial for the mankind to ban the plastic and come up with other items that are biodegradable and also not a threat to the other living beings.
Well written, PK!
A couple of notes:
Your intro should only be two or three sentences, then you can write longer body paragraphs.
Great second paragraph!
There could be better linking between your sentences and ideas. Your ideas are great but sometimes don’t flow together naturally.
At the end, you can simple include ‘In conclusion’ not ‘at last’
Over the last few years, people have become increasingly concerned about the overuse of plastic bags, which leads to environmental pollution and other issues. Personally, I am of the conviction that plastic bags should be eliminated because they are not only bad for the environment but also harmful to human bodies.
To start, using plastic bags has many negative effects on the environment. Since plastic bags are nonrecyclable, used bags accumulate in landfill as garbage, where they will take a prolonged period of time, sometimes over a hundred years, to degrade. During this process, an extended area of land is wasted and polluted. Worse still, some used bags were dumped in the ocean and consumed by ocean animals, which significantly threatens their well-beings and even their lives. Statistics show that the extinction of several species of tortures is related to the increasing volume of ocean garbage, plastic bags in particular.
In addition, using plastic bags can also harm our health. It is generally acknowledged that these bags contain toxic chemicals, which can enter people’s systems via oral consumption and skin contact, and make them sick. In some underdeveloped countries, people carry food in plastic bags, which allow those harmful substances to enter through their month. Besides, our skin also absorbs those unwanted chemicals during handling and manipulating. As a result, an increasing number of people are suffering from illnesses due to the excessive use of plastic bags. This is why they need to be banned immediately.
In conclusion, no more plastic bags should be produced, considering how much damage they cause to our home planet as well as our health. If we continue using them for convenience, our children and grandchildren will have to pay the price of this fault. (290 words)
Great paragraphing and well-supported main ideas – keep it up!
Thanks for your helpful writings.
Nowadays government are struggling with a lot of environmental side effects of plastic bags overuse so some people believe that usage of these should be limited.In the following essay, I will discuss my opinion and reasons why I completely agree with this group.
The main reason is plastic bags,which are usually thrown out to the environment,are not degradable.It’s takes more than 1.000 years or more for a plastic to be break down and get back to the nature and till then, they will make the environment un pretty therefore,I think e should use other reusable types of shoppig bags rather than thses plastic ones.
secondly,as we know,plastic bags are made from oil, which is non-renewable source of energy. I believe that by using more and more plastic bags, we will end up lacking of this kind of energies so we should use plastic bags more considerably.
in conclusion,in my opinion,usage of plastic bags should be limited as much as possible because the have number of negative effects on environment like polluting lands and also consumption of oil for producing these.
Good work – keep it up!
Corrections: the environmental, with this viewpoint, thrown out are not biodegradable, to break down, and return to a natural form, litter the land and ocean, lots of spelling mistakes too!
Remember an essay has to be 250+ words!
I wrote this after the railways and roads topic. Can anyone let me know if i can get a band 6 with this. Thank you!!!
People believe that governments should invest in railways transportation rather than the expense on roads. From my perspective, I agree with the statement above. In this essay, I will demonstrate my reasons.
First of all, trains are more eco friendly than automobiles. Since the train is a public mean of transport, it could carry lots more passengers than any car or motorbike, which means the consumption of energy will be cut down. To be more specific, for example, a train transports 100 people would use fewer fossil fuels than the same amount of people use fuel for personal vehicles. On the other hand, according to a forecast of a university, the population on Earth in 2050 will be 10 billion leading to a gradual rise in personal transportations. So that, in order to keep the environment sustainable, politicians should increase the expenditure on constructing and maintaining railways.
The second reason for my agreement with the belief above is railways are safer than roads. Because trains run on certain pathways and separated with other trains and other vehicles then there would be a remarkable reduce on crashing issues. Moreover, the railways net is controlled by a special centre so different trains would schedules and different ways to obey. Besides, not only safer the train is but it is also much faster than private automobiles.
In conclusion, I strongly agree with the statement of spending money on railways rather than roads. The governments should increase the investment in trains because they are safer and more eco than roads
Hi Toby!
You have a clear opinion in the introduction and conclusion and your second paragraph is great.
I think this essay would be in the band 6 range but you need to clean up the 3rd paragraph – try to focus on a single main idea fully developed and make it more like your 2nd paragraph.
You are capable – just be disciplined too!
over the current century, it have been common to use plastic material for shopping bags because of their excellent quality and their lower price. on the other hands,they surely cause cause variety of environmental as well as human health issues which need immediate concern, one of the possible solution which i firmly believe would work is to prohibit production of them for not only shopping bags but also for other unnecessary items.
there are plenty of serious current problems and upcoming devastating results which could come from using plastic materials. The first and foremost one is the nature of plastic material which is not degradable. it means that it takes up long period of time to being dissolved in the soil or decompose to their original composition. for example, plastic bottle which is unfortunately becoming ubiquitous might maintain their shapes and body for a hundred of years which is real threat for the next generation. they would be detrimental for the soil productivity and reduce its fertility due to their long-term effect on the soil ingredient quality and minerals. therefore, these pernicious effect should incline people to avoid using this type of material and save the natural resources for the future generations,
secondly, although production of plastic materials could be economical for the manufacturer, their recycle would be extremely expensive and bring social problems.there are plenty of measurement Which should be taken in when it come to collect the used synthesized plastic materials and their process of recycling. firstly it notoriously causes creation of labor children searching for plastics and try to divide them form other type of rubbish, including those which may cause illness and serious infectious disease, which is a global problem. besides that, factories which have the industrial equipment to recycle them, need pricey procedure to turn them into raw material. whats more, harmful gasses which is a byproduct of the whole process, surely pollute the atmosphere and make it unhealthy for the children and the elderly. all in all, considering these deleterious impact of plastic materials on society should convince us to prohibit them to preserve the well-being of each member of it.
in conclusion, although addiction to usage of plastic bags would be hard to leave, it is time that we educated us to replace them with more environmentally-friendly materials. i personally agree to ban using of them in the foreseeable future in order to maintain our environment more sustainable.
Good but be more careful with your punctuation and paragraphing, Mehdi!
Majority of people in the world are using plastic every time they go shopping even though they have bad effect to nature. That’s why many people agree that they must be prohibit. I totally agree because many seas lives died by taking plastic and they take long time to be destroyed.
The reason why I support people avoid using plastic bags because there are numerous animals in the sea all around the world were killed by eating it. Moreover, some of them were endangered species. The poor animals took the plastic because they thought the plastics were food. People can see that on the news, and it shows that people are careless about the fact that they are killing many lives by leaving garbage which contain a lot of plastics on the beaches. To illustrate, when I when to the beach with my family on holiday, I saw many tourists were having fun and didn’t realize that they left plastics on the beach.
In addition, in order to get rid of the plastic, it takes more than thousand years because of the substances. It is said that a huge amount of plastics is burned in fire, the substances within plastics can destroy the atmosphere. They are not environmentally friendly for both animal and human being.
In conclusion, I completely agree that plastic bags should be avoided because they can cause animal’s deaths. Furthermore, they are difficult to be destroyed and it takes a lot of time to do. Personally, People must realize how dangerous of using the plastic not only to human but to animal as well. We live in the same world so we should take care of each other.
Good work!
Try to keep your claims weaker, don’t use contractions in formal writing and reduce the size of your conclusion – the paragraph before should be longer so that you can more fully develop your main ideas.
Keep working hard!
Is the format for “Do you Agree / Disagree” & “What extent do you Agree / Disagree?” the same if I only plan on supporting one side? Is it a necessity to acknowledge the other side?.
For example, if I only support one side, can I support it in both my body paragraphs?
Yes, they are exactly the same.
You can but I would strongly recommend writing about both sides so that you don’t repeat your main ideas.
good morning, I’m very happy that I have read this site, and also everyday I use
Happy to help!
Hello, Dave
thank you for your explanation! I’ve written my essay based on yours
Dunno whether it is a good tip for acquiring academic writing technique or not )
Thank you in advance
A lot of environmental problems are caused by the wide usage of plastic bags, hence, some people consider that those bags ought to be prohibited. In my opinion, they have a negative effect on landfills and the seas, however, the replacements for plastic bags also carry significant environmental risks, that is why I think that plastic bags should not be bunned.
To begin, the main environmental side effect caused by plastic bags is the earth and water contamination. An insignificant percentage of people may reuse them, but most would simply litter or throw them in the trash. If individuals continue to throw plastic bags in the trash, they will turn to an ever-increasing number of landfills and contribute to soil pollution. For example, the ones that are simply thrown on the street tossed into clog drains after that find their way to the sea and entangle marine life.
Another view is that if plastic bags would be prohibited a harmful effect from biodegradable products. Most people suggest that paper bags and reusable bags made from cotton are the best solutions, however, these remedies are even worse. Paper bags require us to continue clearing forests, besides, reusable bags are plagued by similar problems. Independent studies have shown that the production of cotton and reusable plastic causes more harm to the environment than disposable bags due to factories’ exhausts.
In conclusion, owing to broadly usable plastic bags nature snowed under many problems; some people support the idea to restrict those bags. Plastic bags are the main reason for landscape and water contamination, however, I think that if plastic bags would be bunned the side effects for nature will be even worse, hence, they should not be prohibited.
Nowadays, the massive use of plastic bags has resulted in a lot of environmental issues. It is because plastic is a material that is harmful to the sea and land. To cherish and save our earth, I strongly agreed with the idea that plastic shopping bags should be prohibited.
First of all, marine pollution can be attributed to plastic bags. A pile of plastic bags are discarded into the oceans every year. Most of them are non-biodegradable. Animals like fish, whales, crabs, seabirds might not be able to distinguish between food and rubbish. Marine creatures may mistake plastic for food. Since the plastic is difficult to be digested, it will stay in their stomachs for a long time. If they swallow the plastic bags, it may become a deadly threat to their life. For this reason, plastic waste has brought about a detrimental effect on the world’s ecosystem.
Next, the excessive use of plastic bags are closely bound up with land pollution and agricultural development. Landfill sites of used plastics seem to occupy a large piece of land which will not / is possibly not able to be restored for a long period of time and affect the fertility of the soil. Besides, It will deteriorate the crops’ absorption of nutrients and water, thus reducing productivity. Therefore, plastic products has brought an adverse effect on soil environment and crop yields.
In conclusion, the impact of the use of plastic shopping bags on the environment must be minimised. For the sake of the earth’s health / the planet’s sustainability, It is advisable that plastic bags should be banned while encouraging people to think invent alternative ways on shopping bags.
Plastic bags are in high demand for shopping purposes. Some people believe that there should be a ban on the usage of these bags, and I completely agree with this opinion because of their adverse impact on the environment.
Plastic bags are in high demand due to their cheap cost, however, these materials pollute the environment. One of the biggest causes is, it acts as a pollutant when we burn it after its usage. It produces toxic gases which are not suitable for human lungs and may cause severe lung diseases same as smoking does. For example, In India, items such as vegetables, groceries, and dairy products come in plastic bags. After the single-use, people burn empty bags with other garbage which unknowingly impact their health. If it is not replaced with other alternatives, people will need to compromise with their health.
Furthermore, It does not only make humans unhealthy but also does the same with other species. Animals when in extreme hunger, mostly street dogs or cows, eat things from garbage boxes that contain plastic bags massively because people throw leftover food after wrapping it in these bags. Animals eat these small bags very often, and it sticks to their organs, which is not digestible and creates stomach issues. Apart from animals, Marine life is also in danger because of plastic when thrown on beaches. Plastic does not dissolve in water and many marine species stuck in these bags and can not move freely.
Considering the negative impacts mentioned in the above paragraphs, I personally recommend the government to ban plastic shopping bag’s usage. It will be beneficial for all of the living beings on the planet to live a healthy life.
Great work! Very accurate writing.
Love how specific your answers are though it could be more academic at times.
Keep it up!
It is often argued that it is more advantageous to ban plastic shopping bags because of widely used and environmental problems. I completely agree with this opinion and think that plastic must be banned. Plastics are made from raw materials like natural gas, oil or plants, which are refined into ethane and propane. Plastic is durable and provides protection from contaminants and the elements. It reduces food waste by preserving food and increasing its shelf life. It protects food against pests, microbes and humidity. Without this protection, food is more likely to get damaged and become unusable.
First of all, I believe that plastic pollution is really bad for the environment. Because of, plastic pollution causes harm to humans, animals and plants through toxic pollutants. Plastic pollution is caused by the accumulation of plastic waste in the environment. For instance, if plastic are burned, it releases a toxic substance into the air causing air pollution. That is why it is more important for people to use organic plastic or bring their own shopping bag instead of using new plastic bag
Secondly, in my opinion, It can take hundreds or even thousands of years for plastic to decompose so the environmental damage is long-lasting. Plastic sticks around in the environment for ages, threatening wildlife and spreading toxins. Plastic also contributes to global warming. For example, filter feeding animals, like whale sharks, can ingest plastic by accident and jellyfish-eating species mistake plastic bags and balloon ribbons for jellyfish.
In conclusion, I strongly believe it is better to banned plastic shopping bag because it can encourage people to use less plastic to reduce plastic pollution and environmental issues.
Great work!
Your introduction is a little long though – try to achieve a better balance and develop your ideas more.
Keep it up!
Hi Dave,
Assume that I was given a both side question. Then, my approach was to discuss both side, but I prefered view 1 to view 2.
I want to ask: “if I choose a 60-40 structure, will I have to write view 2 paragraphs less than view 1 paragraph???”
Have a beatiful day, sir!
Hi An!
I don’t think the length of the paragraph matters in the so-calle 60-40 structure.
You just need to choose one of those sides – ideally, it should be a little bit of a longer/stronger argument for that side but as long as you have an overall opinion then that isn’t so important.
Hi, Dave! May I ask for the strongly agree opinion, I have two paragraphs which support rails are more important, should I compare with the roads?
Hi Alice!
If you are just going to write about one side, then you can just write about that one side.
I wouldn’t recommend it for two reasons:
1. Students tend to repeat their ideas when they just choose one side.
2. I’ve heard some examiners are a little picky/idiosyncratic when it comes to just have one side. Safer and easier for you to discuss both sides!
Respected Sir,
In this essay, should we write the reasons for banning plastic bags or results of banning plastic bags ?
means
Agree as animals suffers a lot and air pollution increases
or
Agree because it saves animals life and people become healthy
You should write about whether or not they should be banned.
Both those options would work.
It is believed that the production of plastic bags ought to be abandoned as it causes environmental issues. I find the above arguments to be logical as it saves not only marine lives but also human lives as well.
This development would definitely protects the lives in the oceans. This is because in many developing countries such as China and India, large amount of plastics are being trashed into garbage, and the garbage is directly thrown into the oceans without proper degradation process that consequently damages organ of marine species by feeding them and turn them into death; therefore, if plastics bags are banned to use, no plastics would be thrown into the oceans. Resultantly, it would save millions of marine animals which are responsible for maintaining the ecological balance.
Addition to saving marine lives, it could be also beneficial for the human body. Since large amount of deadly chemical gas omits in air from the plastic manufacturing firms by making plastic bags, masses suffer from respiratory issues, such as asthma and pneumonia, by inhaling the polluted air. For example, a recent study conducted in the USA indicated that owing to the emission of chemical gas from the production of plastic bags in air, the rate of patients suffering from Asthma, the respiratory disease, has increased doubled in recent decade. As a result, health of human would protect, if use of plastic bags is banned.
In conclusion, I completely convinced that production of plastic bags should be banned as it brings benefits to save marine species besides protecting people from respiratory diseases.
In the technologically modern world , where everything has been upgraded to its maximum capacity, material storing and transporting components are also been upgraded into something which is compressible, easy to carry , and has a very complex and unbreakable structure “Plastic”. Due to its compositions, and non degrading structure , it is very harmful to the environment and should be definitely be banned for usage.
Plastics as stated are complex carbon structures with have whatsoever no impact on its structure due to environment. it stays for million of years in the face of earth. the only way to get it out of the ecosystem is to burn it, which in turn releases multiple green house gases , causing global warming.
Plastics were initially manufactured for ease of humans itself. A medium which is waterproof, does not tear easily, Manufactured in bulk and can be recycles as well. but over the years with increased population , and increased use of plastics , it is seen that the waste rate is way up than the manufacturing rate. even thiugh recycling is done, million of bags doesnt even get back to the factories are lost in the envioronment in between , harming soil, aquatic animals, Land animals and also our us in return.
in conclusion , i would like to state that plastics were a tremendous inventions in the early times, But now its abundance in the earth have much more harming effects than positive effects. and thus they should be banned in every country , so as to protect the earth from further degradation.
A little long but good work Sohini!
You should try to balance your paragraphs a bit better and have clear sentences with periods and good punctuation.
Keep working hard!
Plastic shopping bags are used widely and cause many environmental problems. Some people say they should be banned.To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is important to understand the role of plastic in the degradation of the environment. While, Some believe that usage of plastic carry bags should be banned, I tend to disagree with a complete ban because of its economic and technological benefits, and instead plastic use should be regulated by filtering out the ones which do noticeably less harm to the nature.
On the one hand, plastic as a material to make bags is choosen by industry because of its low cost of production and operation. There is continous research in the manufacturing and logistics to meet the evergrowing demand. Furthermore, it is cheap and easy to recycle a plastic bag. As a result, it becomes economically viable to setup recycling units across the landscape close to towns, where the usage is very high. If the same bag was to be made by cloth or paper, then the overall operation would have been costly.
On the other hand, there is a need to place restrictions on the usage of such variant of plastic which has and will cause harm to the environment. Studies have shown that plastic material made using high degree polymer is the main pollutant of the oceans and wetlands. This doesn’t stop with oceans ,as the carry bags which were thrown in the open could seep down the ground and pollute pure underground water. Moreover, such variant of plastic bags are hard to recycle. However, it is worth noting the noticeable decrease in the use of these plastic bags.
To sum up, given the pros of using shopping bag made of plastic such as its cost and ease of production, it should not be banned entirely. However, the version of plastic which is proven to be detrimental need to be banned from being used as a shopping bag.
It is often noted that many governments are adopting policies that allow a few offenders to perform charitable services instead of staying in prison. I completely agree with this because it reduces reoffending and develops the personal and practical skills of the prisoners.
Sometimes the criminals are not in their senses while doing the violations such as juveniles. These lawbreakers should allow a chance to reform rather than put with serious criminals which can result them to become dangerous offenders. I believe if these young people are allowed to do some volunteer social services, their minds will get distracted to a positive aspect of life which can be a major step towards stopping them from committing further crimes. For example, this has been confirmed by a recent study in the USA, that most of these ages of criminals have adopted a positive outlook on life after spending some time performing community services.
Some crimes such as drug addiction or burglary may be the outcomes of bad company or poverty. In my opinion, these offenders should be dealt with empathy and a bit of leniency. While serving community, individuals learn a new skill or meet new people. As a result, they develop some personal and professional skills such as adaptability, problem-solving, diplomacy and empathy towards others, that can help them to find suitable employment and live a respectful life in future. For instance, many of these minor criminals have found better employment after coming out of prison due to valuable skills they learned in community services.
In conclusion, crimes should indeed be punished, but the ways of punishment should not be the same for all. Rather, people with less serious crimes should be given the chance to improve by permitting them to do community service where they learn new skills and it will stop them from repeating those criminalities.