Scribd
Upload
10 views1 page

17th Feb Task Two

The essay argues against discouraging non-essential flights, emphasizing the negative economic impacts such as job loss and reduced GDP in tourism-dependent countries. Instead, it advocates for the use of sustainable aviation fuels as a more effective solution to reduce carbon emissions from flights. Examples of airlines like British Airways and Singapore Airlines are provided to illustrate the potential benefits of adopting sustainable practices in aviation.

Uploaded by

Maheen Khan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
10 views1 page

17th Feb Task Two

The essay argues against discouraging non-essential flights, emphasizing the negative economic impacts such as job loss and reduced GDP in tourism-dependent countries. Instead, it advocates for the use of sustainable aviation fuels as a more effective solution to reduce carbon emissions from flights. Examples of airlines like British Airways and Singapore Airlines are provided to illustrate the potential benefits of adopting sustainable practices in aviation.

Uploaded by

Maheen Khan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Essay: "Long distance flight consumes the amount of fuel that a car uses for many years and

pollutes the air. Some people think


that we should discourage non-essential flights, such as tourist travel, rather than limit the use of cars. To what extent do you agree
or disagree?"

Carbon Emission caused by flights is a trending topic in the recent years.


It is clear that flights contribute to carbon emission, particularly in long-haul flights. I disagree with the
idea of discouraging non-essential flights, because it is not an effective and practical solution.
Additionally, it can cause some impacts, such as on economy, reducing job opportunities and lowering
GDP in some developing countries. Instead of (Rather than) many bad impacts, we should focus on how
to use sustainable fuel in aviation.

Tourism plays a crucial role, in terms of economy and job opportunities, which significantly contributes
to economy and creates many jobs, for instance, hopitality, transportation and travel related industries.
These industries’ income and jobs mostly rely on tourists (The income and jobs of these industries
mostly rely…). Moreover, if flights are discouraged, millions of people would lose their jobs.
Furthermore, some developing countries, whose GDP mostly rely on tourism, like Thailand and Greece.
In 2023, Thailand’s annual economy report shows that 12% of country’s GDP accounted in tourism, and
19% for Greece. So (hence, therefore, thus),discouraging non-essential flights, which is not a practical
way, to reduce carbon emission.

In my opinion, instead of prohibiting flights, we should focus on how to use sustainable aviation fuel,
such as British airways and Singapore airlines. British airways, is committed to use sustainable aviation
fuels and it will reduce carbon emission at 10 % by 2030, while Singapore airlines which has also
targeted to buy 1000 tons of sustainable aviation fuel, which will reduce about 5 % by 2030. These new
solutions will significantly reduce environmental impacts.

In conclusion, discouraging non-essential flights, which is not a useful method, because it causes a lot of
issues, such as on economy, job opportunities and countries’ GDP, whereas we should focus on new
solutions, such as promoting/encouraging airways to use sustainable aviation fuel in order to reduce
environmental impacts.

British airways commits to using sustainable aviation fuels.


British airways is committed to using sustainable aviation fuels.

You might also like