Environment in IELTS Writing Task 2: Discuss Both Views Essay Samples

In the Academic IELTS Writing section, environment-related essay topics often focus on global environmental issues and sustainable solutions. Common subtopics might include: the impact of climate change, the role of renewable energy, deforestation and its effects, the importance of wildlife conservation, pollution and its control, and the responsibility of governments versus individuals in protecting the environment.

Find useful IELTS vocabulary on the environment here.

Use Benchmark IELTS Writing Correction service to write error-free IELTS Essays, Letters & Reports.

Essay Topics

Topic 1: Is taxing companies the best way to cut industrial pollution, or are there better solutions?
Topic 2: Should governments fund space exploration or focus on solving Earth’s problems

Task 1Some people think that an effective way to reduce industrial pollution is to tax the companies which cause them. Other, however, believe that there are other more effective ways. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

How to approach the essay:

How to Approach the Essay:

Understand the Question: Identify the two views—(1) taxing polluting companies as a way to reduce industrial pollution, and (2) implementing alternative solutions like education or government support.

View 1: Imposing Higher Taxes on Polluting Companies	View 2: Alternative Measures (Education & Innovation)
• Acts as a deterrent against harmful production methods. • Financial pressure may lead companies to change practices. • Difficult to identify specific polluting products. • Profitable companies might absorb taxes without changing.	• Educating companies and consumers raises awareness. • Informed consumers may avoid environmentally harmful products. • Consumer demand can push companies to adopt greener practices. • Public funding for clean technology drives sustainable innovation (e.g., Norway’s Longship project).

State Your Opinion: Decide which method you support more and reflect this in both the introduction and the conclusion for a consistent argument.

Model Answer

There is an ongoing debate about the most effective ways to reduce industrial pollution. While some advocate for the imposition of additional taxes on companies responsible for environmental damage, others believe that alternative measures could achieve better outcomes.

On one hand, imposing higher taxes on polluting companies could act as a deterrent against environmentally harmful production methods. The logic behind this approach is that greater financial pressure would compel companies to reconsider the viability of producing certain polluting products. However, identifying which specific products contribute most significantly to environmental degradation can be a complex task. Moreover, some highly profitable companies may simply absorb the additional tax costs without altering their production methods. Therefore, I believe that taxation alone is insufficient to address the root causes of industrial pollution.

There are more effective approaches that could lead to a significant reduction in industrial emissions. One such method involves educating both companies and consumers about the serious environmental impacts of industrial pollution. By raising awareness, consumers are more likely to make informed purchasing decisions, opting to avoid products that contribute to environmental harm. This shift in consumer behavior can, in turn, incentivize companies to adopt more sustainable practices. Additionally, governments could encourage public funding for research into clean technologies which could benefit the environment while also driving industrial innovation. A notable example is Norway’s government-backed “Longship” CCS project, which has attracted global attention for its potential to transform how industries manage carbon output.

In conclusion, I believe that educating companies and consumers, coupled with proactive government support, is far more effective in reducing industrial pollution than simply taxing the companies responsible for it.

Commentary

Commentary
Essay Question: Some people think that an effective way to red uce industrial pollution is to tax the companies which cause it. Others, however, believe that there are more effective ways. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Introduction

Clarity: Yes, the topic is introduced clearly with both perspectives outlined.
Thesis: The writer’s stance is clearly stated—they support alternative solutions over taxation.

Body Paragraphs

Main Ideas (Pros/Cons):

Pro-Tax View:

Taxes could pressure companies to reduce harmful practices.
Difficulty in identifying which products cause most pollution.
Wealthy companies may absorb tax costs without change.

Alternative Solutions:

Education raises awareness among consumers and firms.
Consumer behaviour influences company decisions.
Government support and funding can drive innovation (e.g., Norway’s CCS project).

Coherence:

Both sides are balanced and clearly explained.
Logical flow between paragraphs with effective transitions.

Conclusion

Summary:

Reaffirms main points and strongly supports education and government intervention over taxation.
The conclusion is clear and personal, not overly formulaic.

Vocabulary & Grammar

High-Level Vocabulary:
Deterrent – something that discourages action.
Viability – the practicality or feasibility of something.
Environmental degradation – deterioration of the environment.
Incentivize – encourage through motivation or reward.

Academic Phrases:

“There is an ongoing debate…”
“A notable example is…”
“Coupled with proactive government support…”

Complex Sentences:

“By raising awareness, consumers are more likely to make informed purchasing decisions, opting to avoid products that contribute to environmental harm.”
“Some highly profitable companies may simply absorb the additional tax costs without altering their production methods.”

Task 2

Some people want the government to spend more money to looking life on other planets. However other think it is a waste of public money when many problems on earth are not be solved. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

How to approach the essay:

How to Approach the Essay:

Understand the question: Identify the two views — one supports funding space exploration (e.g., finding life on other planets), the other believes this money should solve Earth’s problems first.

View 1: In Favor of Space Exploration	View 2: Prioritize Earth’s Problems
• Ensures humanity’s long-term survival through asteroid detection or extraterrestrial discovery. • Leads to technological innovations in materials science and communication. • Inspires youth to pursue STEM fields and fosters innovation.	• Public funds should address urgent issues like poverty, hunger, lack of shelter, and education. • Climate change is a critical issue; industrial emissions worsen the greenhouse effect. • Governments have a moral obligation to prioritize environmental restoration and social welfare over space exploration.

State Your Opinion: Clearly express your stance in the introduction and reinforce it in the conclusion (e.g., Earth’s urgent needs should come first, but space research has long-term value).

Model Answer

People hold differing opinions on whether governments should allocate funds for space exploration. While there are strong arguments in favor of investing in research beyond our planet, I firmly believe that public resources should be directed toward solving urgent problems here on Earth.

Supporters of space exploration present several persuasive arguments. Firstly, research in this field is crucial for humanity’s long-term survival, as it may lead to the discovery of extraterrestrial life or enable early detection of potentially catastrophic asteroids. Secondly, advancements in space research contribute significantly to technological innovation and scientific knowledge, particularly in materials science and communication technologies. Finally, the allure of space exploration can serve as a powerful motivator for young minds, fostering interest in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields and inspiring the next generation of innovators.

However, I side with those who argue that public funds should focus on addressing immediate concerns on our planet such as poverty and hunger. When millions struggle to access basic needs such as food, shelter, and education, channeling resources into space exploration seems disconnected from urgent human priorities. Additionally, environmental challenges present another pressing issue. Many industries continue to emit high levels of carbon dioxide, exacerbating the greenhouse effect and contributing to climate change. This predicament has dire consequences for all living organisms on our planet. In such circumstances, it is essential for governments to prioritize environmental restoration and climate action rather than exploring distant galaxies.

In conclusion, while the benefits of exploring outer space are undeniable, I believe governments have a moral obligation to address the fundamental challenges affecting life on Earth first. Focusing on social welfare and environmental sustainability is not only more immediate but also more impactful in creating a stable foundation for future scientific pursuits, including space exploration.

Commentary

Essay Question: Some people want the government to spend more money looking for life on other planets. However, others think it is a waste of public money when many problems on Earth remain unsolved. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.