Topic: Some people think international car-free days are an effective way of reducing air pollution; others think there are some other ways. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

In many major cities around the world, the issue of air pollution is exacerbating and it needs immediate action. Some people suggest the introduction of international non four-wheeled vehicles days while the others believe there are different but more efficient ways. In my opinion, both views have their own advantages as well as drawbacks.

For one thing, adherents to worldwide car-free days advocate that the solution significantly cut down the amount of harmful emissions from automobiles, thus contributing to the ultimate aim. Having said that, the menace from cars is just tip of the iceberg as empirical evidence suggests the major cause of air pollution is from exhaustion from factories. The plan also may not yield success in regions where cars are still primary means of transport; people there can go haywire with overwhelming pressure to public transports should the plan be executed.

Exponents of other solutions claim alternatives such as resorting to alternative sources of energy like solar power or encouraging dwellers to use public transport could be optimal in tackling the problem. It is true some options are more feasible to implement, especially with incentive to use mass transit system, for which outright victory is witnessed in cities like Australia. Nevertheless, some of them, such as building tide farms, require huge financial support which then heavies the burden of the government.

In sum, each of the view gives its own pros and cons. Having people abandoned their cars at home may be a short-term solution, whereas the others can be ideal in terms of macroscale. I suppose a combination of both could shed light on our predicament and help us diminish air pollution more successfully.