【circumstances in a hurry】Would you have my essay corrected ? It is an example question of IELTS writing task 2. If you have an extra time, pleas tell me which part is good and not good. And I am looking forward to any advices regarding IELTS writing and speaking sections.

Question:
Government should spend money on railways rather than roads.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

My answer

It is argued that more money should be used for constructing railways rather than roads by government. This essay illustrates that it must be changeable whether railways are more adequate or less depending on where it is built and how rich the local government is. This essay will first look at both benefits and drawbacks of given two infrastructures and then discuss which is more suitable for different conditions.

As some scientist state, it is clear that enriching railways rather that roads is more eco-friendly. If more people get to use trains not their own cars, the quantity of emitting green-house gasses would decrease. Furthermore by diminishing the number of car users, deaths by car accidents, which are the most serious causes of death relating with vehicles, must show a large decline. However, it needs a greater deal of money to construct railways compared to roads. Also its construction has a technological difficulty in particular areas such as hills and fluctuating lands. Last but not least, financial sustainability matters. If local government do not have as rich finance as they maintain the transport system, it would lead to disappointing results.

Regarding roads, they are more reasonable than railways from a financial point of view as mentioned above. It costs less to build roads and keep them in good condition. Thus it is possible, even for poor local government, to construct and maintain them. But when it comes to environmental aspect, increasing roads would interrupt scientist devoting to prevent global warming. Growing the number of roads almost means growing the number of car users. It is said that CO2 emitted from automobiles is crucial cause of global warming. In other words, from economical views, construction of roads must be a better way while railways must be eco-friendly and environmentally sustainable way from ecological views.

In conclusion, it would be efficient to decide which infrastructure should be spent more money after considering current financial situations and local geographic characteristics. In case of large cities and wealthy regions, they should invest on railways rather than roads. In reverse, regions, local government of which have poor finance, should devote to increase roads instead of railways.

Question

【circumstances in a hurry】Would you have my essay corrected ? It is an example question of IELTS writing task 2. If you have an extra time, pleas tell me which part is good and not good. And I am looking forward to any advices regarding IELTS writing and speaking sections. 

Question:
Government should spend money on railways rather than roads.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

My answer

It is argued that more money should be used for constructing railways rather than roads by government. This essay illustrates that it must be changeable whether railways are more adequate or less depending on where it is built and how rich the local government is. This essay will first look at both benefits and drawbacks of given two infrastructures and then discuss which is more suitable for different conditions.

As some scientist state, it is clear that enriching railways rather that roads is more eco-friendly. If more people get to use trains not their own cars, the quantity of emitting green-house gasses would decrease. Furthermore by diminishing the number of car users, deaths by car accidents, which are the most serious causes of death relating with vehicles, must show a large decline. However, it needs a greater deal of money to construct railways compared to roads. Also its construction has a technological difficulty in particular areas such as hills and fluctuating lands. Last but not least, financial sustainability matters. If local government do not have as rich finance as they maintain the transport system, it would lead to disappointing results.

Regarding roads, they are more reasonable than railways from a financial point of view as mentioned above. It costs less to build roads and keep them in good condition. Thus it is possible, even for poor local government, to construct and maintain them. But when it comes to environmental aspect, increasing roads would interrupt scientist devoting to prevent global warming. Growing the number of roads almost means growing the number of car users. It is said that CO2 emitted from automobiles is crucial cause of global warming. In other words, from economical views, construction of roads must be a better way while railways must be eco-friendly and environmentally sustainable way from ecological views.

In conclusion, it would be efficient to decide which infrastructure should be spent more money after considering current financial situations and local geographic characteristics. In case of large cities and wealthy regions, they should invest on railways rather than roads. In reverse, regions, local government of which have poor finance, should devote to increase roads instead of railways.

dotrain · Answer

* means that I have changed something
[ ] are my comments
——

It is argued that more money should be used for constructing railways rather than roads by [you could use either 'the government' or 'governments' depending on which you're talking about]. This essay illustrates that it must be changeable whether railways are more adequate or less depending on where it is built and how rich the local government is [I don't know what you mean to say in this sentence]. This essay will first look at both the* benefits and drawbacks of the* given types of* ['two' makes it seem like you are talking about a specific road or railway] infrastructures and then discuss which is more suitable for different conditions.

As some scientists* state, it is clear that funding* railways rather than* roads is more eco-friendly. If more people get to use trains and* not their own cars, the emission of* greenhouse* gasses will* decrease. Furthermore,* by diminishing the number of car users, deaths by car accidents (which are the most serious causes of death relating to* vehicles)* will* show a large decline. However, railways need a greater amount of money to construct* compared to roads. Also, their* construction would have* technical difficulties* in particular areas, such as hills and fluctuating lands. Last but not least, financial sustainability matters. If local governments* do not have enough* finance to* maintain the transport system, it would lead to disappointing results.

Regarding roads, they are more reasonable than railways from a financial point of view, as mentioned above. It costs less to build roads and keep them in good condition. Thus, it is possible, even for poor local governments*, to construct and maintain them. But when it comes to the* environmental aspect, increasing roads would interrupt scientists* devoted* to preventing* global warming. Growing the number of roads almost means growing the number of car users. It is said that the* CO2 emitted from automobiles is a main* cause of global warming. In other words, from economical views, the* construction of roads would be a better way, while railways would be an* eco-friendly and environmentally sustainable way from ecological views.

In conclusion, it would be efficient [what do you mean by 'efficient'?] to decide which infrastructure should have money spent on it* after considering current financial situations and local geographic characteristics. In the* case of large cities and wealthy regions, they should invest in* railways rather than roads. In contrast*, regions and local governments * which have poor finance should devote to increasing* roads instead of railways.

——
Your essay is very good and nearly everything I corrected was really minor. Your biggest problem was word choice. Sometimes the words you used didn't make sense (the first paragraph's second line and the last paragraph's first line) or sounded odd in context. Also, watch out for plurals and the preposition 'the'.

Good luck with the IELTS! :)

dotrain · Answer

@sadokaho0725 

They're much better!

1.  This essay illustrates that it is relative* ['changeable' doesn't make sense here, but I think I now understand what you're trying to say. Is 'relative' right here?] whether railways are more important or less depending on geographic features and the financial* condition of local governments.

2.  it would be better to decide which infrastructures should have more money spent on them* ...

I'm afraid I don't have much advice for that, as I have that same problem myself. I usually try to stop it from getting unnecessarily long by sketching out a rough plan. Also, look at how many marks the question is. With lower mark questions you can guess at what kind of answer they're expecting by the number and write accordingly.

Ask native speakers questions for free