It is true that much pollution has been produced in modern society. However, I completely disagree with the proposal to raise the price of petrol. In my opinion, I admit it works, but I generally disagree that it is the best way.

In my opinion, interference with petrol prices could bring about many unintended and negative consequences. Firstly, families with a limited budget may not be able to afford the prohibitive gas price. Take, for example, we can image a poor mother’s sorrow when she struggles between the desire to drive her litter daughter to the countryside to feel the beauty of nature and the frustration from the prohibitive gas price. Secondly, once petrol becomes an influential factor, in its price, some factor manufacturers might deliberately raise the price because the transport fee is more experience, so the extra profit can be guaranteed. This may be counterproductive to handling the green issue, mentioned in the talk, producing many harmful pollutions to the society, especially to people with a generous budget but limited awareness of the problems they made.

There are many other options that can tackle the green-related problem mentioned in the task. Firstly, compared to an abrupt price increase in petrol, green talks in gas stations or any other societies that shed light on the potential risk of pollution problems might function better. Secondly, the men/women who work in the gas station can also provide green suggestions to those who frequently go to the gas stations. Last but not least, labels on gas stations or roads should be informative enough to alert people to the inherent dangers of increasing vulnerability to diabetes. Since many people flinch at cigarettes with alarm slogans on the covers, we can also expect them to show many pollutions with similar warning signs.

In conclusion, I agree that a price rise for petrol is liable to invite various problems, and we can restore plenty of alternatives to make sure that people steer clear of the risk of excessive pollution produced.