There are a lot of individuals who believe that the solution for environmental issues is to raise the price of petroleum. I partly disagree with this statement, because overpricing could lead to other concerns instead of solving it. This essay will discuss why I mostly argue against this idea and provide some reasons for it.
The main factor why I disagree with this statement is the poor-quality fuels. In other words, when the process of overpricing the costs of fuel occurs, owners of individual vehicles quite often prefer to utilize cheaper fuel, which consists of poor-quality materials. As a result, it can exacerbate this situation. For instance, in Kazakhstan, a couple of years ago, the government increased the price of gasoline to diminish air pollution. However, it was not a significant shift; vice versa, residents commenced buying cheap gas, which led to a growth in the level of air pollution.
Nevertheless, it also could be beneficial. It is clear that the main purpose of raising the price of fuel is reducing the number of cars on roads. Therefore, in some cases this increase can enhance theenvironment. For example, in the majority of European countries, theadministration increased the cost of gas. Over a month, citizens refused to use individual cars and initiatedtravel by public transport. Results illustrated that with the declining numbers of cars on the roads, the percentage of emission also fell.
To conclude, despite the fact that increasing the price of gasoline could be the solution for environmental issues, I mostly believe that it brings more drawbacks than amending the situation. Hence, I partly disagree with this statement.