In recent years, environmental issues has become an increasingly debacted topic in modern society. Goverments propose to banning all non-essential private vehicle travel in city centers, while some people believe that this trend offers significant benefics, other believe It presents notable drawbacks, this essay will analize both sides of the argument.
In the one hand, banning-non-essential vehicle will help to deal with the main problem. Reducing the footprent genereted by cars goverments will achive reduce the global gorming atrivueted to their contries. Moreover a constaneously reduction of carbon deoxide will aslo constribius with a better quality of fresh air for citicents helping to reduce lenght illnesess. Furthermore, retiring non-neccesary vehicules from the city center will improve the expienece of visit the cities center for citizents en many ways. Less vehicles means less noice, and a more enjoyable living experience. For essencial vehicules improve the timing spend going thought the center, for example the gods transportation will be faster and more efficient.
In the other hand, banning-non-essential vehicle has a few desadvantages for public trasnportation and citizents. For example, people will be force to use public trasportation service in order to arrive to the city center, this will encress the number of individuals using the public transportation service, such us subways or buses, transforming the experience of use this service to a not confortable one. In addition, people who suffer of mobility problems will have trobbles to arrive to the city center. For example, individuals who use wheelchairs have to face the already crewed public trasportation service or ask for a public permition to use there cars in the centar of the city.
in conclusion, the banning of non-essential- vehicules has clearly drawbacks and problems. But, are not enoght desadvantages comparing to the benefficts of fight envirolmental issues and the improvments for citizents
