In the reading passage, the author states that congestion pricing is an effective solution to traffic jam. However, in the lecture,the speaker entirely denies the statement and uses three specific points to support his idea.
First, contrary to the believe in the passage that congestion pricing can save lots of time, the speaker says that to avoid the congestion fees, people would rather choose to detour, which will be more time-consuming. For example, the delivery service will spend more time on detour in order to save money.
Second, according to the passage, congestion pricing can help improve the area environment. In contrast, the speaker holds the opinion that this can do help in the areas that charge congestion fees, but not in those non-congestion pricing areas. Science most drivers trend to avoid the fees, there will be more noise and air pollution in those non-congestion pricing areas. Therefor, it is not good for the entire area environment.
Finally, the speaker contends that those people cannot afford the fees would switch to take public transportations, such as the subways, so the government needs to spend lots of money on the maintenance of public transportations, which would exceeds the revenue from congestion fees. This refutes the author's point that the government can use the revenue to construct more roads and bridges.
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-11-13 22:50:28
收藏
收藏
楼主
