Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
01 Dec 2010, 07:53
Kudos
Bookmarks
It is unrealistic to expect individual nations to make, independently, the
sacrifices necessary to conserve energy. International leadership and worldwide
cooperation are essential if we expect to protect the world’s energy resources for
future generations.”
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above.
Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience,
observations, or reading.
The issue whether individual nations to make, independently, the sacrifices necessary to conserve energy or the international leadership and worldwide co operation are essential to conserve the world’s energy resources is always contentious. My view point is that the mutual co operation among all the nations across the world will be more effective in saving the world’s natural resources rather than the individual’s efforts.
The main reason to support my view is that today, the energy is mainly consumed in the form of electricity, construction of infrastructures, or consumption by industries and agriculture both in the developed or developing countries. Since, the energy requirements of both countries are different such as in developed countries, the living standard of people is higher and the industrial energy consumption is also more in developed countries than in developing countries. But in developing countries energy requirement is into agriculture sector or for the development of infrastructure. So, the mutual co operation among developed and developing countries to share the world’s resources to meet the varied energy demands across the world is the best way.
Secondly, the single point international leadership is the only platform where the global planning can be done to meet the individual energy requirements of the nations. For example, recent Global warming summit at Copenhagen is the best example of such international leadership. In this summit, both the poor and rich countries got equal platform to share their concerns to conserve the natural resources for future generations. The countries such as Africa demanded the monetary support from the developed countries US and Europe to develop infrastructure to conserve resources such as licensing the build nuclear power plant to meet its electricity demands, so that can conserve coals or other resources.
To conclude, I must suggest that the world’ natural resources can only be saved with the mutual understanding or co operation rather by self centered individual efforts. World’s economic as well as overall development depends on the sharing of each other’s natural resources. So, the efforts should also be mutual to conserve them.
01 Dec 2010, 12:15
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey Aimkp
You have made a mistake in identifying the issue. If you analyse the statement well you will find it issue is not whether an individual approach or co-operative approach is necessary. The issue is individual approach is impractical and what it need to have is co-operative approach to save the world's energy sources.
You have to say whether co-operative approach will help saving world's energy sources or not.
If u are agree with the statement then say why individual approach is impractical, and how international leadership will help.
If you are not agree with the opinion then explain why co-operative approach wont work and what could be other ways to conserve the energy. e.g. whoever will be the leader will not neccessorily cut the usage, or there could be dispute in many countries regarding cuts like what happened in copenhagen. Other ways to save the energy will be switching to non-conventional energy sources for energy. There will be short term investment but profits in long term and so on....
Consider giving me KUDOS if you find this post helpful
You have made a mistake in identifying the issue. If you analyse the statement well you will find it issue is not whether an individual approach or co-operative approach is necessary. The issue is individual approach is impractical and what it need to have is co-operative approach to save the world's energy sources.
You have to say whether co-operative approach will help saving world's energy sources or not.
If u are agree with the statement then say why individual approach is impractical, and how international leadership will help.
If you are not agree with the opinion then explain why co-operative approach wont work and what could be other ways to conserve the energy. e.g. whoever will be the leader will not neccessorily cut the usage, or there could be dispute in many countries regarding cuts like what happened in copenhagen. Other ways to save the energy will be switching to non-conventional energy sources for energy. There will be short term investment but profits in long term and so on....
Consider giving me KUDOS if you find this post helpful
14 Dec 2010, 12:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey, aimkp:
Sorry to fall behind on responses here! I think your structure here is terrific, and your thoughts on the issue are pretty strong, too. Still, somewhat as vyassaptarashi mentioned, you may have slightly missed the mark on attacking the issue at hand. I think you're pretty close to it, but as an example your third paragraph seems slightly off:
Here, you mentioned that the recent global summit is an example of global cooperation, but you don't really demonstrate WHY that's important. In a way, you need to treat your support as a way to sell your point: The summit is essential because only through mutual checks and balances will individual countries act responsibly for the whole - countries need to be accountable to one another both ethically and through more concrete measures like trade and military alliances. You did a nice job of giving an example, but you missed the "why" portion.
Your structure and examples are solid and probably net you around a 4, but to score higher I'd recommend:
-Look for the "why" in selling your point (thinking much like on a Critical Reasoning question)
-Try to have 3 support paragraphs, both for overall length and so that if one paragraph (like I said, paragraph 3...) misses the mark slightly you still have others that are dead-on
-If you can, take a paragraph to consider the opposition side ("Some countries, however, are doing excellent work independently. For example..... However, that is not enough...) and rebut it. This demonstrates that you've truly considered the entire issue.
You're certainly looking strong on structure - if you can develop your support to supplement what you're already doing I think you'll do well!
Sorry to fall behind on responses here! I think your structure here is terrific, and your thoughts on the issue are pretty strong, too. Still, somewhat as vyassaptarashi mentioned, you may have slightly missed the mark on attacking the issue at hand. I think you're pretty close to it, but as an example your third paragraph seems slightly off:
Here, you mentioned that the recent global summit is an example of global cooperation, but you don't really demonstrate WHY that's important. In a way, you need to treat your support as a way to sell your point: The summit is essential because only through mutual checks and balances will individual countries act responsibly for the whole - countries need to be accountable to one another both ethically and through more concrete measures like trade and military alliances. You did a nice job of giving an example, but you missed the "why" portion.
Your structure and examples are solid and probably net you around a 4, but to score higher I'd recommend:
-Look for the "why" in selling your point (thinking much like on a Critical Reasoning question)
-Try to have 3 support paragraphs, both for overall length and so that if one paragraph (like I said, paragraph 3...) misses the mark slightly you still have others that are dead-on
-If you can, take a paragraph to consider the opposition side ("Some countries, however, are doing excellent work independently. For example..... However, that is not enough...) and rebut it. This demonstrates that you've truly considered the entire issue.
You're certainly looking strong on structure - if you can develop your support to supplement what you're already doing I think you'll do well!
