8大题材雅思写作范文-生态保护

题目1：动物实验

Some people think that using animals for experimentation purpose is cruel, but other people think that it is necessary for the development of science. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

思路：

应该做实验：

1. 动物是唯一的可选实验体，太多的医学进步得益于动物实验。

2. 人类为了自身生存而利用动物是可以理解的，这只不过是自然选择的结果。

3. 这是一个机会成本的计算，如果仅仅是几只兔子的代价就能带来数百万人的健康和存活，这个无疑是划算的。

不应该：

1. 这是一种漠视生命的表现，不利于动物保护。

2. 有效性存疑，毕竟动物的体征和人类的有较大不同。

范文（Band 9）：

Animal testing has been applied as a normal procedure of scientific research for years. There are emerging criticisms arguing that the sufferings inflicted on laboratory animals are brutal. However，the progress of sciences would be seriously hampered if heavy regulations are imposed on animal research. Many medications and procedures currently in use would not exist if animal testing was banned. Animal testing has assisted mankind in successfully developing vaccines and antibiotics. Life-saving techniques such as organ

transplant also own thanks to animal research. Such development in science has cured people around the globe，saving millions of lives. However，what could we use to achieve comparable results without animal research? Our science is not so advanced that we could test a new drug on a flower or tomato before its clinical application. Of course，mankind could not sacrifice human lives for the purpose of research.

In comparison to the costs in terms of the sufferings on animals，the advantages that animal testing has brought to humans are much greater. Human society is required to generate valuable consequences，even at the cost of inflicting pain to some animals whose lives may be worthy. Nevertheless，the value of their lives does not count as much as the value of human life because human beings have much higher capability and sensibility than animals.

However，it is also true that pain killers are not administered to animals in many cases of animal testing. Animals even as a lower form of life deserve to be treated with due humanity. So mankind has a moral obligation to decrease the sufferings of animals within their power.

In conclusion，animal testing is crucial as a procedure of science. Its elimination would severely hamper development of sciences. However, mankind should also do their best to decrease the sufferings of laboratory animals.（310）

题目2：环境污染是否是经济发展不可避免的过程

Some people think pollution and damage of environment are resulted from a country developing and becoming richer, and this is hard to be avoided. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

思路：

1. 不可否认的是，工业化是任何一个国家经济起飞的必经之路，这就会带来污染。举例，为了追求GDP，中国这个发展中国家不得不大力发展制造业，成为全球工厂，而这带来的是大量的煤尘和化学废料被从工厂中排放到空气，水体和土壤中。

2. 此外，当人们财富增多的时候，他们的消费就会增多，举例，使用汽车，冰箱，空调。而这些都是造成气候变暖的主因。

3. 然而，我始终认为人们对于生活习惯的改变能缓解一部分的环境问题。举例，骑车或是步行去上下班，放弃开车。还有，使用可重复使用的杯子和餐具，而不是一次性物品。最后，积极地进行垃圾分类。

范文（Band 9）：

Does the economic development come with the environmental pollution, as the speaker asserts? This question has been a heated social issue in debate. In my view, industry is the pre-condition of a thriving economy, so that industrial pollution is inescapable, and my reasons would be explored as below.

Undeniably, there is a universally regular pattern of economy growth that in all countries, the economy rising is always at the expense of environment, and which no one can be exempt from. First, in retrospect of human history, industrialization, an essential stage in midst of economy development, are an unavoidable source of environmental pollution. For example, in order to keep a rapid growth of GDP, Chinese manufacturing industry receives all kinds of product orders worldwide, from iPhones to sports shoes to Barbie dolls. In the process of production, an excessive number of smog, chemical wastes and toxic heavy metals are discharged into air, water and soil, thus contaminating the environment in an overall way.

In addition, an increase in social wealth boosts the goods consumption, which further deteriorates the environmental destruction. In China, again, soaring average salaries among the public make private cars and appliances like fridges, air conditioners and microwave ovens affordable now. However, these modern facilities are main carbon emitters, and whose wise use would contribute to the global warming inevitably.

Although the complete prevention of pollution is a fantasy, I still believe our efforts to change lifestyle in daily life can partially reduce the level of environmental pollution. For example, if urbanites can use walking or cycling, rather than private cars, for day-to-day commuting outside, then the gas emission

would decline steeply. Similarly, if the public can consciously obey the principle or 3R--reducing the consumption of one off goods, reusing refillable bottles and containers, and recycling those renewable materials like plastics, paper and metals, then the amount of industrial and daily-life pollutants will be lowered quickly.

In conclusion, as long as the economy and the wealth of ordinary people are growing, the environmental pollution would exist for a long time. However, we can still our efforts to reduce the pollution level, by living a green and clean life.（359）