再次再次谢谢斑竹 改改我作文

lizhongweiUID: 2212984

181题 关于贵国土地是加以开发还是保持原样的

I am living in China, a developing country. People used totransform natural landscape into houses and factories perusing after the temporaryeconomic benefits. After several years of reckless construction, rivers arepolluted, atmosphere is contaminated, and a large number species of animals andplants are endangered, some species are even extinction, people are in a desperatesituation. At this point, I whole hearted support that letting the land in itsnatural condition appropriately is superior to recklessly construction asdetailed below.

Firstly, keepingland in its original condition offers us a bulwark to the natural and man-madedisaster. When natural disaster comes, perhaps a flood or a drought, a naturalland would be a refuge for the human by providing foods and resources. Whenpollution happens, the rise of carbon dioxide for instance, the natural wouldhelp us cleaning the air by the process known as photosynthesis. That is not tosay that one should not use any piece of natural land for every possible contingency.It simply means that one should not transform too many natural lands intohouses and factories without a substantial amount of natural resources to defendthese inevitable tragedies.

The second reasonwhy let the land in its natural condition is for the environmental reasons.Almost all of the developing countries have the problem of leanness. Forexample, it is true that the green coverage of our country is very small, about1%, less than the average standard of the world. This figure, however, is stilldeclining by the expense of unceasing construction. Without the resources fromthe natural, human can not sustain the life of any kind, foods, clean water andfresh air and so on. So keeping the land in its natural condition would not onlya guard against the unavoidable disaster but also provide the resources to us.

At last, while itis true that building houses and industries is very profitable, it is not theonly way to make money. On the one hand, one should rebuild the old houses andindustries instead of ceaselessly demolish natural surroundings. In our countrythere are too many building are dilapidated, while people intend to build newone in the resource and environment of the natural. This, of course, is thewaste of money and energy. On the other, the space saving information industrycan earn more money than the heavy industry, which has to need scale-up and exploitresources from natural. While one would like to believe that only we build moreconstructions and more manufacturing will we truly prosperous, recklessconstruction can cause many problems such as pollution, species extinction, andmost important, it can not profit any more in the long run because if thenatural property are dried up, we would have nothing to support the developmentin the future. So I believe that if we build up more information industriesrather than the old ones. Not only will we protect eh environment but it willbenefit from the investment.

zhangran555UID: 2188609

I am living in China, a developing country. People used to transform natural landscape into houses and factories perusing after the temporary economic benefits. After several years of reckless construction, people are now in a desperate situation, with the rivers polluted,  atmosphere contaminated, and a large number species of animals and plants endangered, even some of them extinct.(换成独立主格,这样更紧凑,连贯,简洁).  At this point, I passionately support that letting the land in its natural condition appropriately is superior to recklessly construction as detailed below.

Firstly, keeping land in its original condition offers us a bulwark to the natural and man-made disaster. When natural disaster comes, perhaps a flood or a drought, a naturalland would be a refuge for the human by providing foods and resources. Whenpollution happens, the rise of carbon dioxide for instance, the natural wouldhelp us clean the air by the process known as photosynthesis. That is not tosay that one should not use any piece of natural land for every possible contingency.It simply means that one should not transform too many natural lands intohouses and factories without a substantial amount of natural resources to defendthese inevitable tragedies.

The second reasonfor letting the land in its natural condition  due to the environmental cause(避免重复).Almost all of the developing countries have the problem of leanness. Forexample, it is true that the green coverage of our country is very small, about1%, less than the average standard of the world. This figure, however, is stilldeclining by the expense of unceasing construction. Without the resources fromthe natural, human can not sustain the life of any kind, foods, clean water andfresh air and so on. So keeping the land in its natural condition would not only guard against the unavoidable disaster but also provide the resources to us.

At last, while itis true that building houses and industries is very profitable, it is not theonly way to make money. On the one hand, one should rebuild the old houses andindustries instead of ceaselessly demolish natural surroundings. In our countrythere are too many building are dilapidated, while people intend to build newone in the resource and environment of the natural. This, of course, is thewaste of money and energy. On the other, the space savingfor information industrycan bring(the space can't earn money) more money than the heavy industry do, which has to need scale-up and exploit resources from natural. While one would like to believe that only we build moreconstructions and more manufacturing will we truly prosperous, recklessconstruction can cause many problems such as pollution, species extinction, and most important, it can not profit any more in the long run because if the natural property are(exhausted) dried up, we would have nothing to support the development in the future. So I believe that if we build up more information industries rather than the old ones. Not only will we protect eh environment but it willbenefit from the investment.