The bar chart below shows percentage ofadults of different age groups in the UK who used the internet everyday from2003-2006.
The bar chart illustrates the percentage ofadults using the Internet on a daily basis between 2003 and 2006 in the GreatBritain according to different ages.
The main users of the Internet were youngadults aged between 16 and 24 years old. In 2003 and 2004, they shared the samepercentage, at 80%. In 2005, this figure increased significantly to 100%, butdecreased slightly to 90% in the next year.
We can see from the chart that the entiregroup experienced an upward trend. In the group of 25 to 44 years old, the percentagegrew gradually from 50% to 80% between 2003 and 2006. There were similarincreases for the group 55 to 64 years old, rising from 30% in 2003 to 50% in2006. As for the other two groups, although the percentage has a marginalfluctuation, the overall trend went up obviously.
In summary, adults between 16 and 44 showedthe great need of Internet, nut their percentage declined with time. AndInternet gained a growing number of users regardless of their ages.
The leaders of directors of organisationsare often older people. But some people say that young people can also be aleader. Do you agree or disagree?
The line graph shows the sales ofchildren’s books, adult’s fictions and educational books between 2002 and 2006in one country.
The sales of three different kinds of booksbetween 2002 and 2006
The line graph compares the sales of threedifferent kinds of books during the period from 2002 to 2006.
In 2002, the figure for adults’ fictionscame top with 45 million dollars, followed by that of children’s books andeducational books. Afterwards, the sales of adults’ fictions decreased quicklyto 37 million dollars. Despite a slight increase in the following year, theyexperienced a drop of 10 million dollars from 2004 to 2006.
By contrast, there was a big rise of 16million dollars in the sales of children’s books during this period. In 2002,they were 33 million dollars and ended up at 56 million dollars in 2006 whenthey were the highest among these three kinds of books. When it comes to thefigure for educational books, it fluctuated between 2002 and 2006. It was the smallestat the beginning (25 million dollars), although it exceeded the figure foradults’ fictions in the end (33million dollars).
Overall, the sales of children’s books andeducational books rose markedly while the popularity of adults’ fictionsdropped.
Some people think that the amount of noisepeople make have to be controlled strictly, others say that people are free tomake as such as they wish. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.
It is generally agreed that making noise isan important behaviour. Some people take a position that general public has theresponsibility to control their noise strictly but others consider whether tomake noise is a personal right. In my view, noise should be controlled dependson different conditions.
It is inevitable to make some noise indaily life. For example, in the final of World Cup, every fan will rise theirfeet and cheer wildly when their favorite player score in the final minute ofthe game. Likewise, the public will also cheer and even scream, making a seriesof high pitched sound, to welcome festivals like carnival or the New Year.People make noise in these situations in order to express their positiveemotions, which is reasonable and acceptable.
However, to control noise is necessary inmost cases, both for individual and society. To individual, employees canincrease their work efficiency in a quiet working environment. Too much noisewill district people’s attention so that they may not complete their urgenttask on time. Besides, some medical research has proved that noise may causenegative influence on people’s physical health and even result in somediseases, such as heart attack and high blood pressure. Therefore, it is betterfor people to keep away from noise for physical and mental health. From thesocial perspective, controlling noise reflects people’s mutual care andattention. Only in this way can people build a harmonious social relationship,both in relatives and coworkers. If everyone did not make any unnecessarynoise, society could be more peaceful.
In conclusion, although much noisethroughout our life is unavoidable, it should be controlled by the governmentsince it may be harmful for personal health and social harmony.
Nowadays both scientists and tourists cango to remote natural environments such as the South Pole. Do you think theadvantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?
Unknown natural is always brimming withseductive scenery. Plenty of researchers and travelers make trips to distantnatural places, such as the Mount Qomolangma, Antarctica and the North Pole. Iam of the opinion that this has more disadvantages than advantages.
Discover of new areas always bring someirreparable destruction. Before the South Pole is in the sight of public, itwas once an uncharted territory. Since its discovery, hundreds of explorers andscientists had taken adventures to this wilderness. At the same time, theirscientific expedition may leave some geographical environment destructionthere. And it is quite troublesome to make up such destruction.
Although travelers extremely enjoy thebreathtaking natural landscape, they bring along tremendous risks. One of themost common phenomenon of travelers is producing pollution to local areas. Asreported in many cases, holidaymakers have left behind tons of waste in theAntarctica over the last century. This will not only threaten the survival ofmany creatures, including endangered species such as penguins and seals, butalso cause irreversible damage to the ecosystem.
In addition, we cannot avoid the fact thatuntouched environments are scientifically proved to have considerable oil andgas reserves. Currently, the world fuel supply is running out in the next fiftyyears, and no countries will help themselves from the temptation of these fuelsources. The greed of people will drive them to drain out the resource in theseregions, and by then places like the South Pole will be truly deserted.
In conclusion, I confirm that travelling tovirgin land will bring far more losses than gains.
The chart below shows the percentage of thewhole population in four countries from 1950-2002, with projections to 2050.
The bar chart compares the changes in theproportion of population in India, China, the USA and Japan in 1950 and 2002,and it also indicates the projections for 2050.
In 1950, China accounted for one fourth ofthe world population. Although this figure decreased slightly, it still rankedthe first in 2002, compared to other three countries. It is estimated that thepopulation in China will continue to drop to 19 percent in the middle of thiscentury.
India ranked the second in terms of thepopulation in the table, which make up 15 percent in 1950, but since then, therewas a dramatic increase, climbing to approximately 19 percent. The percentageis expected to increase slightly to 21 percent in 2050 and will probably exceedthat in China.
When it comes to the population in the USAand Japan, both of which witnessed a decrease from 1950 to 2002. It ispredicted that in 2050, the percentage will remain the same in the USA, and inJapan, the percentage is likely to keep falling.
Overall, it seems that India will becomethe country with the largest population although there is still a huge numberof people in China.
Some people argue that too much attentionand too many resources are given to the protection of wild animals and birds.To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In recent years, animal protection hasbecome an issue of concern. People take different attitudes toward theincreasing attention and expenditure on wildlife conservation. Some peoplesuggest that the spending should be redirected to helping other fields in oursociety. I agree with the view that the investment in wildlife protection isnot worthwhile.
Animals, as a key component of the wholefood chain, have a profound impact on the sustainability of an ecosystem. As weknown, every kind of animals plays an important role in natural balance. Forinstance, the demise of any species will lead to the growth or decline of otherspecies. In some extreme cases, some species may at the verge of extinctionsuch as Dodo bird. If people did not take actions to protect wildlife as soonas possible, we humans would be affected in the end.
However, there are more issues that we needto focus in our society rather than protecting animals. In current socialcontext, the primary task is still to improving living standards since thereare many people living under the poverty line. Only when people are in a goodliving condition, can they pay attention to other social problems. Besides,technology and education are another two aspects for governments to concern.These two industries accelerate the development of society, which will providea better protection for wildlife in turn.
In conclusion, although the animal is asignificant part of ecosystem, it is better for governments to invest morefinance and resources in other social problems.