Price is the only promotion of changing consuming habits, as some scholars say. Others, as a contrast, deem the fact (the fact可以不要吧，感觉有点多余～)that consumers alternating their interests（觉得用interests有点不太对～） is by multiple factors. Being a consumer, myself, I always believe that one factor could not determine one result, such as increasing the price of gasoline and electricity to encourage the energy conservation for government.

By the economic development, foremost, people are inclined to choose the things that they like or they got（是不是应该用get？） used to rather than（rather than 在这是什么意思？没看懂～） something cheap by the reason that money is no longer the essential problem for the most of the time, while in the past, people mostly and constantly have（这是不是应该改成had?） to buy the cheapest ones because they could not afford the more expensive ones. （这句话好长啊，没太看懂，时态也没太搞明白～）So people may still use gasoline and electricity as much as they used to even though the price of them are higher, especially when they do not have a better choice.

Followed by the last sentence I said, people will not change their habits if the new one is not good enough for them. The more efficient and cheaper energy has not being discovered yet. Solar energy, for instance, is still in experiment and has not enough efficiency for driving the machines in nowadays. Or nuclear energy is keeping its enormous value of danger that could cause disasters and yet cannot be totally controlled. How could people trust such energies more rather than the one they had for centuries. Using gasoline and electricity has been done since the Industrial Revolution which happened more than 100 years ago.

In addition, the fundamental impulse for people to save energy is education because changing concept is much more effective than just changing the actions. People would conserve the energy consciously once they realize that saving energy is critical for both themselves and the earth. Consequently, making people to believe that such saving is crucial is（怎么两个is?） one significant work that government should do.

Even I have to confess that price is the effective one for making people use less gasoline and electricity, which others will not deny as well. However, in conclusion, price is no longer and will not be the only way to encourage such conservation since it is just one of several factors to achieve that.（总结段写的很好啊～很精炼）

不知道说的对不对，水平有限，楼主见谅！再问一下，楼主怎么提高速度的？试过一次规定时间内写完的，感觉整个过程就是一片混乱，根本没时间考虑什么结构啊句型用词什么的，语法就更别想了～楼主怎么提高的？能给点建议吗？或者班主任姐姐看到能不能支个招啊，急死我了～～谢谢！
楼主已经考完了吧？还坚持写，学习！

谢谢～回去好好研究～
你还比我强点呢，在规定时间内写完了，我半小时最多就能写270个字，就写了三分之二都不到，郁闷啊～～

As the fast development of the world, the transportation, industry, and our home（怎么觉得说home消耗能源怪怪的～） are consume numerous energy everyday. It brings about（可以不用about的吧） the controversial discussion between whether it is the only way for government to encourage energy conservation by increase（increasing） the price of gasoline. From where I stand, I consider there are better solutions.

To begin with, "Energy is unrenewable", advocated by environmentalists. It is high time that government start (starts;可以说star focus吗？)focus the research（research是不是有点多余？还有好像不能那么用吧？） on gasoline replacement. Gasoline, as a resource formed through millions of years, it is no doubt that the speed of our consumption （is） higher than its speed of reproduction. So, whatever how much it is in the earth, it will run out one day. One of the effective ways is to find the new resource, fuel, new gasoline. For example, some scientists proclaim that hydrogen may become the most essential fuel in the future. Research shows that it can produce from water, from the most common resource in the world. Besides, after reaction the only reminder is water. No pollution! But this technology is still under developing. Hardly can I imagine our world will be in future if government does not find new resource.

Furthermore, as a proverb says, "eople' （？）power is endless". Government should make people understand that the more energy they use today, the less it exist （exists）on the earth. Energy conservation is a(an) arduous task, it should be taken by the whole world rather by only an area or a country. Imagine the population in the world up to six billions, suppose that if people save a small amount of energy everyday, surely(surely在句首不用倒装吗？) it will up to a gigantic amount or even become unimaginable as years past. （So, the government should use the way that it can use to put the concept of energy conservation to people's mind.）（这句话不太好，我也没想好怎么改～） Such as advertisement, television program, books, public activity and so on, it should ensure people will exert a positive effect on energy conservation.  （这个句子是省略了ensure后面的that吗？这样的话感觉should ensure 不太对啊）

Admittedly, improve the place （price?）of gasoline have its own advantages, it may costs people more money when they waste electricity or gasoline, that may reduce the energy consume at a certain rate. However, it does not solve the problem thoroughly. The solutions should be research the new resource, （make people able to save the energy.）（这个是什么成分？不能有两个谓动啊，还有在句子也不太好～） Obviously, these solutions merits overshadowed the advantages of improve the price of gasoline. So, I still cling to my point.
没时间啦，最后一句话没看
不知道对不对，楼主自己再斟酌～加油

引用:

原帖由 yoyo 于 2008-5-24 20:59 发表
Price is the only promotion of changing consuming habits, as some scholars say. Others, as a contrast, deem the fact (the fact可以不要吧，感觉有点多余～)that consumers alternating their interests（觉得 ...

呵呵,别学我....我这次写作只有19分,比第一次还差,具体的去看我的报分贴~
第一段的the fact确实可以去掉，只不过我习惯这么写。。。看来是个不好的习惯~
第二段的got我想应该没问题，我的意思是“他们已经习惯了的东西”，have改成had有道理，谢谢。
这一句话的意思是：首先，随着经济的发展，过去大多数人不得不买便宜的东西因为他们根本买不起价格更高的，而今人们更倾向于购买他们喜爱的或者已经习惯了的商品因为大多数情况下价格已经不是最主要的因素。
倒数第二段的第一个is是such saving is crucial这个短语里的，后面的is是指的这整个短语，不知道这么写对否~

总而言之，谢谢这位朋友这么细致的修改，速度方面的练习我想是一步一步来的，首先要确定一下自己的风格，把自己用的顺手的句型练熟，做到随口就能说出来，这样写的时候自然就能想起来，相当于一个活动模板~
别的我就不好说了，因为自己的2次作文考得都不理想，还很有待提高。。。所以目前别向我学习，会误入歧途的。。。。

谢谢指教了
呵呵
我仔细看看再

我们那问题确实是个大问题......

啊?!
作文看你平时的写得蛮好啊
分数都不理想

那我们.....
危险了

我现在打字只要一快就容易出错
还真头痛啊

我觉得我作文分数低一方面是考试时发挥不好,每次都比较赶,没有平时的状态好
其次就是我写作的风格不太对TOEFL的口味,尤其是之前的风格,逻辑性不够,最近在着重练习这个~

首先说，我也不会改，我语法很差
So big energy consumers什么意思没看懂
cutting energy consumption中的cutting 用Reduce是不更合适呢
even energy conservation can be中的even 用even though貌似更好吧
只说我能看出来的，抱歉

多谢多谢

我是想表达“大能耗单位”这个意思，不知怎么讲比较好

引用:

原帖由 bill911u2 于 2008-5-25 22:52 发表
多谢多谢

我是想表达“大能耗单位”这个意思，不知怎么讲比较好

不用些，这里是大家互助
别忘了批你楼下的作文