IELTS Writing Task 2: Carbon Footprint (Two-Part Question) — Band 6/7/8/9 Model Answers

Related guides:

• IELTS Writing Task 2 Rehabilitation: Band 9.0 Sample Answer
• IELTS Writing Task 2: Traffic Congestion - Band 6.5 Sample…
• IELTS Writing Task 2: Juvenile Justice - Band 7.0 Sample…
• IELTS Writing Task 2: Social Media Influencers - Band 7.0…
• IELTS Writing Task 2: Road Safety – Band 8.0 Sample with…

Prompt: Some people believe that individuals are responsible for reducing their own carbon footprint. Others argue that only governments and large companies can make a significant difference. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Band 6.0 Sample Answer

People have different ideas about who should cut down on carbon emissions. Many people think that each person must try to use less energy, like driving less or recycling. This is a good point because if everyone does a little, it can add up to a big change. For example, choosing to walk instead of driving for short trips.

On the other hand, some people say that governments and big businesses are the real problem. They produce most of the pollution, so they should be the ones to fix it. Governments can make laws, and companies can use cleaner technology. This is also true because a factory pollutes more than one family.

In my opinion, both sides are important. Individuals should do what they can, but governments and companies have more power to make big changes. We all need to work together to solve this problem.

(Word count: 143)

Why This is a Band 6.0 Response

• Task Response (TR): Addresses both parts of the prompt but the ideas are general and lack development. The example is simplistic. The opinion is clear but not fully extended.
• Coherence & Cohesion (CC): Uses basic linking words ('On the other hand', 'For example'). The paragraphing is logical but connections between ideas are sometimes mechanical.
• Lexical Resource (LR): Uses a limited range of vocabulary ('cut down', 'big change', 'cleaner technology'). Some repetition ('people'). Attempts less common vocabulary ('emissions') but with errors in collocation ('cut down on carbon emissions' is acceptable but 'reduce emissions' is more academic).
• Grammatical Range & Accuracy (GRA): Uses a mix of simple and compound sentences. There are no major errors that cause misunderstanding, but there is a lack of complex structures. Sentences are generally accurate but simple.

---

Band 7.0 Sample Answer

There is an ongoing debate regarding the primary responsibility for mitigating climate change through carbon footprint reduction. One perspective holds that individuals must adopt sustainable practices in their daily lives. Proponents of this view argue that collective action from millions of households, such as reducing meat consumption, minimizing air travel, and improving home energy efficiency, can create substantial cumulative environmental benefits. Consumer choices also signal market demand for greener products.

Conversely, it is argued that systemic change driven by governments and corporations is far more critical. Industries like energy, transportation, and agriculture are the largest emitters, and only regulatory frameworks—such as carbon taxes, emissions trading schemes, and strict industrial standards—can force the necessary large-scale transitions. Furthermore, corporations have the resources to invest in renewable energy and sustainable supply chains.

In my view, while individual actions are morally and educationally valuable, they are insufficient without top-down policy. Governments must lead by implementing robust regulations and incentivizing green innovation, thereby creating an environment where sustainable individual choices become the easier and default option.

(Word count: 181)

Why This is a Band 7.0 Response

• Task Response (TR): Clearly addresses all parts of the prompt. Presents relevant, extended, and supported ideas for both views. The writer's opinion is clear and developed.
• Coherence & Cohesion (CC): Logically organises information and ideas; there is clear progression throughout. Uses a range of cohesive devices appropriately ('Conversely', 'Furthermore', 'thereby').
• Lexical Resource (LR): Uses a sufficient range of vocabulary to allow some flexibility and precision ('mitigating', 'sustainable practices', 'cumulative benefits', 'regulatory frameworks', 'systemic change'). Uses less common lexical items with some awareness of style and collocation.
• Grammatical Range & Accuracy (GRA): Uses a variety of complex structures ('such as...', 'thereby creating...'). Produces frequent error-free sentences. Has good control of grammar and punctuation but may make a few occasional errors.

---

Band 8.0 Sample Answer

The question of agency in reducing humanity's carbon footprint polarises opinion between individual behavioural change and institutional action. Advocates for personal responsibility rightly emphasise the power of aggregated consumer demand. When individuals consciously opt for plant-based diets, embrace public transport, and invest in home solar panels, they not only lower direct emissions but also drive market shifts towards sustainability, making ethical consumption a powerful economic lever.

However, the counterargument—that governments and multinational corporations bear the paramount duty—is compelling from a scale perspective. Over 70% of global emissions are linked to just 100 corporate entities, a statistic highlighting the limits of voluntary individual action. Effective decarbonization of the energy grid, heavy industry, and international logistics requires capital, coordination, and legislative authority that only states and large firms possess. Policies like mandating renewable energy portfolios or subsidising carbon capture technology are beyond the reach of any individual.

Ultimately, I contend that a false dichotomy is at play. Individuals and institutions are interdependent within a socio-economic system. Governments must establish the rules (e.g., strict building codes, fossil fuel divestment), corporations must innovate within them, and individuals, empowered by these structures, can then make impactful daily choices, creating a synergistic cycle of reduction.

(Word count: 215)

Why This is a Band 8.0 Response

• Task Response (TR): Sufficiently addresses all parts of the prompt with well-developed, relevant, and extended ideas. The position is clear and nuanced, rejecting a simple 'both are important' conclusion for a more integrated view.
• Coherence & Cohesion (CC): Sequences information and ideas logically. Manages all aspects of cohesion skillfully. Paragraphing is used appropriately and effectively.
• Lexical Resource (LR): Uses a wide range of vocabulary fluently and flexibly to convey precise meanings ('agency', 'polarises', 'aggregated demand', 'paramount duty', 'decarbonization', 'false dichotomy', 'synergistic'). Skillfully uses uncommon lexical items with very rare inaccuracies.
• Grammatical Range & Accuracy (GRA): Uses a wide range of structures with full flexibility and accuracy. The majority of sentences are error-free. Makes only very occasional, minor 'slips'.

---

Band 9.0 Sample Answer

Determining the locus of responsibility for curtailing carbon emissions necessitates a dissection of both ideological stance and practical efficacy. Proponents of individual accountability posit that environmental integrity stems from civic virtue; each person, by eschewing fast fashion, adopting a minimalist lifestyle, and boycotting high-emission products, engages in a form of daily activism that normalizes sustainability and exerts bottom-up pressure on the market.

Yet, this perspective can be critiqued as naively optimistic, overlooking the immense structural inertia engineered by vested interests. The stark reality is that systemic overhaul—decarbonizing national grids, revolutionizing agricultural practices, and overhauling global shipping—demands the fiscal muscle and legislative mandate exclusive to governments and conglomerates. Initiatives like international carbon pricing mechanisms or binding treaties (e.g., the Paris Agreement) are quintessential examples of change that cannot be voluntarist.

Therefore, my firm conviction is that institutional action is the non-negotiable catalyst, while individual effort is the essential cultural adhesive. Governments must enact transformative policies—banning internal combustion engines, funding green hydrogen research—and corporations must pivot from greenwashing to genuine circular economic models. Within this enabling framework, individual choices then become profoundly consequential, completing a feedback loop where policy enables practice, and practice legitimizes policy, forging a cohesive front against climate peril.

(Word count: 231)

Why This is a Band 9.0 Response

• Task Response (TR): Fully addresses all parts of the prompt with extended, fully developed, and deeply relevant ideas. Presents a sophisticated, fully articulated position that directly engages with the complexity of the issue.
• Coherence & Cohesion (CC): Uses cohesion in such a way that it attracts no attention. The message can be followed effortlessly. Paragraphing is skilfully managed.
• Lexical Resource (LR): Uses a wide range of vocabulary with very natural and sophisticated control of lexical features. Uses rare, idiomatic, and academic vocabulary precisely ('locus', 'curtailing', 'eschewing', 'vested interests', 'structural inertia', 'voluntarist', 'circular economic models', 'greenwashing'). Minor errors are virtually non-existent.
• Grammatical Range & Accuracy (GRA): Uses a full range of structures naturally, accurately, and flexibly. Rare minor 'slips' are only seen on careful, repeated reading. Punctuation is flawless.

---

Key Vocabulary for This Topic

1. Carbon Footprint: The total amount of greenhouse gases emitted directly or indirectly by an individual, organization, or product. (Collocation: reduce/calculate/offset your carbon footprint)
2. Mitigate: To make something less severe or harmful. (Collocation: mitigate climate change/effects/risks)
3. Decarbonize: To remove or reduce the carbon emissions from a process, sector, or economy. (Collocation: decarbonize the economy/transportation/industry)
4. Systemic Change: Change that affects an entire system, not just its parts. (Collocation: drive/require/systemic change)
5. Regulatory Framework: A system of regulations and laws governing an area of activity. (Collocation: establish/within a/robust regulatory framework)
6. Circular Economy: An economic model aimed at eliminating waste by continually reusing resources. (Opposite: linear 'take-make-dispose' economy)
7. Greenwashing: Disinformation to present an environmentally responsible public image. (Collocation: accuse of/avoid/corporate greenwashing)
8. Sustainable Practices: Methods that do not completely use up or destroy natural resources. (Collocation: adopt/promote/sustainable practices)
9. Emissions Trading Scheme: A market-based approach to controlling pollution by providing economic incentives. (Also known as 'cap and trade')
10. Aggregate Demand: The total demand for goods and services within an economy. (Collocation: shift/influence/aggregate consumer demand)
11. Vested Interests: Groups or persons with a strong personal stake in a policy or system, often resisting change.
12. Structural Inertia: The resistance of large, complex systems to change.
13. Synergistic: Relating to the interaction producing a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects.
14. Quintessential: Representing the most perfect or typical example.
15. Non-negotiable: Not open for discussion or modification.

---

5 Common Mistakes on Two-Part Questions

1. Answering Only One Part: The most critical error. You must discuss both views presented in the prompt before giving your opinion.
2. Unbalanced Development: Spending 80% of the essay on one view and only 20% on the other. Aim for a roughly equal discussion of each perspective.
3. Vague or Repetitive Examples: Using generic examples like 'recycle' or 'use less water'. Be specific: 'installing a smart thermostat to reduce home heating gas consumption by 15%'.
4. Mixing Opinion Prematurely: Your opinion should be clearly stated and developed in its own dedicated paragraph(s), after you have discussed both given views.
5. Overly Simple Conclusion: Concluding with 'I think both are important' without synthesizing the discussion or adding a final, insightful judgement.

---

Get your own response to this or any IELTS prompt scored by AI on English AIdol. Our platform analyzes your writing against the official band descriptors for Task Response, Coherence, Vocabulary, and Grammar, giving you targeted feedback to reach your target score.