【5.19】同一篇综合写作，今天第三次考，刚出考场的你，会good吗？

昨天（5.18）托福考试，综合写作话题很新，非常像是独立写作话题。并且，昨天是一篇综合写作新题，这篇必定在接下来的考试中反复考到。

今天（5.19）托福考试，综合写作是一篇老题，今天已经是第三次重复考到。

提醒各位注意：托福是题库考试，所以题库题库重复考到是必然，尤其是目前实行ABCD多套试卷。

2019.5.19 综合写作

重复

2015.04.12

2018.09.08

大陆托福真题

阅读主要观点提取

总论点：美国东部的高铁发展是很成功，一些专家认为，在美国西部建立一个往返旧金山和洛杉矶的铁路系统也是很有好处的。

分论点一：减少公路维修。修护公路的费用是很贵的。由于经费有限，所以加利福尼亚州很难保证公路一直保持很好的条件。因此，如果有高铁的话，人们就可以放弃驾车而选择乘坐高铁，这样一来就可以减少对公路的损坏。

分论点二：缓解交通堵塞。在一条往返旧金山和洛杉矶的一条主要干道上，交通堵塞已经处于可以创纪录的程度了。另外，高铁系统已经帮助了一些东部地区缓解了交通堵塞问题。高铁甚至已经成为了人们最喜爱的交通方式。所以，高铁在解决交通堵塞的问题上起到了至关重要的作用。

分论点三：高铁是最环保的交通方式之一。高铁是非常省燃料的。所以，相对于汽车和常规火车来说，使用高铁每年可以减少大量的有害气体排放。

听力主要观点提取

总论点：建立一个往返旧金山和洛杉矶的铁路系统并不是一个好主意。

分论点一：建立一个高铁系统比修护公路更昂贵。如果要建一个全新的铁路系统，加利福尼亚州需要借1000亿美元，这相当于加利福尼亚州全年税收的75%。所以，这一大笔钱是很难独立偿还的，这会使加利福尼亚州出现财政危机。

分论点二：是否能缓解交通压力取决于乘坐高铁是否比驾车更方便。在美国东部城市，由于公共交通线路很普遍，人们很容易找到高铁站。但是，西部城市的公共交通很稀少。所以，对于居住在西海岸的人们来说，驾车比乘坐高铁更方便。

分论点三：有一些区域的轨道是不能允许高速行驶的高铁通过的。所以，当高铁通过这些区域时，它必须要降速行驶。在这种情况下，高铁会排放出较多的有害气体。

Image: Washington Post

经典满分范文

The author suggests that California should build a high-speed rail system to connect the cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles. However, the professor says that it doesn’t have many benefits for California. 

First, the writer points out that maintaining roads is expensive. As a matter of fact, the speaker says that building a high-speed rail system is much more expensive than maintaining roads. To build a new system, California have to borrow $100 billion, which is equal to 75% of all the tax income the state collects in one year. As a result, this would put itself in a difficult financial situation. 

Second, the reading states that building high-speed rail system helps relieve traffic congestion. Nevertheless, the speaker indicates that most of people living in the urban areas on the West Coast will keep driving. The reason is that unlike the ideal situation in the East Coast cities, cities on the East Coast lack extensive public transportation systems. So, people in the West Coast cities cannot reach the rail stations conveniently. 

Third, the professor refuses the point in reading by claiming that high-speed trains are not as fuel efficient as the reading mentions. In fact, a new high-speed track would be built for some of the root but not for the whole root and trains must slow down when they travel on regular tracks. Thus, fuel emissions will not be reduced too much. (234 words)