導語：綜合寫作改套路了，聽力不再去反駁閱讀了，而是去回答閱讀中的問題。下面YJBYS小編提供三篇2017年的託福獨立寫作範文，歡迎參考。
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
In twenty years there will be fewer cars in use than there are today.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
範文：
The Earth today faces many problems. Among these problems, the top three, in some people's perspective, are probably global warming, pollution and energy crisis. All three, if we really look into them, can be connected with the pervasive use of private cars. It is because of this, I agree with the statement that there will be fewer cars in twenty years comparing with today.
First of all, people will definitely use fewer cars. If we look at the global media, we are seeing an increasing consciousness on environmental problems. Be it the famous documentay by Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth, or the "Earth One Hour" movement. They all indicate a global consensus: "We need to help the environment". So what's the easiest way to help? Using fewer cars. According to a survey conducted by the Ministry of Environmental Conservation in China, more than 40 percent of carbon dioxide produced by individuals are from private cars. If the trend of eco-friendly consciousness continues to grow in the next 20 years, people will, without a doubt, use fewer and fewer cars. So, in a nutshell, the first reason why people will drive less in twenty years is because they will be more environmentally-concerned.
Another key aspect is that, in twenty years, there will be fewer people in the world. If there are fewer people in the world, of course there will be fewer cars. If we are sensitive to global trends, we can see that a lot of countries in the world are facing a decrease in population. The biggest contributors to population growth, China and India, are also experiencing a decrease in the rate of population increase. In 20 years, I am confident that there will be, without a doubt, fewer people in the world. In this case, there will be a decrease in the needs of transportation. So, it is logical to assume that there will be fewer cars in the world twenty years from now.
A final argument I want to make is based on the ever developing technology. In the past twenty years, we have seen tremendous innovations taken place in the field of transportation. From high-speed trains to cars that run on electric, there is simply no telling what might happen twenty years from now. Considering how much we have achieved in the past twenty years, it is not so improbable for me to say that we might not even need cars in the near future. Who's to say that we won't be traveling on more efficient vehicles? Or maybe public transportation may become so convenient that we won't even consider using private transportation ever again? The fact is, we cannot deny these possibilities for they are very likely to happen. In this light, I am definitely supportive of the view that there will be fewer cars in the future.
From my arguments above, I think I am very optimistic about the future. I believe that, in twenty years, we will be living in a society with much fewer cars. And I am looking forward to that future.
Part Two科技帶來的弊端
In terms of life quality, there is no question that technology has revolutionized our life. Yet we still cannot ignore the problems coming along with the progress. While we are enjoying the convenience of searching information online and the notifications from the calendar, we might receive an email accidentally sent by someone with evil intentions, which could cause some problems.
A ransomware, WannaCry2.0, has been passed around online recently. People who have received this email and clicked the link would find that their important documents stored in the computer are locked and they are blackmailed for large amounts of bitcoin, a kind of virtual currency. In order to get these documents back, people have no choice but to pay bitcoin or the real money. As a result, these victims could lose thousands of dollars, some of which would even lose all the important documents no matter they choose to pay or not.
Imagine that a to-be graduate who has already finished the final paper suddenly lose his paper, or a doctor who is going to do an operation suddenly lose all the information of his patients. You can understand how bad the consequence is caused by ransomwares such as WannaCry2.0.
Part Three託福綜合寫作：海洋生物滅絕
某一地點所有海洋生物在同一時間滅絕
閱讀給出的三種觀點：
1.海洋蒸發
2.致命病毒
e boom在食物鏈中積累
聽力逐一反駁：
1.海洋蒸發應該還會有一些物種殘存，但化石中並沒有看到
2.單一的病毒一般只針對特定的物種或是兩個相聯絡的物種進行攻擊，不可能同時滅絕這麼多生物
3.化石上有些生物是食草的，不會受到毒素在小魚體內積累的影響
版本二:
主題
Topic：發現了一大批ocean animals死在了一起 有幾個theories
R&L對照
Reading:
1、原來這塊地方是個lagoon，因為地震啥的.會堵塞河口，動物就被渴死了;
2、一些virus導致他們死了，比如現在就有個virus影響了dolphine;
3、algae會分泌一些toxic，如果很多fish吃了就會發生toxic concentration，一些位於食物鏈高階的動物就會死。
Lecture:反駁
1、如果這個地兒的ocean water evaporate還會留下mineral，但是並沒有發現mineral;
2、一個virus只能影響一個species，少數情況下它能影響兩個closely related species，但是不可能同時影響mammals和fish species;
3、plant-eating species不會受影響，這些fossils裡還發現了large mammals他們主要吃植物，那他們體內的toxic應該不足以導致他們死。
