"Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain."
This topic raises the controversial issue whether nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain. Indisputably, those laws will preserve wilderness area and maintain its ecosystems. Nevertheless, pass laws to preserve it isn’t only solution regarding its potential for economic gain, for instance, in Bogor, Indonesia the government use some of its wild area as an natural-amusement park which can be beneficial both environmentally and economically. Thus, I generally disagree with the opinion that nations should establish some laws to maintain wild areas regardless any potential and would argue that the nations should pass laws to maintain the wild with regarding its potentials.
First of all, preserving area and developing economic gain it's something that can be combined. I would like to point out that the combining preserved area with economic activities is possible to do. To illustrate, let us look at the example of Bogor national park, this park contains zoo and preserved wild areas. In this circumstance, obviously this approach can maintain both preserved area and economical gain. Consequently, it is pretty obvious that combining preserved area and economic activities is possible.
Furthermore, refusing economic potential will be harm for the government. Specifically, for the local income. Both common sense and personal experience have told us that if some areas just preserved regardless anything it will be unbeneficial. Hence, all the evidence above demonstrates that it is a loss if government did not use the potential economic areas.
In conclusion, although laws will preserve the wilderness areas, it is better to regarding its potential economic gain.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 470, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...government use some of its wild area as an natural-amusement park which can be ben...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, furthermore, hence, if, look, nevertheless, regarding, so, thus, for instance, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.5258426966 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 58.6224719101 43% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1521.0 2235.4752809 68% => OK
No of words: 274.0 442.535393258 62% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.55109489051 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.55969084622 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11006514317 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 215.323595506 65% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.514598540146 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 478.8 704.065955056 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 62.4307371314 60.3974514979 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.642857143 118.986275619 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5714285714 23.4991977007 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.07142857143 5.21951772744 174% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.439992372653 0.243740707755 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.167366028197 0.0831039109588 201% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.147775501237 0.0758088955206 195% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.249027455196 0.150359130593 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.128784047997 0.0667264976115 193% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.91 12.1639044944 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 100.480337079 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 11.8971910112 134% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.