Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
Over the past several years, there has been debate over wilderness protection and exploiting pristine areas for economic gain. It is said that the wilderness must be protected at the expense of economic gain. I agree with this position for two reasons and disagree with it for another reason.
First, it is important to protect wildlife which resides in the wilderness. For example, the bees depend on forests that though could be cut down for cheap and locally produced raw materials (mainly wood), will instead produce a negative impact on the environment. This is because the bees are the primary pollinators of flowers and the trees that were cut down will worsen global warming. Thus, since the environment is at stake when wilderness areas such as forests are cut down for economic gain, it is reasonable to preserve the trees to eschew CO2 levels in the air and to keep bees pollinating their flowers, which is important for farmers and the prosperity of many species of plants.
In addition, wilderness areas are important for basic human needs and can be lost if exploited for economic gain. For instance, if an oil rig is erected precariously close to a fresh water river, it threatens to soil the drinking water of a population the size of a big city. Though oil is believed to be a major driving force for economic power, it is not worth sacrificing drinking water if gas prices go down by two hundred percent. In fact, there could later be economic downturns if the wilderness is exploited this way since fresh water is used for many other goods in the economy such as coffee and soft drinks.
On the other hand, exploiting the wilderness could potentially be worth the economic gains. For example, going out to the desert to build factories and to build giant solar panels will create more jobs and produce greener energy. Many hot deserts almost support minimal life and there may be little that can be disturbed if such a noisy factory or large solar panels are placed there. As for the employment opportunities, it is a major economic benefit since people will get well-paying jobs which they will spend at other businesses and make them flourish and do their part for contributing to the economy. Solar energy can create cheap electricity which can increase economic output since more energy can be used for production at a lower cost. What is anyone concerned about in those barren and dry lands anyway? These kinds of wilderness are just waiting to help make our economy grow after being exploited.
In conclusion, there is mainly a cost-benefit analysis that should be done before considering whether a given wilderness should exploit for economic gain. This is because there could be major environmental damage that may occur as a result or that the economic gain initially invested in could end up backfiring and causing economic damage. However, a given pristine wilderness could essentially be exploited without any consequences at all. It is these cases where using them for economic gain is acceptable.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
anyway, but, first, however, if, may, so, thus, well, as for, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 37.0 19.5258426966 189% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.4196629213 169% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2535.0 2235.4752809 113% => OK
No of words: 513.0 442.535393258 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94152046784 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75914943092 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61883855537 2.79657885939 94% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 215.323595506 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.502923976608 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 799.2 704.065955056 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.6594574768 60.3974514979 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.227272727 118.986275619 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3181818182 23.4991977007 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 5.21951772744 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.310812064917 0.243740707755 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101480381487 0.0831039109588 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0630610714972 0.0758088955206 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.19639184474 0.150359130593 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0369357517361 0.0667264976115 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.1639044944 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.38706741573 99% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 100.480337079 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.