"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.
It is inculpable to associate environment deterioration with economic development. After all, the last century has seen considerable tragedies concerning environment, which cultivates the conception that the economic gains are inevitably at the cost of environment. What's more, a lot of policies banning development in pristine area and advocating evacuating from polluted regions have clearly had sound effect. However, it is impractical to hold such passive attitude on environment and withdraw willingly when confronting the nature.
To begin with, the policy in the statement is actually our present method to meliorate the environmental problems. Compared with the cost of recovering a polluted region, apparently, building fences and barriers around it will be more economical. If such policy is implanted and enforced strictly, anyone who wants to invade the protected area will have to weight between the profit and thi risk of violating the law. Meanwhile, for government and companies, they can turn to invest the downtown or other developed regions in stead of the wilderness, which would help improve the infrastructure and facilities in those areas. In this way, the wilderness will be preserved.
But blindly withdrawing from the nature, as advocated in the statement, to some extent, will jeopardize not only our economy but also our civilization. First and foremost, the limited land use will circumscribe our material development. In retrospect, our ancestors pushed the envelope of their territory and expanded the population, bade on which they cultivated a splendid culture. But had the policy promulgated, we would have to control not only the industry size but also our population. What's more, the policy constitutes a passive attitude toward humanity and the nature. It presumes that our technology and laws will not prevent us from excessive exploitation. Ant it underestimates the self-recovering ability of the nature. Therefor, the policy would actually hinder our progress.
Based on the discussion above, neither a conventional or a radical attitude is plausible. It is necessary to evaluate the feasibility concerning exploitation,state-of-art technology and the current formulations before a decision is drawn. For instance, if the current technology is not reliable to guarantee the sustainable development of the wilderness, the the government should delay the exploitation. In addition, the government is supposed to clarify the exact factors hindering the exploitation. If those factors could be overcome by the development of technology and formulations, then the government should positively take the responsibility to address those problems in the way. However, if the wilderness is in fact inaccessible for reasons like preservations of endangered species, then the program should be abandoned.
To sum up, I would like to make it clear that our economy is not necessarily opposed to the nature. We should come up with methods to solve the contradiction between them rather than escaping the reality, passively exhibiting our inability in front of the nature. Moreover, sustainable development should be considered when policy is concerned with environment as aforementioned.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 267, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
... inevitably at the cost of environment. Whats more, a lot of policies banning develop...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 524, Rule ID: IN_STEAD_OF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'instead of'?
Suggestion: instead of
...the downtown or other developed regions in stead of the wilderness, which would help improv...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 494, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
... industry size but also our population. Whats more, the policy constitutes a passive ...
^^^^^
Line 8, column 55, Rule ID: NEITHER_NOR[1]
Message: Use 'nor' with neither.
Suggestion: nor
...iscussion above, neither a conventional or a radical attitude is plausible. It is ...
^^
Line 8, column 158, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , state-of-art
... the feasibility concerning exploitation,state-of-art technology and the current formulations...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 356, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...tainable development of the wilderness, the the government should delay the exploitatio...
^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 356, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...tainable development of the wilderness, the the government should delay the exploitatio...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, apparently, but, first, however, if, moreover, so, then, while, after all, for instance, in addition, in fact, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 58.6224719101 111% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 12.9106741573 225% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2744.0 2235.4752809 123% => OK
No of words: 485.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.65773195876 5.05705443957 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69283662038 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.39015974882 2.79657885939 121% => OK
Unique words: 259.0 215.323595506 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.534020618557 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 883.8 704.065955056 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.7531666233 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.538461538 118.986275619 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6538461538 23.4991977007 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.80769230769 5.21951772744 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.160152067921 0.243740707755 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0410975692287 0.0831039109588 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0407304941093 0.0758088955206 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0872829056318 0.150359130593 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0374355506418 0.0667264976115 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 48.8420337079 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 12.1639044944 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.51 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 153.0 100.480337079 152% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.