Some people believe that society should try to save every plant and animal species, despite the expense to humans in effort, time, and financial well-being. Others believe that society need not make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
Preserving plants and animals has always been a controversial issue, and people have some contradictory ideas about that. Some maintain that the environment play crucial roles in our lives and we should consider about the details and assign budget to save it. Some other believe governments could expense their budget for more important actions to improve economic conditions of the society. I mostly agree with the former group and I will explain my reasons now.
First of all, the environment could provide better conditions for our life. So, by preserving the environment we indirectly serve ourselves to have better life. For example, in Bangladesh, forests are destroying and it leads to soil erosion. Therefore, this area faces floods that demolish the homes of habitants. While if the government had a plan to save forests and expense money for this purpose, their people would have better environmental situation and better place for living.
Moreover, some preserving actions could consider such as insurance. It means we pay some money to preserve the environment to prevent huge costs of reconstructions of the environment in future, even if possible. For example, in recent decades, countries try to reduce the greenhouse gases emission to prevent global warming. They spend huge amount of money for renewable energy such as solar cells and wind power. With these activities, they hope to prevent the consequences of global warming that may force unavoidable expenses in future. In addition, some of the aftermaths of global warming may not reversible like destroying some species.
On the other hand, some claim that governments should consider for more important issues and spend their limited budgets on economic and health problems. They maintain the environment could recover itself and paying money for saving plants and animals is wasting the funds. However, I could not accept their ideas because they did not consider about the consequences of destroying the environment that could affect on our life. In addition, as the damage of the environment was great in the last decades, it is less likely to recover itself without intervene of the governments.
In conclusion, although economic and health activities of human are important issues and should be considered, the environmental problems are crucial and people should take actions to preserve it. Considering the environmental issues not only have economic benefits but also provide better place for living humans.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 183, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...s of reconstructions of the environment in future, even if possible. For example, in rece...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 529, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...ing that may force unavoidable expenses in future. In addition, some of the aftermaths of...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 553, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...idable expenses in future. In addition, some of the aftermaths of global warming may not re...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 408, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'effect'?
Suggestion: effect
...f destroying the environment that could affect on our life. In addition, as the damage of...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, while, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 19.5258426966 41% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 35.0 33.0505617978 106% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 58.6224719101 78% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2101.0 2235.4752809 94% => OK
No of words: 393.0 442.535393258 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34605597964 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79144022061 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.493638676845 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 704.065955056 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.2737271587 60.3974514979 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 100.047619048 118.986275619 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7142857143 23.4991977007 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.09523809524 5.21951772744 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.131387306218 0.243740707755 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0398795955898 0.0831039109588 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0381377904117 0.0758088955206 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.07875556473 0.150359130593 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0339927134202 0.0667264976115 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.