15. The key to solving environmental problem is simple: present generation are willing to accept a less comfortable life for the sake of the future generation. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It has been discussed for decades about how to tackle the environmental problem on our planet. Some people argued that human beings can simply with lower standards to give the next generations a better future. However, I strongly disagree with this point of view because many people would not like to have a lifestyle which worse than what they have been having, and even though some of them want to make a change, the problem cannot be solved without actions from governments.
To begin with, it is unrealistic that ask people to sacrifice with a less comfortable life. Many people, especially residents in under-developing countries, are actually unsatisfied with their current living conditions. They are struggling for a more comfortable life. For instance, most of the young people in China still need to work extremely hard to purchase a house, to have a car and to lead the life that they want. Those who are working for a living will need more daily necessities like food and clothes when they have money. They are going to damaging the environment as they are consuming more goods.
To consider another side, although the people who are concerning about the environment are willing to sacrifice for their children and grandchildren, the impact they can make is insignificant. Normally, the main reason why they can think about others and can care about global problems is that they already have what they need and do not need more materials. It is undeniable that rich people only count for less than 5% of the whole population. Instead, only if all the governments over the world work together, appeal for a change and set up laws, can the environmental problem be solved.
In conclusion, it is unrealistic to deal with the environmental problem by sacrificing the comfortable lives individuals have. Millions of people would not do that, and it will not have a significant effect. I believe governments can do more in this problem.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 545, Rule ID: NEED_TO_VBG[1]
Message: Did you mean 'going to damage'?
Suggestion: going to damage
... clothes when they have money. They are going to damaging the environment as they are consuming m...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 51, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...r another side, although the people who are concerning about the environment are willing to sa...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, however, if, so, still, for instance, in conclusion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 7.85571142285 191% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1627.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 327.0 315.596192385 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9755351682 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83302923949 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 176.041082164 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.544342507645 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 502.2 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.1854454628 49.4020404114 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.6875 106.682146367 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4375 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.75 7.06120827912 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 3.9879759519 251% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.177177935715 0.244688304435 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0670972210773 0.084324248473 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0356779777753 0.0667982634062 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116257204508 0.151304729494 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0169051287066 0.056905535591 30% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.0946893788 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 50.2224549098 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.4159519038 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.01 8.58950901804 93% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 78.4519038076 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.