There is no doubt that environmental pollution has become a global problem these days. Although some people believe that raising the price of the fuel can mitigate this problem alone, I disagree with this statement. In my opinion, government can take other steps, such as increasing the number of public transportation and widespread using of renewable energy sources, instead of solely depending on fuel price hike.
To begin with, it is true that increasing the cost of fuel can solve the environmental pollution to some extent. This is because majority of the factories, industries and vehicles run by burning the fossil fuels, which produces toxic green-house gas that is mainly responsible for environmental pollution. In other words, these hazardous gases deplete the protective barriers of planet Earth, and this, in turn, causes a devastating effect to the environment. Therefore, if the government decides to soar up the fuel price, people will reduce the use of private vehicles and there will be limited number of factories operating in the country. This might decelerate the environmental pollution to some degree; however, it will give rise to other problems as well.
Fuel is considered as the driving force of a country. Thousands of people work in the fuel-run factories and companies, which is the only way to make their livelihood. Thus, raising the fuel price can stop the factories from functioning, and ultimately, sack these people from their jobs. To make matters worse, this can lead to protest and unrest in the country, which would culminate into violence and chaos. For instance, in 2019, Bangladeshi government had to deploy military army to control the infuriated public who were protesting the authority’s decision to increase fuel price. That is why a better solution of this problem would be to harness the power of renewable energy sources like solar, wind and tidal rather than the excessive reliance on non-renewable energy sources. Moreover, facilitating the use of public transport can be helpful in reducing the level of environmental pollution as well.
To conclude, I think that since rocketing fuel price can give rise to disruption and anarchy in the society and impede economic development of a country, the government should search for solution of this problem in renewable energy source and increasing public transport.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, moreover, so, therefore, thus, well, for instance, i think, no doubt, such as, in my opinion, in other words, it is true, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.3376753507 216% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1998.0 1615.20841683 124% => OK
No of words: 377.0 315.596192385 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29973474801 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88736507259 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533156498674 0.561755894193 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 623.7 506.74238477 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.6816804463 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.875 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5625 20.7667163134 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.25 7.06120827912 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.9879759519 226% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.273596754731 0.244688304435 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0944456484664 0.084324248473 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0732586302287 0.0667982634062 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181192232644 0.151304729494 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0549163042338 0.056905535591 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.0946893788 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.76 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.