The best way to solve the world’s environmental problems is to increase the cost of fuel for cars and other vehicles. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The proliferation of modern transport vehicles is the main culprit of innumerable problems to the environment. It is suggested that the optimum method to alleviate the negative implications of automobiles and other transport vehicles on the environment is to raise the cost of fossil fuels. I somewhat disagree with this view as the higher prices of fuels may spell trouble for people and society as a whole, even though it may discourage the utilization of cars.
The increase of fuel cost is a harbinger of lowering living standards of the impoverished and deteriorating the economy. It is a fact that the fuel cost constitutes a large portion of the expenditure of the impoverished. The rise of the cost will prevent the less well-off from purchasing other necessities such as food or education, thereby decreasing their living quality. More importantly, the upsurge in the price of energy takes its toll on the development of society. Fuel is one of the foremost commodities playing a key role in many domains of businesses. The increase in the price of the merchandise will lead to inflation, the phenomenon that the cost of all goods goes up silmutaneously. By increasing the cost of fossil fuels, the authorities not only place million lives of the poor at risk but threaten the coconomic stability.
Admittedly, there are certain environmental merits associated with boosting the price of fuel for vehicles. This can ameliorate the effects of over-reliance on car, producing hazardous fumes and leaving a myriad of carbon footprint, the main contributors of ecological equilibrium destabilization. The approach, however, may be the precursor to many societal and economical issues. It thus brings more harm than good to Homo Sapiens.
In sum, I mostly object to the perspective that increasing fuel cost will help tackle environmental issues. While this suggestion is valid to some extent, it has adverse impacts on poor citizens and jeopardises the posperity of nations.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 771, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a million'.
Suggestion: a million
...l fuels, the authorities not only place million lives of the poor at risk but threaten ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 175, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...fects of over-reliance on car, producing hazardous fumes and leaving a myriad of ...
^^
Line 7, column 365, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
...y be the precursor to many societal and economical issues. It thus brings more harm than g...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, so, thus, well, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1674.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 319.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24764890282 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.19018773523 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.583072100313 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 531.0 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 9.0 2.52805611222 356% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.4535234922 49.4020404114 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.625 106.682146367 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9375 20.7667163134 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.3125 7.06120827912 47% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240544905779 0.244688304435 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0677392314193 0.084324248473 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0478612026567 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130442445032 0.151304729494 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0365723060918 0.056905535591 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.0946893788 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.4159519038 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.73 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.