Encouraging people to use public transport is the best way to solve traffic problems in the cities. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In the modern day, the problem of the bottleneck in several big cities has raised a great deal of public attention. Although the policymakers have proposed a wide range of solutions, chief among them is that making use of public vehicles is the most effective.
On the one hand, some methods may not tackle the root of issues. Firstly, due to the excessive density of private cars, a suggestion of such upgrading transport systems as widening the roads seems not to be feasible. For example, it is undeniable to take an enormous period of time to finish these stages which renders inconvenience and negative effects on commuters’ psychology. Secondly, some people think that an increase in the price of petrol may lead to a reduction in using private cars and traffic jams. By contrast, it may act as an obstacle to various residents who can not seek out an alternative vehicle, especially, they may pay an exorbitant price for petrol as well as are less likely to use their cars or motorbikes.
On the other hand, fostering to use community vehicles, it may help to deal with not only congestion but also air pollution. The first benefit is that using buses or metros means that a whole host of personal transport operating on the roads significantly declines. As a result, the rate of traffic jam on the main streets happen fewer. Besides, encouraging habitants to travel by community vehicles in major cities would limit the amount of exhaust fume from cars. Besides, it would be more successful to reduce the rate of air contamination which has noticeably concerned recently in many big cities.
In conclusion, a lot of solutions have been released but making use of public transport as alternative private vehicles may the most successful solution to solve congestion. Also, air contamination significantly declines by this method.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-06-06 | Sergey He | 78 | view |
| 2020-04-10 | nghialeminh | 84 | view |
| 2020-04-10 | nghialeminh | 84 | view |
| 2020-04-10 | nghialeminh | 92 | view |
- Scientists say that in the future humanity will speak the same language Do you think this is a positive or negative social development 78
- Governments should spend more money on railways rather than roads What extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 89
- In developing countries children in rural communities have less access to education Some people believe that the problem can be solved by providing more schools and teachers while others think that the problem can be solved by providing computers and Inte 84
- Some people think that governments should ban dangerous sports while others think people should have freedom to do any sports or activity Discuss both views and give your own opinion 73
- The following diagrams show the present and future water supply system of a city 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 267, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...e, it is undeniable to take an enormous period of time to finish these stages which renders in...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 466, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Two successive sentences begin with the same adverb. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...t the amount of exhaust fume from cars. Besides, it would be more successful to reduce ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, well, for example, in conclusion, as a result, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1536.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 308.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98701298701 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8770997231 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584415584416 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 492.3 506.74238477 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.0235599615 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.714285714 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.2142857143 7.06120827912 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.154188868897 0.244688304435 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0480745451965 0.084324248473 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0419721427251 0.0667982634062 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0944194430194 0.151304729494 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0250346335791 0.056905535591 44% => 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: 13.1 13.0946893788 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.14 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 78.4519038076 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.