With the increased global demand in oil and gas, undiscovered areas of the world should be opened up to access more resources. To what extent do you agree?
In the words of one of the most prominent scientists of the USA Dr. Shaefer, due to the fact that fossil fuel consumption is rising globally, unexplored areas should be discovered to obtain more resources. However, it seems to me that unused areas should certainly not be explored to access more funds for industries destroy the environment in order to gain more resources and alternative renewable resources can certainly replace oil and gas.
In the first place, I'm against the introduction of new industries in undiscovered lands because they may destroy local ecosystem. In other words, to protect the environment we should not explore unused areas, but invest in science and technology to increase the efficiency of constructed industries. For example, the government of Kazakhstan built an oil platform in the western region. As a consequence, noxious materials spilled into the water during the process caused disruption to sea life and death of various sea creatures. For this reason, it's obvious that contaminants and toxic wastes from factories can lead to the extinction of animals. Therefore, I am convinced that the construction of new manufacturings in unexplored areas may lead to environmental
In the second place, you also have to understand that fossil fuels have limited reserves and therefore should be replaced by alternatives like green power technologies. To explain, Solar, wind and tidal resources could replace our demand for oil and gas, and they could also reduce levels of environmental pollution produced by the overuse of fossil fuel. For instance, in Germany, to reduce the need for oil almost all cars run on green power. Such technologies maintain better environmental conditions and will reduce manufacturing costs. All in all, I am opposed to the construction of new industries to access more resources with limited reserve because there are some more low-priced alternatives with better environmental conditions, like renewable resources.
In conclusion, the foregoing discussion propounds the view that sensitive areas should not be made available to fossil fuel companies because of the environment risks and the fact that our future energy needs can be met by renewable energy.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
In the words of one of the most prominen...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s can certainly replace oil and gas. In the first place, Im against the intro...
^^^^
Line 3, column 25, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: I'm
...oil and gas. In the first place, Im against the introduction of new industr...
^^
Line 3, column 769, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...explored areas may lead to environmental In the second place, you also have t...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...onditions, like renewable resources. In conclusion, the foregoing discussion ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, so, therefore, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in other words, in the first place, in the second place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1881.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 349.0 315.596192385 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38968481375 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05224443489 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558739255014 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 586.8 506.74238477 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 20.2975951904 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 64.1750564458 49.4020404114 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.692307692 106.682146367 136% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.8461538462 20.7667163134 129% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.0 7.06120827912 170% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.212838894809 0.244688304435 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0646482006906 0.084324248473 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0548334971339 0.0667982634062 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126336984049 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0584274855064 0.056905535591 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 13.0946893788 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 50.2224549098 73% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 78.4519038076 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.1190380762 123% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.