Undoubtedly, energy sources are one of the most important issues for human beings because our survival and prosperity closely depend on them. To tackle the insufficiency of energy, it is suggested that exploiting oil and gas in remote places should be taken into consideration. However, I believe that it is not what we are supposed to do.
In many cases, remote areas which have not been inhabited by a large number of people tend to be rich in natural resources, including energy resources like oil and gas. Therefore, extracting oil and gas at these places would be extremely profitable economically, let alone extend the supply of energy for many decades or even centuries. For example, due to the huge profits, many energy companies have already built facilities and factories in Alaska in order to make use of its abundant oil resources there. Practices like this, which result in millions of dollars’ revenue and stabilize the energy market, is not uncommon throughout the world.
However, on the other hand, environmentalists are worried that projects intended for energy extraction may damage the ecology of precious natural reserves. Irreversible consequences or even ecological disasters may occur, given that large-scale industrial activities will completely alter an area. Take some offshore oil platforms for example, there has been many reports on the oil spills which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of marine animals as well as severe pollution of vast waters and coasts. Needless to say, it would take years to restore the whole ecosystem or it might be impossible to fix the detrimental effects.
In my opinion, energy resources are not worth sacrificing the nature because we might be living in a heavily polluted world without natural scenery and wildlife.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 62, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
... areas which have not been inhabited by a large number of people tend to be rich in natural resou...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, may, so, therefore, well, for example, as well as, in many cases, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 41.998997996 90% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1511.0 1615.20841683 94% => OK
No of words: 289.0 315.596192385 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22837370242 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86725338752 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.629757785467 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 496.8 506.74238477 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.3971898077 49.4020404114 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.916666667 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0833333333 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.25 7.06120827912 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.278605331154 0.244688304435 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0912985170177 0.084324248473 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0671503642122 0.0667982634062 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150243359022 0.151304729494 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0876241900035 0.056905535591 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.35 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.8 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 78.4519038076 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.