Recently, the traffic congestion and environmental problems have become the hottest issue worldwide. Some people support the idea that the increase of gas prices could be the solution to tackle these problems. Personally, I think the it could be but there are many more effective methods to solve the problems of traffic jams and severe environmental pollution.
To begin with, I think the increasing price of gasoline would be a short-sighted method which just scratched the surface and cannot solve the problem in the long run. Because of expensive gas, people with impoverished background might give up using cars, but the rich still continues to drive. In other words, the way of increasing price of petrol merely affects a small group of people who can’t afford them. Therefore, the problems of pollution and traffic congestion will not be radically resolved.
In my views, there are several effective methods which could be used to solve the problems of pollution and traffic jams. One of the best ways is to invest in public infrastructure such as widening the road and developing means of public transportations. Because the efficiency of public transportations could benefit all residents. For example, Shang Hai, one of the largest cities in China, with nearly 23 million population, it has the most effective public metro system which helps the city reduce the traffic and pollution problem largely, while most locals would like travel by metro rather than their private cars regardless of their income. Additionally, the way of encouraging people to use cars with green energy is also very effective. In Shen Zheng, government subsidised citizens who purchase or use electric vehicles and the governments also granted taxi drivers further tax cuts if the drivers would use electric automobiles. By doing this, the air condition of Shen Zhen has improved a lot.
In conclusion, there is a long way for people to solve the problems of traffic and pollution problems, but the government should implement more considerate methods such as development of public transportations and encouraging the use of vehicles with newly developed energy other than merely the increase of gas price.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, if, so, still, while, for example, i think, in conclusion, such as, in my view, in other words, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 10.4138276553 173% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => 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: 2029.0 1615.20841683 126% => OK
No of words: 393.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16284987277 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7893101452 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.503816793893 0.561755894193 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 629.1 506.74238477 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => 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: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 73.5682384884 49.4020404114 149% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.928571429 106.682146367 136% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.0714285714 20.7667163134 135% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.21428571429 7.06120827912 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.221985026879 0.244688304435 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0830869073644 0.084324248473 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0575119450264 0.0667982634062 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154176144607 0.151304729494 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.030883716149 0.056905535591 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 13.0946893788 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 50.2224549098 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.58950901804 97% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 78.4519038076 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 9.78957915832 184% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.