Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve growing traffic and pollution problems.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
What other measures do you think might be effective?
There is a widespread idea that the disposal for traffic and environmental issues should be surging the cost or fuel, petrol in particularly. Apparently, it will exert huge impacts on every dimension of people lives so that the privileged authorities have to take into account before any offers. This will provide evidences to support my disagreement on this viewpoint.
First of all, growing traffic and pollution are the upper most problems that governments are confronting, they require imminent, effective resolutions as well as not causing any repercussions. Definitely, in economic field, it is needed to attain the unanimous commitment among nations so that the taken steps related to the price of petrol will not lead to the recession. It should become a big burden for under developed countries since the fuel not only play a critical role in transports but also in industrial activities. Another reason is that implementing this solution just tackle a little part of the pollution situation all over the world nowadays. A great amount of issues such as contaminated water or greenhouse effects can still exist if governments only increase the cost of this resources. Therefore, by this way. it is not the best idea to solve either the heavy traffic or environmental problems as regarded.
On the other hand, climbing population is ascribed to be the main factor for both issues; hence, the viable measures that should be conducted would be raising citizens' conceive and knowledge. All people need propagating and educating about commuting by public transports and not using the private vehicles if unnecessary in order to reduce emission gases as well as the amount of transport means on the street. Each countries also had better offer incentive for their residents to utilise alternative energy rather than fuel energy.
Having manifested through aforementioned opinion, it is not a suitable disposal to tackle growing traffic and pollution by increasing the price of petrol. However, governments should put more attention on the human awareness of using this fuel resource.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 791, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...f governments only increase the cost of this resources. Therefore, by this way. it i...
^^^^
Line 5, column 831, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...this resources. Therefore, by this way. it is not the best idea to solve either th...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, first, hence, however, if, so, still, therefore, well, in fact, in particular, such as, as well as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1769.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 333.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31231231231 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92847149801 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.603603603604 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 555.3 506.74238477 110% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.8104724646 49.4020404114 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.933333333 106.682146367 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.2666666667 7.06120827912 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.144512515475 0.244688304435 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0475752810939 0.084324248473 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0503826632374 0.0667982634062 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0854096955476 0.151304729494 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0363342579584 0.056905535591 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.0946893788 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.4159519038 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.56 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.