In modern times, living in a city is associated with congestion and air pollution. To tackle these problems, many feel that governments should take measures related to the rise of petrol prices. In this essay I will explain the reasons why I disagree with such a policy, and I will present alternative ways to deal with traffic jams and environmental issues.
Increasing the price of petrol is not an appropriate way to mitigate the traffic and pollution, especially in city centres. One main reason is that similar measures have been introduced in the past but interestingly failed. In Sweden, for instance, the implementation of such a policy ended up with higher income for the petrol companies. Historically, it was not a deterrent for people in order not to use their own cars and commute by public transportation instead. Individuals, however, long preferred pay more in petrol but enjoy the convenience of travelling by car or airplane, which both operate with fuel. Clearly, a significant rise in petrol prices in the past has shown that it did not encourage people to eliminate the use of means of transportation that are linked to pollution and traffic.
By contrast, there are more effective ways to cope with these problems, including the implementation of green taxes and limits to the use of cars in the city centres. Indeed, introducing environmental taxes would be a key tool for moving towards a decarbonized economy. Australia, for example, has implemented these taxes in the emissions of nitrogen dioxide which are produced, above all, by combustion vehicles. In addition to the green taxes, another efficient measure should be the allowance in the use of cars in the city centres during specific hours each day, aiming to decongest the cities from vehicles and air pollution. A good example is the law of the Athens Ring, in Greece; this is an area in the central Athens controlled by an odd/even system, originally designed to control traffic congestion in the capital of Greece.
In conclusion, while there are some who feel that the more expensive the price of petrol, the less traffic and pollution, I am of the view that such measures have already failed in the past. Governments though should implement more appropriate ways to mitigate traffic congestion and pollution, like the green taxes and elimination in the use of cars in the city centres.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 110, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun feel seems to be countable; consider using: 'many feels'.
Suggestion: many feels
...ir pollution. To tackle these problems, many feel that governments should take measures r...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, then, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 41.998997996 162% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 8.3376753507 240% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1990.0 1615.20841683 123% => OK
No of words: 395.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03797468354 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45809453852 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92739027872 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.508860759494 0.561755894193 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 636.3 506.74238477 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.76152304609 231% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.7055077256 49.4020404114 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.375 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6875 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 7.06120827912 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.122040473775 0.244688304435 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0433637509206 0.084324248473 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0396611475257 0.0667982634062 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0804058204312 0.151304729494 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0229620468919 0.056905535591 40% => 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: 14.7 13.0946893788 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.4159519038 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.