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 no doubt to say that the large amount of vehicles has caused serious troubles to the traffic and the environment, which leads to different solutions for this problem. While many people say that raising the petrol’s cost is the most efficient way for this dilemma, I believe that more solutions should be applied to solve the problem.
The major explanation for the rise of traffic and emissions is the expansion of private automobiles such as cars, motorbikes. Therefore, rising gas rates appears to be an effective way to fix this, but in fact, this effect is unlikely to reduce long-term driver numbers. Furthermore, this solution would also impact the public transit costs, which will have adverse effects for many people, especially the poor. However, there are various approaches can contribute to dealing with the rise of traffic and environment corruption.
In terms of the environment, cleaner fuels are the perfect choice for tackling the problem. Numerous technology companies are already producing environmentally-friendly vehicles. Tesla's electric car is a typical automobile can be named out since its performance can be compared with a car using gasoline, and it produces less noise and no emissions. Thus, the way an electric car is used is similar to using a conventional car, meaning that everybody can quickly embrace this revolutionary technology without any difficulty.
However, solving traffic congestion is more complicate than the environment, and the most realistic approach is persuading people of changing the transport mode, from private automobile to public transits. People, for example, can travel by commuter bus or city train rather than using private vehicles as they were designed to travel a long distance and carry a large number of passengers. Furthermore, people can save a great amount of money for fuel since it costs a few money.
In conclusion, raising the gasoline’s expenditure is not an effective means of minimizing the road congestion and pollution in the long term, and the means we move from conventional car to hybrid car and public transports should be modified.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 361, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...ned to travel a long distance and carry a large number of passengers. Furthermore, people can sav...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 468, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'few money'.
Suggestion: few money
...amount of money for fuel since it costs a few money. In conclusion, raising the gasoline’s...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 470, Rule ID: MANY_FEW_UNCOUNTABLE[2]
Message: Use 'much' or 'little' with uncountable nouns.
Suggestion: much; little
...ount of money for fuel since it costs a few money. In conclusion, raising the gaso...
^^^
Line 4, column 470, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[6]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun money seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'little money'.
Suggestion: little money
...ount of money for fuel since it costs a few money. In conclusion, raising the gasoline’s...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, no doubt, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 13.1623246493 144% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1795.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 339.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29498525074 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29091512845 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03864305353 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 176.041082164 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.566371681416 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 560.7 506.74238477 111% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.6916875803 49.4020404114 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.214285714 106.682146367 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2142857143 20.7667163134 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 7.06120827912 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => 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: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0964290188964 0.244688304435 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0350700657448 0.084324248473 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0298450027626 0.0667982634062 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0576671516787 0.151304729494 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0275230551487 0.056905535591 48% => 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: 15.6 13.0946893788 119% => 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: 13.7 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 78.4519038076 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.