The international community must act immediately to ensure all nations reduce the consumption of fossil fuel (gas and oil). To what extent do you agree or disagree?
To decrease the use of fossil fuel (gas and oil), in different nations, communities all over the world must act promptly. I strongly agree with this opinion and feel that consumption of fossil should be reduced.
Firstly, extracting fossil fuels like gas and oil is a very challenging process. It uses various number of resources which include heavy machinery and labours. Another reason is that, extraction involves millions of dollars to be spent initially to set up equipment. It also has a very severe impact on the health of labours who work under such circumstances. For example, many labours working at a boring site to extract oil were killed because of collapse of bored hole due to lack of support structure. Therefore, extracting fossil fuel is a deadly process especially if safety measures are not taken.
Moreover, extracting from the ground or sea means destruction of natural environment. It often leads to cutting of trees or destruction of aquatic plants and animals which ultimately creates pollution problems on ground or in sea. It also destroys the shelter of many deep sea animals. Take Arabian Sea, for instance, where lots of flora and fauna was destroyed due to spillage of oil which was being taken to boring site in sea. Thus, this should be reduced to preserve the environment from pollution and ultimate destruction.
In Conclusion, reducing the consumption of fossil fuel will not only save resources but it will also save the environment from destruction. Hence, I strongly feel that the use of fossil fuel should be made limited in order to save it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 606, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ially if safety measures are not taken. Moreover, extracting from the ground or ...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 325, Rule ID: LOTS_OF_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun flora seems to be countable; consider using: 'lots of florae', 'lots of floras'.
Suggestion: lots of florae; lots of floras
.... Take Arabian Sea, for instance, where lots of flora and fauna was destroyed due to spillage...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, moreover, so, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1328.0 1615.20841683 82% => OK
No of words: 264.0 315.596192385 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0303030303 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75644124181 2.80592935109 98% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 176.041082164 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.602272727273 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 408.6 506.74238477 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => 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: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 26.9844399608 49.4020404114 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 88.5333333333 106.682146367 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6 20.7667163134 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.26666666667 7.06120827912 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.182361113022 0.244688304435 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0620028776445 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0826568640427 0.0667982634062 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.134683194329 0.151304729494 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106468731963 0.056905535591 187% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.0946893788 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 50.2224549098 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.3001002004 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.4159519038 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 78.4519038076 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 9.78957915832 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.