More cars and traffic on the road. This causes traffic jams and excessive pollution. People suggest that one way to solve this issue is to increase the price of fuel.
As the economies improve and life standards increase, our roads see more cars and traffic. This causes traffic jams and excessive pollution. Some people have suggested that one way to solve this issue is to increase the price of fuel. In this essay I will discuss why I agree with this and what are some other solutions that might be helpful.
Part of the reason why we are seeing a surge in vehicle ownership is low petrol prices, so hiking up the prices might do us some good. First benefit is that it will force people to look for alternative transportation. Since combustion engines will no longer be economically viable, this will lead to people purchasing electric vehicles that are subsidized by the government. People might also start using public transport, as trials in Europe has shown. The second benefit would be that commercial travel industry will be forced to rethink their business model. Since profits matter, the busses and coach companies may start looking into cheaper and cleaner energy sources for their vehicles.
Although making the fossil fuel more expensive is a good option, it’s not the only solution. Some other steps could also be taken such as making the clean energy cheaper and making it more efficient. Environmental friendly energy sources could be made cheaper by providing subsidies, as is done by US and UK. By doing so, these countries have seen a decline in the traditional cars and an increase in public transport usage. Secondly, we need to make cleaner energy as efficient as petrol. If it takes people the same time to charge their car battery as it does to fill up a petrol tank, they will have less qualms about choosing electric cars. Both of these option will hopefully make our roads a little less congested and improve our air quality.
In conclusion, although rising prices of fuel may seem like a simple measure, I think it can have a significant positive impact. Other than that, making sure that clean energy is cheap and efficient will also help curb the problems of traffic and pollution.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 604, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun qualms is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...o fill up a petrol tank, they will have less qualms about choosing electric cars. Bo...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, i think, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 7.85571142285 229% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 24.0651302605 141% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1709.0 1615.20841683 106% => OK
No of words: 350.0 315.596192385 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88285714286 5.12529762239 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32530772707 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48329110132 2.80592935109 89% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577142857143 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 528.3 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.10420841683 380% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 27.3018420938 49.4020404114 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 89.9473684211 106.682146367 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4210526316 20.7667163134 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.26315789474 7.06120827912 60% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.67935871743 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.275143858572 0.244688304435 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.091498871027 0.084324248473 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.136794868571 0.0667982634062 205% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.200432955993 0.151304729494 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.223968623279 0.056905535591 394% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 13.0946893788 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 50.2224549098 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.3001002004 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 12.4159519038 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.58950901804 96% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.