The most effective way to solve the current traffic and pollution problems in cities is to encourage people to move from the suburbs or the countryside into the city centre. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Traffic and pollution-related issues have been cited as one of the most complicated issues that require governments to impose strict measures to address. While it is believed that stimulating the influx of rural citizens to the innermost metropolitan areas is the ultimate solution to tackle the described problems above, I completely disagree with this view.
On the one hand, the mentioned scheme above will deteriorate the existing gridlocked rush-hours traffic and pollution-related problems. Indeed, immigration will contribute to explosive growth in the number of city dwellers whose private cars will exert severe pressure on road capacity. Take Bangkok as a prime example, the year-on-year soar in the number of cars stemmed from immigrated rural citizens is exacerbating bottlenecks in the city centre, which forms a lengthy queue of cars at peak hours. Additionally, the migration of rural people to urban areas will exert detrimental impacts on the environment, especially air quality. The demand for car ownership of these people will put air quality at high risks of being severely polluted since the fossil fuels burning of private cars is likely to worsen air pollution, the main contributor to climate change.
On the other hand, motivating rural citizens to urban areas might urge the government to embark on different schemes to enhance traffic infrastructure. In practice, yearly road expansion projects are implemented in developing countries to alleviate traffic congestion as well as traffic collisions triggered by the excessive increase in the number of suburbs citizens whose private cars will overwhelm road capacity. In tandem with this, the government might encourage commuters to use public transports, including sky trains and underground trains once immigration is encouraged, which will mitigate air pollution.
In conclusion, I am not in favour of stimulating people from the countryside as well as suburbs to the innermost urban areas to tackle traffic and pollution-related problems though this scheme might bring about several advantages.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... which will mitigate air pollution. In conclusion, I am not in favour of stimu...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, well, while, as to, in conclusion, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 24.0651302605 37% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1771.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 315.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62222222222 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1283874057 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 176.041082164 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565079365079 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 552.6 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 42.7174069848 49.4020404114 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 161.0 106.682146367 151% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.6363636364 20.7667163134 138% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06120827912 99% => 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: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.144464445141 0.244688304435 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.054959290378 0.084324248473 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0368322170747 0.0667982634062 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0972414097247 0.151304729494 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0383911936178 0.056905535591 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.4 13.0946893788 148% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 26.14 50.2224549098 52% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 11.3001002004 147% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.91 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.24 8.58950901804 119% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.