Q9. With the increasing demand for energy sources of oil and gas, people should look for sources of oil and gas in remote and untouched natural places. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages of damaging such areas?
Recently, the issue of resources has become the subject of heated debate. Some people assert that although there are some disadvantages to developing undamaged areas in order to secure fossil fuels, such as crude oil and gas, these are exceeded by the advantages, while others argue otherwise. Personally, I wholeheartedly agree with the former stance. In the following essay, both views will be discussed before a conclusion is reached with my opinion.
On the one hand, those who claim that exploiting natural spaces so as to acquire fossil fuels should be discouraged do so for several reasons. Proponents of this argument insist that devotion to producing fossil fuel poses a threat to the environment given that being equipped with a multitude of facilities which make it possible for developers to obtain energy sources with greater ease is necessary. In addition, developing natural land without taking into account environmental degradation accelerates the speed of global warming that can even give rise to climate change.
My opinion, however, is that mankind should make use of natural spaces in a bid to create fossil fuels as there are a number of advantages that can be derived from the availability of fossil fuels. Perhaps the principal benefit is that fossil fuels are economical given that generating renewable energy sources, such as solar power and tidal power, costs a fortune. Furthermore, fossil fuels facilitate various aspects of people's daily lives, from commuting to and from work to operating businesses. To provide a hypothetical example, if it were not for making an effort to gain fossil fuels from natural places, human beings would have difficulty having an improved standard of living. In light of the above, I find these more persuasive.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that there are a variety of opinions about this topic. However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, I fully support the view that the benefits of developing natural areas to acquire fossil fuels surpass the drawbacks for the reasons discussed above.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 65, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...ho claim that exploiting natural spaces so as to acquire fossil fuels should be discoura...
^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 127, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a careful manner" with adverb for "careful"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, I fully support the view that the bene...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, so, while, as to, in addition, 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: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1749.0 1615.20841683 108% => OK
No of words: 333.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25225225225 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77985313268 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 176.041082164 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612612612613 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 570.6 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.8154082229 49.4020404114 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.928571429 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7857142857 20.7667163134 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.64285714286 7.06120827912 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => 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: 0.181087200408 0.244688304435 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0504014991883 0.084324248473 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.046460176058 0.0667982634062 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102846521309 0.151304729494 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0349667359565 0.056905535591 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.76 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 78.4519038076 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.