The rising levels of congestion and air pollution found in most of the world cities can be attributed directly to the rapidly increasing number of private cars in use. In order to reverse this decline in quality of life in cities, attempts must be made to encourage people to use their cars less and public transport more. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Traffic congestion and air pollution are the consequences of massive volumes of private vehicles in megacities or urban areas. I completely agree with this statement and governments should invest more in public transportation in lieu of private cars to alleviate arising issues.
First and foremost, concentrating on the public transport system could ease volumes of traffic congestion, especially during rush hours. As a result, it is a great alternative for people because more space on road helps people easily commute to work or study by bus or train. Consequently, public transport like buses and metros can address the gridlocks because a large number of urban inhabitants could travel a long distance at the same time. For instance, in Japan, most of them use buses and trains, which are the major vehicles as a daily habit can carry more passengers and space. It is an effective way to alleviate collisions and traffic jams.
Nevertheless, private cars or automatics contribute most to the rising amount of carbon dioxide and other contaminated emissions into the air. Unless people use public transportation, they can suffer from health problems such as heart attacks, and hard breathing. Alternatively, if people choose metros or buses to travel, they consequently put a cap on harmful emissions as there will be a great reduction in the number of vehicles flowing on the roads. For example, Sun has changed its color to purple which is alarming for people to use public transport.
In conclusion, funding in public systems is a key factor contributing to the reduction in car users and harmful smoke emitted.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 363, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...etros can address the gridlocks because a large number of urban inhabitants could travel a long d...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, if, nevertheless, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 8.0 24.0651302605 33% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1360.0 1615.20841683 84% => OK
No of words: 263.0 315.596192385 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1711026616 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94771725176 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 176.041082164 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.608365019011 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 426.6 506.74238477 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.3181051519 49.4020404114 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.333333333 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9166666667 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.83333333333 7.06120827912 125% => 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 : 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: 0.131535789947 0.244688304435 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0472773577784 0.084324248473 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0404174415792 0.0667982634062 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0787454312351 0.151304729494 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.044240585527 0.056905535591 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.0946893788 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 50.2224549098 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.94 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 78.4519038076 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => 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.