In modern days, one of the controversial changes related to an increase of issues in the habitat we live in. Although some people tend to believe that such problems need to be solved nationally, the rest of them think that each country should tackle these problems themselves. In this essay, I am going to examine from both sides of view and represent a conclusion.
On one side of the argument, there are people who claim that solving environmental issues locally has a benefit of fast to react to suddenly occurred problems. The primary reason for believing this is that tsunamis, flames, and earthquakes require a high quality of prevention. It is also possible to argue that using a method that requires a certain time such as the help of other nations is no need for these situations. One important illustration of this is in the US in 2015 much amount of flame brought many destructions for short term time. In this case, waiting for help from other nations is meaningless.
On the other hand, it is argued that some such problems as warming and waste are growing throughout the world, which required the aid of many countries. People often have this opinion because one specific nation's budget and workforce are not sufficient to tackle surrounding problems but other countries can help to solve economical problems by finance and experts. A particularly good example is here is that research, in 2015, about garbage show that because waste that is polluting the sea is increasing day by day, agreement of recycling waste is made by 31 nations.
In conclusion, as we have seen, this question is uneasy to discuss. On balance, however, I tend to believe that suddenly environmental problems need to be solved locally and issues with a wide range should be tackled nationally.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 205, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'nations'' or 'nation's'?
Suggestion: nations'; nation's
... have this opinion because one specific nations budget and workforce are not sufficient...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1414.0 1615.20841683 88% => OK
No of words: 290.0 315.596192385 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.87586206897 5.12529762239 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75425516646 2.80592935109 98% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.568965517241 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 437.4 506.74238477 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.1496899713 49.4020404114 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.769230769 106.682146367 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3076923077 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.92307692308 7.06120827912 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
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: 0.248320624779 0.244688304435 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0780717073482 0.084324248473 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0957788358029 0.0667982634062 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158691420787 0.151304729494 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0879004817557 0.056905535591 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.0946893788 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 50.2224549098 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.4159519038 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.58950901804 100% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 78.4519038076 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.