Some people think international car-free days are an effective way of reducing air pollution, others think there are some other ways. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Environmental issues are inevitable issues that many countries are struggling to combat. When it comes to air pollution, car-free days are considered effective in reducing the pollution level, whereas others claim that there are other alternative solutions. I will discuss both of these views, and express my opinion.
On the one hand, imposing some days without cars could exert positive influences on some aspects. Thanks to the absence of cars, the volume of traffic would be reduced, allevitating the problems caused by traffic congestion and the pressure put on the infrastructure where traffic tailback usually occurs. As a consequence, a considerable amount of pollutants emitted by vehicles such as carbon dioxide would be eliminated, provoking the amelioration in the air quality. Not a long-term policy, car-free days could raise residents’ awareness of the detrimental impact of unbridled use of cars on the environment. Therefore, this policy not only stimulates residents to find alternatives vehicles to commute as opposed to cars, but the need to protect the environment would be attached more importance as well.
On the other hand, there are other courses of action to combat air pollution. Firstly, the use of public transport could be encouraged. Expanding and upgrading public transport provision would attract more citizens to make use of this system instead of individual vehicles, and also offer an opportunity to rural residents, who rarely have access to the system. In Korea, for example, the residents commute to mostly by subway thanks to its convenience. Secondly, the authority could galvanize its inhabitants to commute by such alternatives as bicycles and by foot when in short distance. This could be done by constructing separate lanes, making the inhabitants feel safe when traveling.
In conclusion, while discouraging cars in certain days could be a way to alleviate the air pollution, I think imposing long-term solutions is of prime importance.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, whereas, while, for example, i think, in conclusion, in short, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1682.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 309.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44336569579 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06411827652 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.585760517799 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 537.3 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.6753579327 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.133333333 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6 20.7667163134 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3333333333 7.06120827912 146% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.23106574028 0.244688304435 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0700233606643 0.084324248473 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0869396558653 0.0667982634062 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.146605627787 0.151304729494 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0739279966219 0.056905535591 130% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.05 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 78.4519038076 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.