The best way to solve the world’s environmental problems to increase the costs of fuels. Do you agree or disagree?
Environmental issues are now becoming global concerns. Some people believe that an increase in fuel price is the best solution to reduce those problems. However, I am of the opinion that there are particular measures would be more effective than raising fuel costs.
It is a fallacy to consider high fuel costs as the best way to tackle environmental problem. Advocates of such a perception tend to claim that heightening fuel prices would lead to a decrease in the amount of fuel consumption for transportation and production resulting in reducing carbon dioxide emission and toxic air pollutants from vehicles and factories which are likely to be the main causes of greenhouse effect and global warming. However, such a scenario would not happen since using fuel terms to be a deep-rooted practice of human, which could be clearly seen that most vehicles in the world use fuels as the main source of energy. Furthermore, this solution may not only have no positive impact on the global environmental condition but also cause a counter-effects on the world’s economy. Therefore, applying a higher fuel price should not be regarded as the most practical solution.
In my point of view, some feasible measures could be taken to handle our environmental issues. Firstly, the governments should introduce laws as well as organize campaigns to encourage their citizens to use public transportation which may directly reduce the amount of smoke released from private cars and motorbikes. Besides, every country should have its public transportation improved to promote such a type of eco-friendly commuting mode. Secondly, an immense investment in renewable sources to reduce the cost of these types of power would switch people’s habit to use alternative energy instead of fossil fuels. Compared to such an inefficient measure like heightening fuel costs, those solutions tend to be more practical and sustainable to tackle environmental issues.
In conclusion, high fuel cost could not be considered as the most feasible method to solve environmental issues as other measures are likely to be more practical and sustainable.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, in conclusion, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1799.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 338.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3224852071 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04639641936 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556213017751 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 569.7 506.74238477 112% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 71.5346711999 49.4020404114 145% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.5 106.682146367 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1428571429 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.07142857143 7.06120827912 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.135800061206 0.244688304435 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0572935149072 0.084324248473 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0707224836387 0.0667982634062 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0868787488945 0.151304729494 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0157593933662 0.056905535591 28% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 13.0946893788 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.31 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 78.4519038076 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.