Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The environmental issue is too complex to be handled by the individual.
Nowadays, environmental problems in every country are a critical and serious matter of concern as if they are not solved, the future generation will suffer from the consequences of them. A controversial argument that is often raised regarding this topic is whether the individual is enough to overcome the difficulties concerns the environment or not. If I were obliged to answer, I would think that these issues are so elaborate that no person alone can handle the situation for several reasons, on a few of which I will elaborate on consequently.
The first imperative reason is that many environmental issues are required universal cooperation, like global warming, deforestation and so forth. Never can an individual prevent these problems' progression as they need every human beings' effort to solve these disasters. One can try his best to inhibit some problems to happen like riding or walking to his work instead of using a private car to help to reduce the greenhouse effect that the gasses emitted from the cars have, but conspicuously it is not enough. My country is a compelling example to clarify this issue. I live in Tehran, one of the most polluted cities in Iran. The air pollution level is always placed in a perilous place. I use public transportation to avoid adding to the gasses that are the cause of air pollution, however, it is crystal clear that it will not have any effect if the government does not regulate or establish any rule to not let others pollute it. Hence, Tehran is at a dangerous point although I avoid any activity to further pollute it.
The second reason corroborating my view is that one's knowledge might be limited as environmental problems are too complex that need professional ways to handle them. Also, this complexity can confuse that person so he makes a disastrous decision since his information about that concept is not broad enough. My personal experience can shed light on this issue. There is no doubt that humans will die out if the drinkable water level continues to descend. I am a professor at the Amirkabir University of Technology and my field of interest is providing drinkable water out of ocean water. Two years ago, I heard about a project which used an especial kind of algae to eliminate undesirable particles from the water. At first glance, it seemed like a brilliant idea, but I knew that these algae secrete a toxic material that is harmful to humans to consume. The head of that project did not think of the unwanted products that these algae could produce. had I not figured out about the method that project used, they might have killed many people.
To sum it up, I strongly believe that environmental problems are not something that the individual overcome. This is because not only do they need a considerable number of people to work together, but also a professional observation to prevent further mistakes.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 185, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'problems'' or 'problem's'?
Suggestion: problems'; problem's
.... Never can an individual prevent these problems progression as they need every human be...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 231, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'beings'' or 'being's'?
Suggestion: beings'; being's
...ms progression as they need every human beings effort to solve these disasters. One ca...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 952, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Had
...roducts that these algae could produce. had I not figured out about the method that...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, however, if, regarding, second, so, kind of, no doubt
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 15.1003584229 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 9.8082437276 163% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 13.8261648746 65% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 11.0286738351 190% => OK
Pronoun: 61.0 43.0788530466 142% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 59.0 52.1666666667 113% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.0752688172 161% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2400.0 1977.66487455 121% => OK
No of words: 491.0 407.700716846 120% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88798370672 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70728369723 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82461596928 2.67179642975 106% => OK
Unique words: 261.0 212.727598566 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.531568228106 0.524837075471 101% => OK
syllable_count: 786.6 618.680645161 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 9.59856630824 135% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.7775683673 48.9658058833 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.090909091 100.406767564 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3181818182 20.6045352989 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.18181818182 5.45110844103 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 3.85842293907 363% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.107665682083 0.236089414692 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0280364360026 0.076458572812 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0447479205183 0.0737576698707 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0683054391765 0.150856017488 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0152761869965 0.0645574589148 24% => 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: 12.8 11.7677419355 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 10.9000537634 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.01818996416 111% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 86.8835125448 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.002688172 155% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.