Generally speaking, cars are one of the inevitable aspects of modern world. It's not even conceivable the world with no cars in status quo. However, inventing the car is one of the most foremost human achievements but still there is some refutes about the pernicious influence of cars on the environment. The proponents of environment gather annually to protest about disadvantages of cars to reduce the number of vehicles. But in my perspective, there will be more cars in use in future beside all of the current demonstrations and condemns for the following reasons.
First of all, the electric cars will change the environmentalists view about cars. However, there is still a long road ahead to make a perfect electric car, and these vehicles have a lot of flaws right now. For example, they cant move fast enough or their batteries only can produce energy for a limited time. But these vehicles can change everything, for instance, imagine a world with electric cars. There is no trace of the air pollution and not only improve our environment status like global warming, but also it helps to maintain fossil fuels in an efficient way instead of consuming in cars.
Secondly, in future, each person needs a vehicle and it's inevitable parts of societies. Maybe, it seems a bit fiction to talk about flying cars but in future mankind has a faster routine life and its essential. According to news, scientists are striving for it even now and one day we will watch the first flying vehicle like many breakthrough ideas before, for instance, once sending humankind to mars or making the submarine and conquer the deep dark waters in the oceans were dreams, but we achieved it. In a world with overwhelming of information and interminable fast communications, we need to make an enormous number of fast vehicles to satisfy the urgent needs of mankind in future.
So based on all points mentioned above we need fewer cars in future, but it requires diligent and unstoppable strive for achieving flawless cars in which, not only they are fast and reliable but also using electric force as main fuel and it's not a threat to our environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 495, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...ll be more cars in use in future beside all of the current demonstrations and condemns for...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 226, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...t of flaws right now. For example, they cant move fast enough or their batteries onl...
^^^^
Line 3, column 550, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an efficient way" with adverb for "efficient"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... also it helps to maintain fossil fuels in an efficient way instead of consuming in cars. Second...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 11, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...tead of consuming in cars. Secondly, in future, each person needs a vehicle and its in...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 681, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
... to satisfy the urgent needs of mankind in future. So based on all points mentioned ab...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 59, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...ints mentioned above we need fewer cars in future, but it requires diligent and unstoppab...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, for example, for instance, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 15.1003584229 60% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 11.0286738351 9% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 43.0788530466 49% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 52.1666666667 102% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1780.0 1977.66487455 90% => OK
No of words: 365.0 407.700716846 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.87671232877 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.48103885553 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77764985423 2.67179642975 104% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 212.727598566 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.545205479452 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 563.4 618.680645161 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.86738351254 321% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6003584229 73% => 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: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.8038346998 48.9658058833 138% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.666666667 100.406767564 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 20.6045352989 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.93333333333 5.45110844103 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.5376344086 108% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.128818722458 0.236089414692 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0490617864728 0.076458572812 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0457882170494 0.0737576698707 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0865388924951 0.150856017488 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524578209427 0.0645574589148 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 11.7677419355 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 58.1214874552 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 10.9000537634 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 86.8835125448 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => 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: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.