Following are three choices to protect the local environment. Which one do you think is the best and explain why.
1. Plant trees and create gardens
2. Local shops do not provide consumers with plastic bags
3. Take public transportation and reduce the use of private cars on local roads
As the consciousness of environmental conservation has been increasingly raised, people are dedicated to a number of measures to impede our planet from deteriorating. Being a member of global village, I am pro the opinion that planting vegetation is the most effective way to improve this environmental issue.
Admittedly, stop offering plastic bags in stores sounds a reasonable method where consumers could not obtain free plastic bags when they checking out. However, what can those who are still want to use plastic bags do? Would they be tamed to accept without using it anymore? The answer might be skeptical. Plastic bags could be found everywhere and not to mention you can buy it even though there is no free one. For instance, if every grocery store does not provide plastic bags for packaging, they would either purchase zipper bags to keep their food fresh instead or buy garbage bags if they originally using free plastic bags as trash bags. In light of these circumstances, we could not alleviate the ecological pollution efficiently by means of limiting people’s plastic usage.
On the other hand, even though the concept of promoting public transportation in order to decrease the amount of private cars is quite optimal, but it exists some practical issues. The problem we could imagine is how people can withstand a five minutes-drive become a thirty minutes-bus ride when you are rush to get to the school? If you are facing whether to have a cost-effective drive or to have a time-consuming ride but it can save the earth especially when you do not have enough time, I think it is simple to make a choice which is that you would prefer driving a car. In addition, it is ridiculous that you tell those who do already have a car that do not drive it but keep paying registration fee annually. As a result, I do not consider that encouraging taking public transportation is a decent method for resolving environmental destruction.
In contrast, greening our hometowns and cities, from my point of view, is much more effective and feasible than aforementioned means where the reason is that it can be conducted by either individuals or governments without sacrificing a lot of their time and money. In other words, since people could just cost a little money to have some pots of plants and only spend a little time on watering them, they would rather do this than wasting time on bus or living without plastic bags. Furthermore, local governments may promote cities' greening schemes via planting trees and building parks or gardens, which the cost might lesser than constructing infrastructures. Consequently, in view of cost-efficiency of this measure, it would be the most effective way to protect the planet.
In summary, based on the above analysis, despite certain merits of prohibiting plastic bags and supporting public transportation rides, I believe that the best and the most functional approach in terms of ecological conservation is greening the places we are living in.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 190, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'wanted'.
Suggestion: wanted
.... However, what can those who are still want to use plastic bags do? Would they be t...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, furthermore, however, if, may, so, still, for instance, i think, in addition, in contrast, in summary, as a result, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 15.1003584229 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 9.8082437276 184% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 43.0788530466 107% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 52.1666666667 102% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.0752688172 149% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2519.0 1977.66487455 127% => OK
No of words: 500.0 407.700716846 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.038 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72870804502 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99833220308 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 267.0 212.727598566 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.534 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 780.3 618.680645161 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 20.1344086022 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 65.870266181 48.9658058833 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.578947368 100.406767564 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.3157894737 20.6045352989 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.84210526316 5.45110844103 162% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 11.8709677419 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.88709677419 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.208394460507 0.236089414692 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0600427343815 0.076458572812 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0451755152436 0.0737576698707 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0956109427993 0.150856017488 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0445947867275 0.0645574589148 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 11.7677419355 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 58.1214874552 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.1575268817 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 10.9000537634 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 86.8835125448 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.0537634409 123% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.