The government can take a variety of actions to help protect the environment. Which of the following do you think is the most important one that a government should take to protect the environment:
1 Fund the research to develop environmentally friendly energy sources such as solar and wind energy.
2 Preserve the natural places like forests and protect the animals that live there.
3 Enforce laws to prevent the pollution of air and water caused by large companies.
Some people think that funding researches to develop environmentally friendly energy sources is the most ideal way to help protect the environment. Others claim that preserving natural places and animals that live there is better. Sill, others maintain that enforcing laws to prevent the air and water pollution caused by large corporations is a more favorable approach. As far as I am concerned, I believe that
To begin with, governments usually care about efficiency, and enforcing laws to prevent the pollution of air and water can help governments become more efficient in terms of preserving the environment. Take the Taipei City government as an example. Five years ago, the Taipei City government enacted decrees that imposed exceptionally strict fines on several chemistry factories which dumped waste chemicals into rivers in Taipei. Similarly, the government taxed car factories every month for emitting waste gases. Consequently, corporations were always afraid of losing too much money, so they decided to revise the technology and reduce the amount of waste gas and chemicals produced. In only two months, the air quality improved significantly, and most rivers in Taipei became clean and clear again due to the reduced number of toxic chemicals. On the other hand, the Chiayi County government planned to preserve the Alishan National Park by planting native trees and introducing native species to the region. Nevertheless, it took the animals and plants more than 15 years to grow, so the environment is not significantly improved after the plan is implemented. Evidently, preserving natural resources is not an efficient approach to protecting the environment.
In addition, governments are exceptionally concerned about saving budgets. Nevertheless, funding research might make the government spend too much money. For example, the Taichung City government spent more than 500 million dollars annually assisting National Chong-Yang University in conducting solar energy research. What's more, the government disbursed a hundred million dollars per month for hiring prestigious researchers and professors in Taiwan. Eventually, nearly 20% of the total budgets were spent on the research. Contrarily, the Kaohsiung City government decided to tax electrical engineering corporations that emitted too much carbon dioxides and methanes. Therefore, all the government needed to do is let lawmakers agree on how much money should be imposed. Also, the government only allocated 1 million dollars asking ecology experts and economy researchers to debate how the details of such a regulation. Consequently, the government only allocated 0.1% of its total wherewithal to implement the regulation. Apparently, enforcing laws and regulations is a more preferable approach because it prevents the government from wasting too many resources.
In conclusion, I maintain that the government should enforce laws to prevent pollutions caused by large corporations due to the aforementioned reasons. After all, the government usually place an emphasis on its efficiency as well as saving budgets.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 412, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...As far as I am concerned, I believe that To begin with, governments usually care ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 320, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
...ty in conducting solar energy research. Whats more, the government disbursed a hundre...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, consequently, if, nevertheless, similarly, so, therefore, well, after all, for example, in addition, in conclusion, as well as, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 9.8082437276 41% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 13.8261648746 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 43.0788530466 37% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 52.1666666667 92% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 8.0752688172 297% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2639.0 1977.66487455 133% => OK
No of words: 466.0 407.700716846 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.66309012876 4.8611393121 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64618479453 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06989756034 2.67179642975 115% => OK
Unique words: 256.0 212.727598566 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.549356223176 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 814.5 618.680645161 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 3.08781362007 324% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.4207901463 48.9658058833 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.958333333 100.406767564 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4166666667 20.6045352989 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.41666666667 5.45110844103 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.259517886562 0.236089414692 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.07078408476 0.076458572812 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0612447485857 0.0737576698707 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145173665067 0.150856017488 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0333670778408 0.0645574589148 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 11.7677419355 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 58.1214874552 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 10.9000537634 143% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.32 8.01818996416 116% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 86.8835125448 161% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => 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: 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.