Many people maintain that economic development should be slowed down so as not to harm the environment. Do you agree or disagree?
Both economic development and environmental protection are imperative for human society. This will raise the question of whether economic development should be slowed down so as not to harm the environment. I disagree with the statement.
First of all, we could keep developing the economy and establish some environmental protection regulations at the same time. Take Hsinchu city as an example. Decades ago, Hsinchu city was a rural and destitute area but its environment wasn’t heavily polluted yet. In the 1970s, the Taiwanese central government decided to introduce the semiconductor industry into this city. With this policy, a good deal of high-tech enterprises thrived, such as TSMS and Media Tek, which were top-notch businesses in the world. However, these corporations would also pose a series of pollution, like air pollution or metal pollution. Thus, the local government chose to cooperate with these companies to set some environmental protection laws, such as the carbon dioxide emission law. With these efforts, the local government could boost its economic advancement and improve the environmental issues concurrently. In contrast, if the government hadn’t chosen to collaborate with these companies, the complicated situation might not have been resolved.
Second, we could encourage a few big-scale corporations to invest some funds in bettering the pollution problems. Taipei city will be a suitable instance. In the 1980s, many diverse types of software enterprises were created, like Synology, and it prompted the regional economy to flourish at a fast rate. However, these companies would utilize lots of electricity from the Taipei power plant. With the fuel consumption, these institutes would cause some extremely serious environmental damages, such as air pollution, which could be examined through PM2.5. Thus, the local government demanded these businesses to supply some capital to deal with this trouble. Along with these appropriate means, air pollution could be under control gradually. By contrast, if the enterprises hadn’t decided to participate in these public issues, the environmental problems might not have been tackled properly.
To sum up, these are the two reasons why I disagree with the statement. On one hand, we could develop the economy and protect the environment at the same time by establishing some regulations. On the other hand, we could also give financial support to cope with environmental issues.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 106, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; the question whether
...tive for human society. This will raise the question of whether economic development should be slowed d...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, so, thus, in contrast, such as, first of all, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 15.1003584229 73% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 9.8082437276 153% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 11.0286738351 18% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 43.0788530466 53% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 52.1666666667 94% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 8.0752688172 322% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2098.0 1977.66487455 106% => OK
No of words: 377.0 407.700716846 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.5649867374 4.8611393121 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.48103885553 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01453488663 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 212.727598566 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554376657825 0.524837075471 106% => OK
syllable_count: 657.0 618.680645161 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 13.0 4.94265232975 263% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.9027750231 48.9658058833 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.3636363636 100.406767564 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1363636364 20.6045352989 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.13636363636 5.45110844103 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => 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: 0.116952313192 0.236089414692 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0412076944058 0.076458572812 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0768219872943 0.0737576698707 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11568736993 0.150856017488 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.124464406303 0.0645574589148 193% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 11.7677419355 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 58.1214874552 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.67 10.9000537634 135% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.01818996416 111% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 86.8835125448 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => 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: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.