In the situation that the natural environment is under severe threat, it is necessary for governments to take action on the protection of the environment. Some people believe that it is important to fund research on new energy resources or preserve natural places, while others feel that the government should prioritize the regulation about industrial pollution. From where I stand, reducing the pollution produced by companies and industries is an urgent need for the protection of the natural environment. I feel this way for two reasons, which I will explore in the following essay.
To begin with, the government plays an irreplaceable role in reducing the pollution produced by companies and industries through its force of law. By saying this I mean that funding research on new energy resources and reserving natural places can be supported by other organizations such as companies or non-profit organizations. Nevertheless, industrial pollution can be considered as a controllable variable for the government noticing that the environment will be remarkably improved as soon as the law is passed. For example, once in our country those wasted water from industries was directly poured into rivers without any treatment. Before the enactment of environmental regulations, only social responsibilities could prevent those companies from polluting. The restriction and supervision from the government now effectively reduces those illegal discharges contributing to cleaner rivers that affect thousands of dwellers alongside. Without compulsory acts done by the government, there is no other party who is able to stop such pollution.
Admittedly, energy problems are urgent concerns due to the possibility of depletion of traditional energy sources such as fuel. Human beings are making all our efforts to promote research on new energy resources before those scarce energy sources are actually exhausted. Attempts at the application of new energy resources are necessary because energy consumption increases further as a result of technological advances. However, it is entirely possible for profitable companies to invest in energy resources development and research. For instance, faced with fierce competition from electric cars, one of the traditional automobile manufacturers in my country now turns to some other renewable energy resources as an alternative solution to fuel. To maintain its market share in the automobile industry, it invested a large sum of money in research on hydrogen power development. The market reacts positively toward its effort to new energy giving rise to a higher business valuation recently. This example demonstrates the alternative approach available to finding financial support other than the government in developing new energy resources.
In conclusion, I feel that it is vital for the government to take action on reducing industrial pollution rather than preserving natural resources or new energy research. This is because the government is the only party that prevents pollution.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, however, nevertheless, so, well, while, for example, for instance, i feel, i mean, in conclusion, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 15.1003584229 126% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 13.8261648746 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 43.0788530466 74% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 52.1666666667 125% => OK
Nominalization: 35.0 8.0752688172 433% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2585.0 1977.66487455 131% => OK
No of words: 458.0 407.700716846 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.64410480349 4.8611393121 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15748683567 2.67179642975 118% => OK
Unique words: 235.0 212.727598566 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513100436681 0.524837075471 98% => OK
syllable_count: 827.1 618.680645161 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.51630824373 119% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.4996194805 48.9658058833 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.095238095 100.406767564 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8095238095 20.6045352989 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.04761904762 5.45110844103 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.310351893216 0.236089414692 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0940100679729 0.076458572812 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0676546321465 0.0737576698707 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.214334314043 0.150856017488 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0585772957038 0.0645574589148 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 11.7677419355 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 58.1214874552 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.1575268817 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.43 10.9000537634 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.01818996416 113% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 86.8835125448 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => 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: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.