Over the past few decades, there has been a high degree of the ambivalence over this matter, whether the pollution can be managed by the individuals or the real change can only be made at the government level. Whereas some people say that its the government who can bring the real change, I sanguinely believe that individuals contribution is required. This essay will further discuss reasons to support this notion and then deduce a logical conclusion.
At the outset, there are myriads of reasons to support this notion, but one of the most compelling reason is that a small contribution from the individuals will make a big difference. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I conducted a research which showed that a small contribution from individuals made a big difference. Thus, the beneficial ramifications of individual contribution apparently can be seen.
On the contrary, skeptics conjecture that its the government who need to form new policy and enforce them which can only make the difference. Although it seems ostensibly veridical, this is the one-sided view. A research conducted by the scientists revealed that small efforts made a big difference, so the individual contribution is important to protect the environment. Hence, it can be presumed a preconceived notion.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments from both the sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of individual contribution far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of individual contribution prove its significance, but also pinpoints implications of not doing so.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 240, Rule ID: IT_IS[17]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...ent level. Whereas some people say that its the government who can bring the real c...
^^^
Line 1, column 316, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
... real change, I sanguinely believe that individuals contribution is required. This essay wi...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 43, Rule ID: IT_IS[17]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
... the contrary, skeptics conjecture that its the government who need to form new pol...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, so, then, thus, whereas, while, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 6.10837438424 147% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 5.94088669951 202% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 24.0 20.9802955665 114% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 31.9359605911 75% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 5.75862068966 330% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1368.0 1207.87684729 113% => OK
No of words: 256.0 242.827586207 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34375 5.00649968141 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.21218231649 2.71678728327 118% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 139.433497537 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546875 0.580463131201 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 428.4 379.143842365 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.6157635468 130% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.71428571429 175% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.2904735532 50.4703680194 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.0 104.977214359 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3333333333 20.9669160288 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.75 7.25397266985 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.33497536946 56% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.189910601674 0.242375264174 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0748367678513 0.0925447433944 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0960355308413 0.071462118173 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117769923537 0.151781067708 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0880017925313 0.0609392437508 144% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 12.6369458128 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 53.1260098522 78% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.9458128079 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 11.5310837438 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.32886699507 104% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 55.0591133005 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.94827586207 141% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.5123152709 133% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.