Airplanes are becoming the top choice for shipping such diverse agricultural products from place to place due to their conveniences. While people claim that it is unjustified when using air transport to ship goods, I firmly believe that drawbacks will be overshadowed by the airplane's advantages in this field.
On the one hand, naysayers claim that transporting farm goods by air may encounter some problems. First, it may push the price of fruit and vegetables higher. Each flight may cost much money for fuel, in fact, but it can convey far more goods than other vehicles. Thus, it is no doubt to say that using planes to transfer farm products may bring economic value for both sellers and shoppers. Secondly, it is indisputable when saying airplanes force global warming more seriously. Admittedly, planes also produce greenhouse gases and are fuel-consuming. However, this problem will be curb because alternative energy sources are being explored, and airplanes will be powered by clean energy soon. Thus, thanks to planes powered by clean energy.
Nonetheless, I am in favor of using airplanes is fruitful for the food industry and customers. Firstly, food companies could save an amount of money. Genuinely, the merit of shipping farm products by air is its speed, so the deterioration of goods through shipping is not the problem anymore, and food businesses can make a big profit due to using airplanes. Next, customers are able to take advantage of aeronautical technology. Every hour of every day, millions of shoppers may have many choices from plenty of agricultural food sources. Without airplanes, consequently, none of this would be easy, or perhaps even exist.
Take all things into consideration, I am optimistic about the airplane future for farm product transport worldwide and firmly believe that it should be adopted and developed even more.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 700, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...l be powered by clean energy soon. Thus, thanks to planes powered by clean energy...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, firstly, however, if, may, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, thus, while, in fact, no doubt
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 41.998997996 79% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.3376753507 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1570.0 1615.20841683 97% => OK
No of words: 301.0 315.596192385 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21594684385 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84611174996 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.617940199336 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 479.7 506.74238477 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.7074342987 49.4020404114 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.3529411765 106.682146367 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7058823529 20.7667163134 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.29411764706 7.06120827912 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.223213991874 0.244688304435 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0618887976949 0.084324248473 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0664405988376 0.0667982634062 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137323515598 0.151304729494 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0311020850236 0.056905535591 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.0946893788 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.7 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 78.4519038076 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.