Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve the growing traffic and pollution problems.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
What other measures do you think might be effective?
Issues related to traffic and pollution have concerned numerous government all around the world recently. Some people contend that the best solution to tackle those problems is to increase petrol’s prices. However, I do not agree with this opinion since there are other practical measures that authorities should take.
On the one hand, increasing the fuel price participates greatly in the progress of mitigating growing traffic and pollution problems. Firstly, only by paying an extremely high price for fuel can people reduce the use of private transports. Instead of using their cars or motorbikes daily, commuters can choose other economical ways for their traveling purposes. As a result, traffic congestion and greenhouse gas will significantly decrease. Secondly, the rise of petrol’s price also takes part in the campaign to encourage citizens to share their transport. For example, co-workers or family members can use one car instead of many ones as in the past to travel for work or entertainment purposes. Consequently, the increase in fuel’s price particularly helps resolve traffic congestion and environmental issues.
On the other hand, it is not solely a solution since there are various effective measures which can be used. The first efficient measure is to develop public transport systems. Governments should allocate more money to improve the condition of buses, trains or MRTs. Moreover, a decrease in tickets also plays an important role since more students, workers and elderly are encouraged to use it. Another practical method is to develop the demand to use bikes in citizens. Hardly people ride bikes nowadays; however, they are considered safe and clean vehicles. Therefore, authorities should provide more public bikes and free bike parking places for citizens in cities. Moreover, the streets also should be renovated in order to be safer for bikers.
In conclusion, the increase in the price of petrol is a good idea to tackle traffic and environmental problems; however, there are still more measures which are far more effective. Governments should try hard to mitigate the concerning problems in order to ensure citizens’ lives are improving gradually daily.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-02 | happyhappy | 89 | view |
| 2019-11-17 | julieehung | 67 | view |
| 2019-10-15 | Chi Hoang | 73 | view |
| 2019-10-13 | Chi Hoang | 73 | view |
| 2019-08-30 | ghikar | 78 | view |
- In the modern world it is possible to shop, work and communicate with people via the internet and live without any face-to-face contact with others. Is this a positive or negative development? 84
- The graph below shows the quantities of goods transported in the UK between 1974 and 2002 by four different modes of transport. 73
- The charts below show the percentage of water used by different sectors in Sydney, Australia, in 1997 and 2007. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- Many university students live with their families, while others live away from home because their universities are in different places. What are the advantages and disadvantages of both situations? 84
- The table below gives information on households with a regular use of car in Great Britain from 1971 to 2007 85
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 317, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s; lives are improving gradually daily.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, for example, in conclusion, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1883.0 1615.20841683 117% => OK
No of words: 344.0 315.596192385 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.4738372093 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30665032142 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89067376134 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 176.041082164 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.578488372093 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 598.5 506.74238477 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.2634721117 49.4020404114 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.1052631579 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1052631579 20.7667163134 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.26315789474 7.06120827912 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => 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: 0.176280562674 0.244688304435 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0546824389063 0.084324248473 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0538880364287 0.0667982634062 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111817082275 0.151304729494 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0417922748652 0.056905535591 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.0946893788 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.15 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.62 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 78.4519038076 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.