These days, many developed countries are able to enjoy the luxury of serving exotic fruit and vegetables from far away countries every day and no matter the season. However, farm-to-table products are often trumpeted as saviours of local economies and many praise the positive environmental impact of food that was sourced close to their homes. While I strongly agree with the latter, there is something to be said about having easy access to a wide variety of food from other parts of the world.
On the one hand, there is ample evidence that supporting your resident farmers serves a major role in the amelioration of regional economic conditions and also beneficially impacts the overall environment by reducing toxic fumes produced by ships, planes, and food transport vehicles. The reason for this is that when major big box supermarkets switch to smaller, local businesses as their suppliers, they save money and curb the consumption of fossil fuels from international shipping. Additionally, people are more likely to buy nutritionally rich foodstuffs that are not chemically treated and full of preservatives. For example, recent studies conducted by the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs indicate that local farmer’s market sales had skyrocketed over a period of last 10 years owing to changing consumer preference for sustainable and locally grown produce.
On the other hand, whilst the premise of local farms providing for all of our needs is an enticing one, people would have to expect shortages in some of their favourite vegetables and fruit. Even if we chose to rely solely on what our neighbours can grow, we would have to forego the variety and availability of, for example, fruits of non-native plants. This means that cultivating crops such as bananas, or pineapples is virtually impossible in cold climates. Conversely, you would struggle to grow rutabagas or beets in tropical conditions. Therefore, it would be more sensible to encourage people to think globally and buy locally, however, it shouldn’t be the only available alternative on the market.
From the arguments and examples outlined above, I resolutely believe that having a preference for local produce is incontrovertibly beneficial to people’s general well-being, local economic situation, as well as the environment. However, it must remain a simple question of preference and not a result of limited food choices.
- Some people think that schools have to be more entertaining, while others think that their sole purpose is to educate. Which do you agree with? Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion. 89
- Food travels thousands of miles from producers to consumers. Some people think that it would be better for the environment and economy if people only ate the local food produced by farmers.To what extent do you agree or disagree? 89
- Doing an enjoyable activity with a child can develop better skills and more creativity than reading. To what extent do you agree? Use reasons and specific examples to explain your answer. 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 253, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun praise seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much praise', 'a good deal of praise'.
Suggestion: much praise; a good deal of praise
...eted as saviours of local economies and many praise the positive environmental impact of fo...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, however, if, so, therefore, well, while, for example, such as, as well as, 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: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2068.0 1615.20841683 128% => OK
No of words: 384.0 315.596192385 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38541666667 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4267276788 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04276788713 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 176.041082164 138% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.6328125 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 659.7 506.74238477 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 20.2975951904 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.0095115128 49.4020404114 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 147.714285714 106.682146367 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.4285714286 20.7667163134 132% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.85714285714 7.06120827912 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.271259085369 0.244688304435 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0758702834854 0.084324248473 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.04240148036 0.0667982634062 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145771364836 0.151304729494 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0204566201016 0.056905535591 36% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 13.0946893788 135% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 50.2224549098 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.2 8.58950901804 119% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 78.4519038076 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.