in your country, there is more need for land to be left in its natural condition or is there more need for land to be developed for housing and industry?
Human has long utilized land for centuries to serve multiple purposes. Seeing the economical benefits of the land, people in my country tend to develop it for housing and industrial purposes. However, I personally believe that land should be left in its natural state because it has an effect on natural disasters, environmental pollution, and animal protection.
First and foremost, developing land to build houses brings natural disasters to the surrounding areas. When land is exploited at an alarming rate, deforestation brings in catastrophes and many other severe weather conditions. Forests slow down the flow of floods, which decrease the flood damages. Since tree hold sediments in the land, during a big storm, water is less likely to flood the lower areas. Moreover, sand excavation appears more and more popular, which create negative impacts on people’s lives. Because excavating sand often create landslides, this pose a threat to people and their properties. Indeed, if land is not kept in its original state, natural disaster will appear more often.
Secondly, when land is heavily exploited for farming or industrial purposes, environmental pollution will spike. One of the big changes to the environment is air pollution. Since trees create fresh air through photosynthesis process, they greatly improve air quality. Trees can filter out dust, smoke, and many other particles in the air. As a result, cutting down forests increase air pollution. In addition, buildings increase greenhouse effect, which contributes to global warming. Specifically, since sunlight shines on buildings, windows reflect back to the ground that makes the temperature twice as hot. By and large, air pollution will increase significantly if the land cannot be kept in its primary state.
Finally, leaving land at its natural condition can protect the animals that thrive on that land. Since land provides shelter for animals, developing land for housing and constructions would greatly reduce living areas of these animals. Some people hunt down wild animals, forcing them to move out of their natural habitat. Others cut down trees, causing animals such as deers or bears have nowhere to live that they have to move to completely new areas. Although some can adapt well, many are unable to survive in the new environment. Human and industries take away not only living land but also food source of the animals. When animals cannot find foods and water, they might have to eat trash. Eating filthy trash makes them sick and even die. Indeed, developing land for housing or industries reduces the animals’ living areas and food source.
In conclusion, land should be left at its original state in order to reduce natural catastrophes, environmental pollution, and animal endangerment. Therefore, it is important to develop a sustainable plan to bring out benefits of the land while conserving it.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-09-13 | suyun | 66 | view |
| 2021-01-23 | Buggu | 60 | view |
| 2020-12-07 | anhung | 90 | view |
| 2020-03-17 | DaVa20011218 | 80 | view |
| 2019-07-09 | mike.sharko | 60 | view |
- do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is better to be a member of a group than to be the leader of a group 73
- Your family and friends are encouraging you to buy a new car What are some benefits and downsides of purchasing a brand new vehicle Explain your thoughts using examples 73
- in your country there is more need for land to be left in its natural condition or is there more need for land to be developed for housing and industry 90
- do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is better to be a member of a group than to be the leader of a group 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 83, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
... to serve multiple purposes. Seeing the economical benefits of the land, people in my coun...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as a result, by and large
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 13.8261648746 130% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 43.0788530466 58% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.0752688172 173% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2455.0 1977.66487455 124% => OK
No of words: 459.0 407.700716846 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.348583878 4.8611393121 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62863751936 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74973153925 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 254.0 212.727598566 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553376906318 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 749.7 618.680645161 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 0.0 3.08781362007 0% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 3.51792114695 313% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 20.6003584229 141% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.1344086022 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.501594376 48.9658058833 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 84.6551724138 100.406767564 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.8275862069 20.6045352989 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.44827586207 5.45110844103 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.363131744893 0.236089414692 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.089399658813 0.076458572812 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0942882512457 0.0737576698707 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.213485995482 0.150856017488 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0886360391791 0.0645574589148 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 11.7677419355 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 58.1214874552 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.1575268817 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.45 10.9000537634 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.01818996416 104% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 86.8835125448 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.0537634409 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.