People think that the government should increase the cost of fuel for cars and other vehicles to solve environmental problems. Do you agree or disagree?
It is said that increasing the fuel costs for cars and other vehicles can result in the reduction of environmental matters. I agree with this point of view to some extent.
One of the solutions that officials can take to solve the problem related to the environment is to increase the cost of fuels for different modes of transport, such as cars and motorcycles which mostly pollute the surrounding areas. If governments impose more taxes on fossil fuels, such as petrol, people become more disillusioned to use their private cars or motorcycles. However, this activity does work alone, and I believe that authorities and even people should take other steps for solving this problem. For example, officials can introduce a congestion charge for cars entering the city centre. In this way, people are more encouraged to use public transportation. Additionally, the state must invest in some projects related to the production of vehicles that are environmentally friendly and use some renewable energies, such as sun and wind or electricity. If such projects need a huge budget, officials can try to improve public transport to such an extent that catching a bus or train becomes as convenient as using travelling by car.
On the other hand, some steps should also be taken into account by people for solving this problem. They should try to use public transportations or vehicles which are eco-friendly, such as bicycles. Cycling not only reduces the amount of contamination in the environment but also helps people keep themselves fit and healthy. They can share cars with others who make the same journey. In this way, they can also save more money, as fuel cost is the main drain on individuals ‘income. Moreover, individuals have to try to improve their disposal methods and recycle their rubbish as much as they can. The public should use products that are recyclable and decomposable. With such solutions, people can play an important role in the conservation of the environment.
In conclusion, increasing fuel costs is one of the ways that can help the environment. Other constructive solutions must be addressed by both governments and people.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-01-23 | ojehparvaz | 73 | view |
- At present time the population of some countries includes a relatively large number of young adults compared with the number of old people Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 78
- The climograph below shows average monthly temperatures and rainfall in the city of Kolkata 78
- We can usually learn much more from people whose view we share than from people whose views contradict our own Disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning 66
- An increasing number of people are choosing plastic surgery Why do people choose to change the way they look Do you think it is a positive or negative development 67
- Some people view teenage conflict with their parents as a necessary part of growing up whilst others see it as something negative which should be avoided Discuss both views and give your own opinion 84
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, moreover, so, for example, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 41.998997996 90% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1812.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 354.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1186440678 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33761313653 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95913089944 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511299435028 0.561755894193 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 559.8 506.74238477 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.6214792437 49.4020404114 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.3684210526 106.682146367 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6315789474 20.7667163134 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.84210526316 7.06120827912 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.329854709658 0.244688304435 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.105976724566 0.084324248473 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0866820104734 0.0667982634062 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.237956378623 0.151304729494 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0480336232365 0.056905535591 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.0946893788 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 50.2224549098 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.4159519038 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.58950901804 96% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, moreover, so, for example, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 41.998997996 90% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1812.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 354.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1186440678 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33761313653 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95913089944 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511299435028 0.561755894193 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 559.8 506.74238477 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.6214792437 49.4020404114 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.3684210526 106.682146367 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6315789474 20.7667163134 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.84210526316 7.06120827912 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.329854709658 0.244688304435 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.105976724566 0.084324248473 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0866820104734 0.0667982634062 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.237956378623 0.151304729494 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0480336232365 0.056905535591 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.0946893788 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 50.2224549098 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.4159519038 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.58950901804 96% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.