All cars that born fossil fuels should be banned and electronic cars should replace them.
Fossil fuels that came from all respective cars should be restricted and the provision of E-car should be launched. However, I completely agree with this statement for two reasons.
Firstly, by implementing electronic cars despite modern cars had played a significant role in controlling environmental pollution. It is disputable that the majority of the respective countries can experience enormous control in global warming. As a result, the living standard of the people will be upgraded. For instance, the recent survey by the United Nation Organization showed, about half the proportion of the pollution had gradually plumped in Japan after the bureaucrats avoided modern cars.
Secondly, it is commonly acknowledged that banning modern cars leads to control the use of non-renewable resources consequently, a vast ratio of minerals can be preserved and protected. Mainly, we can use these sorts of resources alternatively on other realms. Thus, by doing this we can acquire huge positive outcomes on the economy as well as the progression of a particular country. There is ample evidence to suggest that, controlling the non-renewable resources can bring a plethora of changes towards country economic growth. Therefore, selling minerals is also one major source of earning foreign currency, which definitely boosts the country economy.
As such it can be concluded that restricting those sorts of cars that fires fossil fuels can bring abundant of merits, controlling pollution and protecting non-renewable resources. Furthermore, it plays a pivotal role in controlling global warming as well as other positive results alike boost in-country income.
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2019-09-08 | Milan karki | 89 | view |
- Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding change. Others, however, think change is always a good thing. 56
- The table below gives information about changes in modes of travel in England between 1985 and 2000. 56
- Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 72
- The graph below shows the unemployment rates in the three countries from 1990 to 2004 70
- The pie charts below show electricity generation by source in New Zealand and Germany in 1980 and 2010.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, well, for instance, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 1.00243902439 998% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 17.0 5.60731707317 303% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 33.7804878049 86% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 3.97073170732 227% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1420.0 965.302439024 147% => OK
No of words: 252.0 196.424390244 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63492063492 4.92477711251 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98428260373 3.73543355544 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08991198248 2.65546596893 116% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 106.607317073 145% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.615079365079 0.547539520022 112% => OK
syllable_count: 437.4 283.868780488 154% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.45097560976 117% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 1.53170731707 326% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 8.94146341463 145% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.7433880358 43.030603864 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.230769231 112.824112599 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3846153846 22.9334400587 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0769230769 5.23603664747 212% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 3.70975609756 297% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.2373825922 0.215688989381 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0801022750142 0.103423049105 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.146110018037 0.0843802449381 173% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171886128326 0.15604864568 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.142868747984 0.0819641961636 174% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.2329268293 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 61.2550243902 71% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.3012195122 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.37 11.4140731707 135% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.28 8.06136585366 128% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 40.7170731707 223% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.