The best way to solve the world’s environmental problems in to increase the cost of fuel for cars and other vehicles. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some individuals contend that the policy makers should put financial pressure on the fossil fuels for private vehicles. While this idea can partly mitigate the degree of pollution, I firmly hold the view that there are some other methods to encounter this worldwide problem.
On one hand, there are some significant benefits of the increasingly prohibitive price of gasoline used in motorbike or cars, the most significant of which is the reduction of the number of private vehicles, which results in the lower degree of pollution. As a matter of fact, once petrol-run vehicles are in operation, the burned fossil fuel produce a huge amount of toxic gas like carbon dioxide; therefore, contribute majorly to the air pollution. Were the authorities set a higher price for gas and petroleum, a large proportion of individuals were more likely to opt for more affordable types of transport, such as relying on public vehicles such as buses or undergrounds. In other words, fewer private vehicles means fewer pollutants released to the environment, and the air pollution especially in the city can be lessened. Hence, the rise in gas prices would act as a deterrent against air pollution.
On the other hand, I would argue that putting financial pressure on road users is not an optimal answer for the world’s pollution question. In fact, no matter how expensive the fossil fuel is, a group of people who dislike the inconvenience of mass transit still willing to pay for higher fuel price, which leads to the perpetuation of air pollution. From my perspective, the more effective solution lies in the affordability of environmentally-friendly vehicles or energy including ethanol or solar energy. If the government subsidizes manufactures with “green energy” and “green vehicles”, the products will be delivered to the end-users at lower prices. When these products’ prices are comparable to petrol cars, the majority of people would take into account of changing their driving habits. Only then could environmental concerns be mitigated.
In conclusion, the state’s decision to increase financial burdens on vehicle users through a higher price of fossil fuel could be useful for lowering the level of air pollution, yet I am of the opinion that cutting down on prices of renewable and clean energy plays a more important role in the protection of mother Earth.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-10 | tsln7607 | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-21 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2023-06-21 | Giang Tran | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-20 | Giang Tran | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-15 | Anhhhhhh | 78 | view |
- In the future all cars buses and trucks will be driverless The only people travelling inside these vehicles will be passengers Do you think that the advantages of driverless vehicles outweigh the disadvantages 89
- Demand for food is increasing worldwide What is the cause of this What measures can the international community take to meet this demand 67
- Some people say that advertising is extremely successful at persuading us to buy things Other people think that advertising is so common that we no longer pay attention to it Discuss both these views and give your own opinion 73
- Some people say it is more important to plant trees in the open spaces in towns and cities than to build more housing To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- In many countries people are now living longer than ever before Some people say an ageing population creates problems for governments Other people think there are benefits if society has more elderly people To what extent do the advantages of having an ag 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 708, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'vehicles'' or 'vehicle's'?
Suggestion: vehicles'; vehicle's
...rgrounds. In other words, fewer private vehicles means fewer pollutants released to the ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, so, still, then, therefore, while, in conclusion, in fact, such as, as a matter of fact, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 41.998997996 133% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.3376753507 216% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1996.0 1615.20841683 124% => OK
No of words: 383.0 315.596192385 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21148825065 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03551053078 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 176.041082164 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56135770235 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 634.5 506.74238477 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 9.0 2.52805611222 356% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => 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: 67.6351632372 49.4020404114 137% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.571428571 106.682146367 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.3571428571 20.7667163134 132% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.85714285714 7.06120827912 140% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.150475074458 0.244688304435 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0513870862021 0.084324248473 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0283305823239 0.0667982634062 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0942186685324 0.151304729494 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0141179530776 0.056905535591 25% => 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: 16.8 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 50.2224549098 71% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.4159519038 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.