Due to increasing world demands for oil and gas energy people need to look for new sources of energy in remote and untouched natural places Do advantages of locating these sources outweigh disadvantages damaging such places

The issue of whether we should look for oil in remote places has been a heatedly discussed topic in the recent years, and this has turned into a dilemma facing many people. Some people claim that the extraction of oil in untouched places destroys local environment while others do not agree. Personally speaking, I would assert that the extraction of oil can improve local economy.
Admittedly, there are two advantages accruing from looking for oil in remote places. The immediate one is that this heavy industry can generate employment in local services such as catering business, hospitality industry, and communication. For example, my hometown’s unemployment rate was very high because there were not a lot of job opportunities 50 years ago. However, when the oil fields were developed, many companies recruited many new staff. Another benefit is the improvement of the local infrastructure and facilities. For instance, Shanghai did not have many buildings 10 years ago. After many companies went there to extract oil, they constructed many accommodations to house workers. However, this does not necessarily mean that there are no disadvantages of extracting oil.
In fact, mining non-renewable resources destroys local environment and triggers wars. First and foremost, this oil industry will release much carbon dioxide and many toxic substances. For example, Guzangzou government extracts oil crazily in order to obtain more income, but its side-effects are irreversible. According to a report, there has been a tremendous increase in the amount of greenhouse gases, while lakes and rivers around the oil wells will remain contaminated for long. In addition, looking for oil could intensify the tension among many countries scrambling for fossil fuels. For instance, there were more than 60 percentage of war caused by the fight for the oil fields in the Middle East, and furthermore, this made many homeless children.
Considering two irreversible problems, I would argue that the drawbacks of extracting fossil fuels surpass the benefits. Although the extraction of oil can improve local buildings and generate more job opportunities, protecting the environment and human safety is the priority.

Votes
Average: 9.5 (2 votes)
Essays by the user:

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, look, so, well, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in fact, such as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1870.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 343.0 315.596192385 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45189504373 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30351707066 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99186167872 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.591836734694 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 583.2 506.74238477 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 33.414877175 49.4020404114 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.4210526316 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0526315789 20.7667163134 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15789473684 7.06120827912 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.9879759519 226% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.196822574183 0.244688304435 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0632763688257 0.084324248473 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0563625230102 0.0667982634062 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119161622096 0.151304729494 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0634906120618 0.056905535591 112% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.0946893788 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.03 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.55 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 78.4519038076 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.