reducing global environmental damage should be handled by government rather than individuals. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some people believe that authorities have a vital role to play in minimizing global environment hazards are more than what citizens can do. To a certain I agree that the states have a great deal of effort, however, I also believe that the damage to the environment ought to be solved by putting emphasis on individuals' attempt.
Firstly, governments should invest in renewable energy from solar, wind or water. Due to cheap and abundant, professor can make use of all available resources to generate energy serving the life. For example, Western countries spent a large amount of money to build electrical factories by environmentally friendly instead of fossil fuels to reduce pressure on environment. Secondly, because mining industry leaves heavy metals into rivers that lead to pollute oceans and rivers therefore it's necessary to implement a pollution threshold for heavy industries by the unions. Governments' regulation forces the factories to have to cut pollutant discarding into environment and triggering serious impact on surrounding habitat. And thirdly, because gas emissions are the biggest threats to the environment so states could impose 'green taxes' on drivers and airline companies. This would lead to decrease exhaust fumes and yield a healthier atmosphere.
On the other hand, individuals should choose products with less parking as like most people also know that plastic parking does not break down easily. As a result of tiny actions such as that would contribute to form individual perception about the public environment. Additionally, people reduce the pollution levels by raising awareness about role of ecosystem. For instance, opting for eco friendly substitutes is encouraged in the public. Hence, changing lifestyle would be made a conscious effort and would tackle partly environment issues.
In conclusion, to fully address the threat of environment, it's essential to have a comprehensive set of solutions of government joining hands with citizens. Lack of individual participation, reducing environment hazards would become a worrying concern globally.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-10-09 | Phạm Phú Trường | 84 | view |
| 2019-09-28 | PardissRS | 73 | view |
| 2019-07-25 | vudinhthuyornot | 84 | view |
| 2019-07-23 | Vũ Thuỳ Liên | 89 | view |
| 2019-07-23 | Vũ Thuỳ Liên | 84 | view |
- reducing global environmental damage should be handled by government rather than individuals To what extent do you agree or disagree 95
- reducing global environmental damage should be handled by government rather than individuals. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 89
- The range of technology is increasing the gap between the rich and the poor To extend what do you agree 70
- Some people think that good healthy is essential to every person so medical services should not be run by profit making companies Do the disadvantage of private healthcare outweight the advantage 84
- Nowadays more and more young people hold the important positions in the government. Some people think that is a good thing while others argue that it is not suitable. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. 61
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thirdly, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 13.1623246493 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.3376753507 204% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1770.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 320.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53125 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22948505376 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97066385678 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 206.0 176.041082164 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.64375 0.561755894193 115% => OK
syllable_count: 557.1 506.74238477 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.2156708694 49.4020404114 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.625 106.682146367 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 20.7667163134 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0625 7.06120827912 157% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => 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: 0.151065173055 0.244688304435 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0417658063975 0.084324248473 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0387853403015 0.0667982634062 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0890727212384 0.151304729494 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0375228578751 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.79 12.4159519038 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.25 8.58950901804 119% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 78.4519038076 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.