Some people believe that it is possible for a country to be economically successful and have a clean environment. Others argue that these two aims are not compatible. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Economics and the environment are two major aspects that determine a successful country. Many people claim that it is possible to an economically progressive land without disrupting the natural resources or causing pollution. However, other people think that it is not possible as one aspect has to sacrifice to achieve the other. In my opinion, it is wholly possible for a nation to be a wealthy nation while maintaining a clean environment.
Undoubtedly, there are many nations that are progressive in terms of their economy while having pollution-free surroundings. This is for the reason that they have adopted programs and implemented laws to protect nature while maintaining their country’s wealth. For instance, New Zealand is known for its being an economically independent and environmentally friendly nation. According to reports, they have no debts in the world bank and their people generally feel financially and economically secure. Additionally, the country is also known to have one of the least nations that generate air and plastic pollution. Thus, it can be inferred that economical and environmental success could co-exist in a nation.
Meanwhile, others still argue that the goal to achieve economic success with a favorable environment is not possible. This negative viewpoint could be attributed to the notion that an economically successful nation develops more industries that generate increasing amounts of waste. For example, most developing countries, like India have reported that with their increasing GDP, air quality, especially in major cities worsens. With more activities to boost the economy, such as transportation, more pollution is generated. This, however, could be mitigated if the country could adapt to more environmentally friendly transport systems, like efficient public transportation and other cars that generate less pollution.
With both viewpoints discussed, there is a high possibility that nations could be both rich economically and environmentally. It strongly depends on how the country could adapt to advancements like building environmentally friendly buildings, the use of fewer cars, decrease the usage of plastic bags, and many more nature-friendly activities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 131, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('economically') instead an adjective, or a noun ('progressive') instead of another adjective.
...any people claim that it is possible to an economically progressive land without disrupting the natural res...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, still, thus, while, as to, for example, for instance, such as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1900.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 333.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.70570570571 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27042606975 2.80592935109 117% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546546546547 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 594.0 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.6660785404 49.4020404114 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.764705882 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5882352941 20.7667163134 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.11764705882 7.06120827912 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => 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: 0.269045195912 0.244688304435 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0940496934158 0.084324248473 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0523890459784 0.0667982634062 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171520209175 0.151304729494 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0631648759238 0.056905535591 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.0946893788 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 50.2224549098 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.84 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.32 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 78.4519038076 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => 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.