Some people think that in order to deal with the problem of congestion in cities, privately owned vehicles should be banned in city centres, while others consider this to be an unrealistic solution. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.
It is true that traffic congestion continues to be controversial in urban area. While some people believe personal vehicles are to be blamed and should be banned from streets, I would argue that this approach is unreliable and impractical to carry out.
On the one hand, the reason why privately owned vehicles is the major factor that lead to traffic congestion is the colossal number of them emerging in the road. In fact, most of people in the world, especially in well-developed nations, prefer using personal vehicles rather than public transports because of their convenience and comfort. Hence, with the large quantity of them, there is not much space for the movement of vehicles in streets, so the act of prohibiting personal vehicles could significantly reduce traffic density. Furthermore, personal vehicles such as cars or motorbikes not only cause congestions in urban areas but also lead to an increase in pollution level. This is simply because the remarkable amount of carbon dioxide that have been disposed by cars and motorbike or their honks during the time they move on the street would result in air and noise contamination.
On the other hand, there are some reasonable reasons why this solution is unrealistic. First, many people are not willingness to use public transports because of their lack of security. As the number of dwellers use public transports for moving increase, the rate of crime would rise as well. For instance, people are prone to be stolen money or valuable items when they are in bus. Second, if the banning policy is adopted, the local authorities would have to manage public transportation well and prepare the infrastructure. For example, in Viet Nam, some areas do not have a bus stop so local residents having demands to use this kind of transportation must go for a long way to reach it. Moreover, not every destination are accessible by public transport, hence, people may not reach the place they want to.
To sum up, though the idea of banning personal vehicles in order to tackle traffic congestion seem to be logical because of its benefit such as reduce air and noise contamination, there are some negative aspects of this solution since it could encourage criminal behaviour.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-08-08 | longle251198 | 78 | view |
- Some people think that in order to deal with the problem of congestion in cities privately owned vehicles should be banned in city centres while others consider this to be an unrealistic solution Discuss both sides and give your opinion 78
- The bar chart below gives information about water use in China USA Russia and Australia in 2010 67
- The table shows forested land in millions of hectares in different parts of the world Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The maps below show the changes in the art gallery ground floor in 2015 and present day 73
- The chart below show the results of a survey about people s coffee and tea buying and drinking habits in 5 Australian cities 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 172, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the people') or simply say ''most people''.
Suggestion: most of the people; most people
... of them emerging in the road. In fact, most of people in the world, especially in well-develo...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, hence, if, may, moreover, second, so, well, while, for example, for instance, in fact, kind of, such as, it is true, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 13.1623246493 160% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1867.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 372.0 315.596192385 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0188172043 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39173103935 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79544431223 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545698924731 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 594.0 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.8182293106 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.466666667 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.7333333333 7.06120827912 166% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.208615700618 0.244688304435 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0719262568535 0.084324248473 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0622776335752 0.0667982634062 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.151133085682 0.151304729494 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0654849374919 0.056905535591 115% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.4159519038 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.