In 20 years there will be less pollution in the air than there is today.
Pollution control has been the hot-topic of 21st century. There have been a lot of money spent every year to curb the excessive amount of pollution growth that has taken place after the industrial revolution. Personally, I believe that there would still be more concentration of the pollution in the environment after 20 years than it is today. I feel this way for two reasons, which I will explore in the following essay.
To begin with, we know that the population growth is a major obstacle in reducing the pollution. In next 20 years, it is projected that the global population would exceed 9 billion. Feeding and nurturing this large population of humans is a task which is unfathomable by even the cutting edge researchers of resources management. Moreover, the living standards of people are uplifted at a tremendous rate in the developing country. As the living standards improves, the pollution per capita would increase. My personal experience is a compelling illustration of this. In my childhood, I lived in a society where most of the people didn't had car. But, in a span of two decades, the current situation is that most of them have a car, and some people have more than one car. If all people would have vehicles of their own, then the pollution would definitely increase.
Furthermore, the renewable resource industry is not supported well enough by the governments. They are facing a sheer competition from the non-renewable companies. The widespread opposition of solar and wind industries by the coal and oil companies reflects the issue precisely. For instance, whenever the government provides tax breaks to the natural energy companies, they get a strong rebuttal from the coal industry. One of the reason is the jobs of people involved in coal companies would be risked because of a new industry growing out of nowhere. For example, most of the electric vehicles that were in use around me had been again replaced by the engine vehicles. However, Tesla is one of the companies which is trying its best to make the electric vehicles ubiquitous.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that the pollution would not decrease in a span of two decades from now. It is because of the growing population and the competition faced by polluting industries.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-03-20 | memi00 | 76 | view |
| 2022-03-20 | memi00 | 76 | view |
| 2021-10-08 | edsonsimoes | 70 | view |
| 2021-10-08 | devvratjoshi | 60 | view |
| 2021-10-08 | devvratjoshi | 70 | view |
- The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions Since they were declared a wildl 53
- We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning 50
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones 50
- In order for any work of art for example a film a novel a poem or a song to have merit it must be understandable to most people 80
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 632, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...d in a society where most of the people didnt had car. But, in a span of two decades,...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, moreover, so, still, then, well, for example, for instance, i feel, in conclusion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 13.8261648746 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 43.0788530466 63% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 8.0752688172 285% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1896.0 1977.66487455 96% => OK
No of words: 381.0 407.700716846 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97637795276 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88531557779 2.67179642975 108% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 212.727598566 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538057742782 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 594.0 618.680645161 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.2538192031 48.9658058833 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 86.1818181818 100.406767564 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3181818182 20.6045352989 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.77272727273 5.45110844103 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.88709677419 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.166502933574 0.236089414692 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0435086325298 0.076458572812 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0777500463877 0.0737576698707 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113731659268 0.150856017488 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.10891302864 0.0645574589148 169% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 11.7677419355 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 58.1214874552 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.1575268817 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 10.9000537634 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.01818996416 103% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 86.8835125448 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.