Governments across the world should invest more of their resources to protect the environment than promote businesses and industry.
Ever since civilization, people have craved to prosper their lives through economic activities that imposed an enormous burden on the environment, which render us to live with its undesirable consequence. In my opinion, I undoubtedly reckon that officials all over the globe should, indeed, devote resources more to environmental projects rather than businesses or industries for two reasons.
First and foremost, the environmental deterioration endangers human life, which means, unless universal governmental efforts collaborate to tackle this issue, the coming generation will be devastated by exacerbation of pollution, climate changes, and overly depletion decline in our precious natural resources. For example, industrialization and transportations consume non-renewable fossilized energy, emit poisonous CO2 gas as well. Therefore, governments must fund infrastructure projects that supply vehicles and factories with clean energy like electricity from the sun, the winds, and waves. Moreover, governments can subsidize replanting trees in forests that absorb green gases, pledge to support scientific research regarding Ozon layers that cause global warming. All those projects will need tremendous funds, but they will pay off by preserving our natural resources. As you can see, if governments do unify their endeavors to mitigate environmental risks, it will save humanity.
Another potential significant reason for international investment in environmental plans is the higher likelihood of improving societies' health to become more productive, which reflects positively on the world economy. For example, contaminated soil, water, and air cause various diseases such as asthma, diarrhea, and infectious diseases. Cost of illness measures the direct expenses of medication, hospitalization, absenteeism of employees, and on the other hand, the indirect cost of potential inputs and saving from those healthy and productive individuals that add to the economy. Experts expect that reduction of air pollution will reduce the global burden from respiratory infections, heart disease, and lung cancer, and premature death that costs the economy millions of dollars. I still can recall tens of times that my teammate took sick- leave because of her recurrent asthma attacks. Frankly, investing in projects that deal with air pollution is an investment in human health in the meantime that maintains sustainable economic growth.
In conclusion, I believe that governments all over the globe must do spend more on environmental projects rather than economic activities to save the human existence of the coming generation and maintains sustainable economic growth.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 992, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ronmental risks, it will save humanity. Another potential significant reason for...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, frankly, if, moreover, regarding, so, still, therefore, well, for example, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 15.1003584229 20% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.0286738351 136% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 43.0788530466 70% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 52.1666666667 90% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.0752688172 211% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2288.0 1977.66487455 116% => OK
No of words: 386.0 407.700716846 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.9274611399 4.8611393121 122% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43248042346 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15530853838 2.67179642975 118% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 212.727598566 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.634715025907 0.524837075471 121% => OK
syllable_count: 706.5 618.680645161 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.51630824373 119% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.86738351254 428% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.94265232975 40% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6003584229 73% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 20.1344086022 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 57.7314087439 48.9658058833 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.533333333 100.406767564 152% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7333333333 20.6045352989 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.53333333333 5.45110844103 175% => 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 : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.14903053311 0.236089414692 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0442836122183 0.076458572812 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0551725281249 0.0737576698707 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.091198702693 0.150856017488 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0399670644056 0.0645574589148 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.4 11.7677419355 165% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 58.1214874552 50% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.10430107527 213% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.1575268817 152% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.41 10.9000537634 160% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.6 8.01818996416 132% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 86.8835125448 161% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 22.5 10.002688172 225% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.0537634409 119% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.