Some people hold the belief that traditional energy sources such as coal or oil are cheaper than cleaner energy sources, so they believe that traditional energy sources are more reliable and useful. However, I think we should use cleaner energy sources to protect the environment. I will elaborate on my discussion for three reasons.
First of all, cleaner energy can improve social efficiency wholly because using cleaner energy can improve the quality of the environment and reduce pollution. For factories that have a lot of workers, a better environment can definitely bring better working conditions, so the output of the factories can be enhanced. In many developing countries, a limited environment - caused by traditional energy sources - usually decrease the motivation of the workers. Both the quality and quantity of the products are restricted by the upset manufacturers. It is obvious that if cleaner energy will be used by these countries, their environment will eventually better and improve the whole social efficiency.
Secondly, cleaner energy can be the catalyst for technological improvement. When people tag into the new cleaner energy, they will embrace the new technology to have a better understanding of the cleaner energy. For instance, wind farms need a lot of scientists to struggle with the material to produce a durable generator of electricity, which can clearly improve the level of the technology. In contrast, if people just focus on the traditional energy sources, they will somewhat restrain the relative technology’s enhancement, since they just notice how to use the energy sources instead of how to develop new methods to find new energy sources. In this fast-changing world, the lack of new technology is so bad for a country or a company.
Finally, some people will keep the opinion that traditional energy sources are cheaper to use and can bring the possibility to the economical benefit. Nevertheless, I want to remind them that traditional energy sources are not reusable and can not be recycled. In the use of oil or coal, we will find that the number of them is going down so quickly, and eventually, the number will to zero. In this turn, the price of the traditional will be higher due to the lack of them.
In conclusion, energy use is crossing a lot of fields around the world, so it is a complicated question for many people to bother with it. However I still believe that in the 21st-century world, we need to focus more on new cleaner energy, it is beneficial for both the environment and for ourselves.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...l be higher due to the lack of them. In conclusion, energy use is crossing a lo...
^^
Line 9, column 140, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...tion for many people to bother with it. However I still believe that in the 21st-centur...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, still, for instance, i think, in conclusion, in contrast, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 9.8082437276 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 43.0788530466 74% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.0752688172 149% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2147.0 1977.66487455 109% => OK
No of words: 423.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0756501182 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53508145475 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93294282815 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 212.727598566 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.444444444444 0.524837075471 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 685.8 618.680645161 111% => 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: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.0508156687 48.9658058833 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.0 100.406767564 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2631578947 20.6045352989 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.57894736842 5.45110844103 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => 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: 0.341021726714 0.236089414692 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113482479322 0.076458572812 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101349058172 0.0737576698707 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.215585011066 0.150856017488 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.099620368029 0.0645574589148 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 11.7677419355 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 10.9000537634 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.16 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 86.8835125448 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.