In contemporary times, the rising proportion of greenhouse gases is a serious concern. There are numerous ways to control pollution and help the natural environment. Three such ways are mentioned in the statement above. Some people think that planting more trees and reducing plastic would minimize the harmful impact of vehicular emission, however, in my opinion, increasing the availability of public transportation would most helpful for the environment. Subsequent reasons throw light on the reasons which support my claim.
First, in order to minimize the immediate impact of pollution swiftly, time is a crucial factor. When it comes to construction time, public transportation take lesser time as compared to planting trees that would one day grow fully to nullify the impact equivalent to that of public service. According to a research, growing a full-fledged forest can take anywhere between 25-50 years. By that time, the rise in the number of personal vehical will be uncheckable by the current forest cover. For instance, in New Delhi, there is a severe problem of smog that claims thousands of lives each year. An ingenous even-odd solution implement across the metropolitan city proved to be a boon to curb the rising carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Thus, setting up public transportation facilities is the best way to minimize the individual sources of pollution.
Secondly, another important factor is the space. Most of the polluted cities are metropolitan cities with very high population density, high density of man-made infrastructure which leaves very little scope for any solution to be reduce pollution. On the other hand, public transportation will reduce the number of vehicles on road. This would reduce the parking space required for personal vehicles and thus, leaving more space for plantation. For instance, in Mumbai, almost 2 million people commute through local trains, buses and metros. This in turn means thousands of cars, bikes and taxis off the road eventually serving two purpose reducing the sources of pollution and freeing up space for vegetation.
Lastly, aside from reducing air pollution, there are several other benefits of public transportation. For instance, the honking of cars increases the noise pollution hurting both humans and animals. Noise pollution, according to scientific finding, is also responsible for altering the migration pattern of birds. This disturbs the normal life cycle of the wildlife which eventually exherts pressure on nature. Thus, more public transportation services mean lesser strain on the nature.
To sum up, although there are numerous other ways to combat forces against nature, minimizing the number of personal vehicles is the most effective one. Public transportation services continue to be at the helm of controlling pollution and leading us towards sustainability.
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. “According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in 26
- In 1938 an archaeologist in Iraq acquired a set of clay jars that had been excavated two years earlier by villagers constructing a railroad line. The vessel was about 2,200 years old. Each clay jay contained a copper cylinder surrounding an iron rod. The 73
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones. 58
- TPO 27The little ice age was a period of unusually cold temperature in many parts of the world that lasted from about the year 1350 until 1900CE. There were unusually harsh winters, and glaciers grew larger in many areas. Scientist have long wondered what 61
- Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams Realty is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice 69
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, thus, for instance, in my opinion, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 13.8261648746 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 43.0788530466 28% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 52.1666666667 121% => OK
Nominalization: 31.0 8.0752688172 384% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2427.0 1977.66487455 123% => OK
No of words: 443.0 407.700716846 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.47855530474 4.8611393121 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58776254615 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90919076313 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 212.727598566 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553047404063 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 751.5 618.680645161 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.94265232975 223% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.9111834625 48.9658058833 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.08 100.406767564 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.72 20.6045352989 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.76 5.45110844103 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.212463304224 0.236089414692 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0550087039007 0.076458572812 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0642164869108 0.0737576698707 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119283273083 0.150856017488 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0428527848086 0.0645574589148 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 11.7677419355 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 58.1214874552 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 10.9000537634 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.01818996416 114% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 86.8835125448 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.