"Regulators and policymakers should respond to potential environmental threats even before the information is fully known or concrete."
How would you rate the accuracy of the above statement? Support your position with reasons and examples.
The statement attempts to urge the policymakers and regulators to respond to any information regarding environmental threats, no matter what it is valid or not. Surely many of us have felt the following sentiment, however, that type of attitude should not be the in the first place and that is why, i agree with the statement with some qualifications.
Certainly preservation of the environment is the prior concern in the present world and that is why any threat regarding environment focuses much attention. As world is changing and technological advancement is bringing drastic developments to the civilization, which eventually have influence on the surrounding environment. However, it is becoming more difficult to certainly ascribe any specific positive or negative impact on environment as a result of that techno innovation initially. Sometimes it is on favor of the environment, likewise, the recent breakthrough in green energy, which reduces our dependence on fossil fuel, is certainly a achievement to embrace.
In addition, nuclear power plants are being used to meet the constant increase in power demand, which reduces our dependence on traditional fossil fuel. On the other hand, it can be destructive too, for example, invention of nuclear weapon is undoubtedly destructive to the environment. So, now we can see that the there is an ambivalent situation to decide which direction to go for. Sometimes, vile information regarding environment pollution spread to make the situation unstable to take political advantages regarding the project. For example, in Bangladesh, "Ruppur Power Plant" is a project taken by the government to meet the power demand in the country and it is causing much controversy regarding environment pollution.
Needless to say, some changes are certainly causing harm, like diversion of a river, which in most of the time causing imbalance to the ecological balance and inhabitants living through the downstream. So, there are many changes which posit threat to the environment without any exception.
To conclude, environmental threats which are conspicuous for their tragic development should be protested and others should be gone though rigorous study before thwarting the development. Protesting without knowing properly is not preservation, rather table the development.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-01-12 | bhaskarvemuri18 | 50 | view |
| 2017-01-12 | bhaskarvemuri18 | 16 | view |
| 2016-10-04 | cybertelic | 83 | view |
| 2016-08-20 | nikita2792 | 50 | view |
| 2016-07-23 | tonoy | 50 | view |
- Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study. 62
- life today is easier and more comfortable than it was when your grandparent were children. 90
- People's Behavior Is Largely Determined By Forces Not Of Their Own Making 16
- Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through larg 66
- All college and university students would benefit from spending at least one semester studying in a foreign country.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the posit 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 300, Rule ID: I_LOWERCASE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'I'?
Suggestion: I
...the in the first place and that is why, i agree with the statement with some qual...
^
Line 3, column 646, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...dependence on fossil fuel, is certainly a achievement to embrace. In addition,...
^
Discourse Markers used:
['first', 'however', 'if', 'likewise', 'regarding', 'so', 'for example', 'in addition', 'as a result', 'in the first place', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.249376558603 0.240241500013 104% => OK
Verbs: 0.159600997506 0.157235817809 102% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0947630922693 0.0880659088768 108% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0523690773067 0.0497285424764 105% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0249376558603 0.0444667217837 56% => OK
Prepositions: 0.0947630922693 0.12292977631 77% => OK
Participles: 0.0548628428928 0.0406280797675 135% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.24826231909 2.79330140395 116% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0423940149626 0.030933414821 137% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.0016655270985 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.1072319202 0.0997080785238 108% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0124688279302 0.0249443105267 50% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0249376558603 0.0148568991511 168% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2339.0 2732.02544248 86% => OK
No of words: 355.0 452.878318584 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.58873239437 6.0361032391 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34067318298 4.58838876751 95% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.430985915493 0.366273622748 118% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.360563380282 0.280924506359 128% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.29014084507 0.200843997647 144% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.230985915493 0.132149295362 175% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24826231909 2.79330140395 116% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 219.290929204 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.554929577465 0.48968727796 113% => OK
Word variations: 61.4407394536 55.4138127331 111% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6194690265 73% => OK
Sentence length: 23.6666666667 23.380412469 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.2269914026 59.4972553346 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 155.933333333 141.124799967 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 23.380412469 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.733333333333 0.674092028746 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.21349557522 38% => OK
Readability: 59.7230046948 51.4728631049 116% => OK
Elegance: 1.68421052632 1.64882698954 102% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.386552997797 0.391690518653 99% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.160305766168 0.123202303941 130% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.064002491107 0.077325440228 83% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.635697833874 0.547984918172 116% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.117468802598 0.149214159877 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.170828520172 0.161403998019 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0816946207738 0.0892212321368 92% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.351562922806 0.385218514788 91% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.110244207297 0.0692045440612 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.25878043449 0.275328986314 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.082864891892 0.0653680567796 127% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.4325221239 58% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.30420353982 151% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88274336283 20% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 3.0 7.22455752212 42% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 3.66592920354 109% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 8.0 13.5995575221 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.