Increasing the price of fuel is the best way to decrease air pollution and traffic. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give examples.
Recently, the phenomenon of the effects of increasing fuel prices on air pollution and its corresponding impacts has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complex procedures is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the traffic jam can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, decreasing air pollution can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that crucial issues, as well as ultimate outcomes, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment, which discovered current policies. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both the common phenomenon and accordingly complicated procedures apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of the public arena, declining cars' traffic might increase the consequences of critical needs. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of creative processes is correlated negatively with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notions of this remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of increasing the price of fuel far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issues' potential implications.
- Whether experimental learning can work well in formal education compared to books? Agree or disagree? 85
- It is important for school children to study music, art and sport as it is for them to become literature and numerate. How far do you agree with this statement? support your point of view with reasons and / or examples from your own experience. 88
- Nowadays, people spend too much time at work to the extent that they hardly have time for their personal life. Discuss 85
- Whether the design of the buildings will have a positive or negative impact on people’s life and work? 77
- Nowadays, people spend too much time at work to the extent that they hardly have time for their personal life. Discuss. 88
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 31.9359605911 91% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.75862068966 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1404.0 1207.87684729 116% => OK
No of words: 246.0 242.827586207 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.70731707317 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96035189615 3.92707691288 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24006945951 2.71678728327 119% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.666666666667 0.580463131201 115% => OK
syllable_count: 446.4 379.143842365 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.7001612314 50.4703680194 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.636363636 104.977214359 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3636363636 20.9669160288 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.54545454545 7.25397266985 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.139306471666 0.242375264174 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0470703032688 0.0925447433944 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0588519848285 0.071462118173 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0775913350588 0.151781067708 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0329711147641 0.0609392437508 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 12.6369458128 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.1260098522 61% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.13 11.5310837438 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.02 8.32886699507 132% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 55.0591133005 178% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.