Some people believe that car-free days are effective way to reduce air pollution. However, others argue that there are other ways that are more effective. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Car-free days are considered by some as an effective measure to combat air pollution, while others contend that alternative methods yield better results. In examining these diverging viewpoints, it becomes apparent that there are merits to each perspective.
Proponents of car-free days argue that they provide an opportunity to raise awareness about the environmental impact of automobiles and promote the use of alternative modes of transportation. On these designated days, cities restrict vehicular access to certain areas, encouraging individuals to use public transportation, walk, or cycle instead. Such initiatives can potentially reduce air pollution by decreasing vehicle emissions and promoting a more sustainable urban environment.
However, critics of car-free days maintain that they are merely symbolic gestures with limited impact. They argue that a single day without cars may not significantly address the underlying issue of air pollution. Moreover, these critics suggest that a more comprehensive approach is required, one that focuses on long-term strategies such as improving public transportation infrastructure, incentivizing the use of electric vehicles, and implementing stricter emissions standards.
In considering both perspectives, it is evident that car-free days alone may not be the most effective solution to combat air pollution. While they can serve as a valuable awareness-raising tool, broader and sustained efforts are necessary to achieve substantial results. Implementing policies that prioritize sustainable transportation options, investing in renewable energy sources, and enforcing stringent emissions regulations are essential steps towards mitigating air pollution and creating a healthier environment.
In conclusion, although car-free days can contribute to raising awareness about air pollution, they should be viewed as part of a comprehensive approach rather than a standalone solution. Addressing the issue requires a multifaceted strategy that combines measures like improved public transportation, promotion of electric vehicles, and the enforcement of strict emissions standards. By adopting such an approach, societies can effectively reduce air pollution and promote sustainable living for the benefit of current and future generations.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-13 | duchuynh | 73 | view |
| 2023-05-21 | duyenlf | 89 | view |
| 2023-02-08 | kelvin sandi | 89 | view |
| 2023-01-25 | ieltsstudent | 95 | view |
- companies should provide sports facilities for local communities To what extend do you agree 73
- companies should provide sports facilities for local communities To what extend do you agree 73
- Doing an enjoyable activity with a child can be better for their overall skills development and creativity than reading To what extend do you agree 78
- companies should provide sports facilities for local communities To what extend do you agree 73
- Some people say that to prevent illness and disease governments should focus more on reducing environmental population and housing problems To what extend do you agree or disagree 89
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, moreover, so, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.3376753507 216% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1989.0 1615.20841683 123% => OK
No of words: 318.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 6.25471698113 5.12529762239 122% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.40906755934 2.80592935109 121% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59748427673 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 622.8 506.74238477 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 2.0 1.60771543086 124% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7275327611 49.4020404114 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.071428571 106.682146367 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7142857143 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.71428571429 7.06120827912 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.218636029439 0.244688304435 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0781702871618 0.084324248473 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0710482814421 0.0667982634062 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128725648285 0.151304729494 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0299469771513 0.056905535591 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.4 13.0946893788 148% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 15.31 50.2224549098 30% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 11.3001002004 147% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 19.27 12.4159519038 155% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.98 8.58950901804 128% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 78.4519038076 161% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.78957915832 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.