The only way to reduce the amount of traffic in cities today is by reducing the need for people to travel from home for work, education or shopping.To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Traffic congestion from automobiles is a growing issue, which results in harmful detrimental effects on both pollution and quality of life. One suggested solution is to reduce the amount of traveling done by people for personal, work or academic related. This certainly is a viable solution and it may reduce the traffic to a great extent with, but it does come with some disadvantages and drawbacks. This essay disagrees with proposed solution and will discuss on negative aspects of solution in question followed with alternative approach to lower the traffic in an effective way.

Preventing people from traveling results in certain degree of isolation, which could have a drawback on the overall community. Human beings have been social creatures from the very beginning and this is an important aspect in the overall development and advancement of human race. Technology today has evolved to the level that allows humans to do most of their day to day activities without stepping out. This behavior gradually, but consistently results in reduced human interactions with one another, which results is social isolation leading to awkwardness and discomfort when running into other fellow human beings. This could have greater impact on society and affect how societies operate, leading to a slowdown of the process of evolution.

The other practical and promising method is to encourage green mode of transportation, which uses recycled sources of energy. This does reduce the amount of travel needed by people, which would lead to lowering of traffic, leading to congestion free cities. This approach does have other added benefits which are actually better for environment. The overall air pollution and vehicular noises are reduced. Other big advantage to this approach indirectly results in healthy lifestyle and good habits.

To conclude, the proposed suggestion on lowering the traffic has certain important negative aspects. As such, this essay disagrees with this offered solution and also since other better approaches are available with multi-level benefits are discussed above on one such alternative solution.

Votes
Average: 7.3 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
IELTS Writing Task II - IELTS General Training
Essays by the user:
>>> more essays by the user >>>

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 563, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an effective way" with adverb for "effective"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ternative approach to lower the traffic in an effective way. Preventing people from traveling re...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, if, may, so, to a great extent

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1806.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 330.0 315.596192385 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.47272727273 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26214759535 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77483112765 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554545454545 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 570.6 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.2751143042 49.4020404114 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.875 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.625 20.7667163134 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.1875 7.06120827912 45% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.165130855616 0.244688304435 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0577195513273 0.084324248473 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.067252380013 0.0667982634062 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0989369759488 0.151304729494 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0624617592123 0.056905535591 110% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.4159519038 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.65 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 78.4519038076 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.

Traffic congestion caused by automobiles has become a major issue in almost all cities all over the world. Some people opine that reducing the need for people to travel is the best way to reduce traffic congestion. In my opinion, this approach will certainly help; however, it has its downsides.

Thanks to advancements in technology, it is now possible for people to perform most tasks without having to step outside. For example, they can buy just about anything they need online. They can also pay bills online. In fact, many organizations already allow their employees to work from home. In future, as access to technology improves more and more businesses and establishments will offer the work from option. Likewise, many universities now offer their courses online. By simply encouraging more students to study online and more people to work from home, the government can reduce traffic and vehicular pollution to a great extent.

However, this approach does have its side effects. If people stop traveling, millions of drivers employed by the travel industry will lose their livelihood. This will have a massive impact on the economy. Any reduction in the amount of traveling will also reduce the demand for cars, motorbikes and buses. So, obviously, the automobile industry will be hit hard and people employed in this sector will lose their jobs. There are many more drawbacks. When people perform every activity online, there will be a dramatic decline in face to face interactions. Eventually, this will lead to many psychological and socio-cultural problems. For example, lack of interactions with others may trigger depression in some people. In other words, the disadvantages of reducing the need to travel will outweigh its advantages. Hence, in my opinion, a better solution is to build wider roads and create more job opportunities in the countryside. This will stop the migration of rural folks into urban areas and thus reduce the congestion in cities.

To conclude, eliminating the need the travel will certainly reduce traffic congestion everywhere; unfortunately, this move will create more problems than it solves.