Long-distance flights use more fuel than cars and pollute the environment. We should discourage non-essential flight instead of limiting the use of cars. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Travelling by airplanes have burnt a huge amount of fuel to take-off and therefore it is more harmful to our environment than cars. While many people argue that we only need to limit the insignificant flights without discouraging cars driving, I believe that we are likely to cut back on both means of transportation.
It is true that an airplane requires a huge amount of fuel to take off into the sky and transport its passengers and goods. The more fuels the airplane engines consume, the more polluted air the environments have to suffer. As a result, we need to find other means of transportation or communication, which help to curb the needs of travel by model designed to fly. Moreover, there are many means of communication that are almost as good as face to face meeting such as Video calls through Facebook. Indeed, it is unnecessary to usually book air ticket to move across countries like the days before. The breakthrough technologies could promote and facilitate communication without producing pollution.
The best option is not only discouraging long-distance flights but a combination of limiting the use of cars and airplanes. While the fuel consumption of one airplane is much more than one car, the gross number of car commuting is a huge number and at the macro level, they will add up in big way. Therefore we could not underestimate the pollution that cars driving produce. Furthermore, cars has become so popular and therefore there is a range of effective measures that could control the amount of fuel released by automobiles. So, we can implement simply various measures that lead to the reduction of toxic air discharged by cars.
In conclusion, there is no compelling reason to choose the only one between car and airplane in order to reduce air pollution. The governments who is mainly responsible for environmental protection should discourage both fuel use of cars and long-distance flights.
- Long-distance flights use more fuel than cars and pollute the environment. We should discourage non-essential flight instead of limiting the use of cars. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 78
- Some people think that instead of preventing climate change, we need to find a way to live with it. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 67
- Some people think rich countries should help poor countries by giving money directly. Others believe there are more effective forms of international aids. What is your opinion?Give reasons for your answers and include any relevant examples from your own k 61
- Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of people. Some people say that governments should spend public money on saving these languages, while others believe that would be a waste of money. Discuss both 56
- Some people think that good health is essential to every person, so medical services should not be run by profit-making companies. Do the disadvantages of private health care outweigh the advantages? 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 387, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun means seems to be countable; consider using: 'many means'.
Suggestion: many means
...el designed to fly. Moreover, there are many means of communication that are almost as goo...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 298, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...cro level, they will add up in big way. Therefore we could not underestimate the pollutio...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, if, moreover, so, therefore, while, in conclusion, such as, as a result, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.3376753507 192% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1611.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 321.0 315.596192385 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01869158879 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05706380609 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563862928349 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 508.5 506.74238477 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 28.1871523137 49.4020404114 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 107.4 106.682146367 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4 20.7667163134 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.73333333333 7.06120827912 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.280919052258 0.244688304435 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0894484117251 0.084324248473 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0930412233161 0.0667982634062 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175734550206 0.151304729494 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0700741259308 0.056905535591 123% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 50.2224549098 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.4159519038 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.58950901804 99% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 78.4519038076 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.