Studies some people believe pollution and damage of environment are resulted from a country’s developing and becoming richer. And this is hard to be avoided. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Whether the environment delegation should be the price of economic development has been into fierce discussion. Some people convince that there is not possibility to prop up economic and protect environment at the same time. I cannot stand in the same side with them. In following essay, I will refute this view in detail.
First of all, the economic prosperity built on the sacrifice of environment is short-sighted and more harm than good. Human cannot survive without clear air and water. When the nature resource exhaust, people would die and the economic would collapse. Like the movie 2012, all the achievement of human are destroyed in one second because of uncherishing the nature.
Besides, there are several choices to make environment-friendly economic prosperity. For individuals, they can consume recyclable production and enforce the enterprise to upgrade commodities and increase the investment on environmental research. For instance, the consumers can reject to purchase the high-pollution product such as unrecyclable bottle water. For the governments, they could legislate on environment protection and compel companies to put environment-friendly on the first priority. They can do more effort on infrastructure contribution and encourage individuals to take public transportation. Like Shanghai, the governments encourage P + S model, citizens can park cars on subway station for free and take subway to get downtown as a result it prevents clogging from streets and diminishing pollution from the air.
In conclusion, this planet is the only one we can survive, without it, the civilization of human will ceased to exist. So any actions to damage the environment in order to develop the economic should be ban with high penalty. Only when economic prosperity is sustainable without sacrifice of nature exhaust, it can be last for a long term.
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2014-11-13 | elaineding0818 | 70 | view |
- Studies some people believe pollution and damage of environment are resulted from a country’s developing and becoming richer. And this is hard to be avoided. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? 70
- Some countries have introduced a law to limit working hours for employees How this law can be introduced Do you think it s a positive negative development 50
there is not possibility
there is no possibility
the civilization of human will ceased to exist.
the civilization of human will be ceased to exist.
should be ban with high penalty.
should be banned with high penalty.
it can be last for a long term.
it can be lasting for a long term.
flaws:
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 6.5 out of 9
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 290 350
No. of Characters: 1539 1500
No. of Different Words: 173 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.127 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.307 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.242 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 113 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 89 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 67 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.059 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.512 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.471 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.299 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.51 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.063 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5