One of the most conspicious trends of today's world is a colossal upsurge in the number of people believing that in order to protect the enviornment is to use local resources for example food, buiding materials rather than transporting resources form another places. In my opinion the former apprehension seems to be more rational. This essay will further elaborate my views in upcoming paragraphs with logical explanations.
To commence with, there are deluges of arguments in favour of use local resources for protection the environment. The most preponderant one is that it reduces carbon emission. To elaborate it, when people import resources form another places it require transportation like bulky vehicles like trucks, cargo ships and so on, it emits carbon emission in atmosphere. That put negative impact on ozone layer but if masses use local products. It cannot only contribute to earn money, but also leads to provide them job opportunities. Thanks to the wide range of advantages it offers masses can enhance the quality and productivity of their lives with much ease, efficacy and convenience. Needless to say all these merits stand in one good stead as far as augmenting their chances of prosperity and excellence is concerned.
Furthermore, another pivotal aspect of aforementioned proposition is that it is only likely to help in one excel in thrive in varied areas. Besides, if people import food form another nations then it increase the level of wastage. To explain it, this is because when nations import food to other nations they general pack them in plastic containers and another material that is not easily recycled which become a serious threat for environment for that region in which these products are exported . For instance the study results published by the government of Australia in March 2014 and April 2016 clearly indicates that when china exported enormous quantity of food to the Pakistan at that time it was very difficult for the government of Pakistan to solve the problem of plastic waste, which was caused by that products which were imported from china. That is why the use of local material is crucial and critical for the development for the society. Hence, it is apparent that many people consider it as a positive development.
On the other hand, a section of society contradicts above-mentioned views by providing reliable justifications they claim that in some cases when few nations have lack of local resources then it is negotiable for those countries to care about environment . To make it justifiable in some conditions many nations face food shortage or do not able to develop due to lack of resources in that condition they import those kind of things which they need to face these problems on that time the lawmakers do not care about environment. For exemplification, In south Korea vast amount of food is imported from India to feed the public of their nation, this because they do not have suitable environment for growing seeds. Hence, it is apparent that many individuals consider it as negative development.
To conclude, having pondered over above said views it is crystal clear that despite some drawbacks the benefits of using local resources for protecting environment are indeed too great, to ignore.
- Some People think that the government should be responsible for crime prevention while others believe that it is the responsibility of the individual to protect themselves Discuss both sides and give your opinion 67
- The bar chart below illustrates the use of tobacco products by secondary school students in the United States 78
- The diagram below shows how ethanol fuel is produced from corn
- Some people think that companies should provide employees with exercise time during the day 61
- In most of the societies the role of mother and father differs what are the causes of this difference what will be the parental roles in future 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 245, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'requires'?
Suggestion: requires
...import resources form another places it require transportation like bulky vehicles like...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 171, Rule ID: FROM_FORM[4]
Message: Did you mean 'from'?
Suggestion: from
...d areas. Besides, if people import food form another nations then it increase the le...
^^^^
Line 3, column 200, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'increases'?
Suggestion: increases
...mport food form another nations then it increase the level of wastage. To explain it, th...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 496, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ion in which these products are exported . For instance the study results publishe...
^^
Line 4, column 255, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...hose countries to care about environment . To make it justifiable in some conditio...
^^
Line 4, column 412, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this kind' or 'those kinds'?
Suggestion: this kind; those kinds
...resources in that condition they import those kind of things which they need to face these...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 774, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'negatives'?
Suggestion: negatives
...nt that many individuals consider it as negative development. To conclude, having ponde...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, furthermore, hence, if, so, then, for example, for instance, kind of, in my opinion, in some cases, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 13.1623246493 167% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 25.0 7.30460921844 342% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 53.0 24.0651302605 220% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 82.0 41.998997996 195% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 8.3376753507 276% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2738.0 1615.20841683 170% => OK
No of words: 536.0 315.596192385 170% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.10820895522 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81161862636 4.20363070211 114% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83991269772 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 282.0 176.041082164 160% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526119402985 0.561755894193 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 876.6 506.74238477 173% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 16.0721442886 131% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 83.4268862626 49.4020404114 169% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.380952381 106.682146367 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5238095238 20.7667163134 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.52380952381 7.06120827912 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.01903807615 139% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => 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: 0.241986663254 0.244688304435 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.064174594631 0.084324248473 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0729719725939 0.0667982634062 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14323728288 0.151304729494 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0366370217255 0.056905535591 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 50.2224549098 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.3001002004 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 143.0 78.4519038076 182% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.