increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve growing traffic and pollution problems.
to what extent do you agree and disagree?
what measure do you think would be effective.
In this present day, enhance the price of gasoline is the best option to fix traffic and pollution growth problems for the government due to both of the complication became much solemn among the citizens in metropolis. Nonetheless, there is an enormous risk for the poverty inhabitant.
Raising the cost of fuel would provide several benefits for all residents who received the negative effect from waste of vehicle and the growth of private car. A lot of environmental experts believe the executive does not provide a good solution to solve the traffic congestion and the vehicle exhaust pollution which is detriment the majority of inhabitants. A matter is started when statecraft seem procrastinating several options to reduce the emotive issue: fuel quota limitation, smart card gasoline checker, and petroleum conversion. No one of those gargantuan plans implement to the truth while the matter enlarge and affect more complication. Therefore solely problem solving is to cut the vehicles mobility on the street with escalate the petrol price which would gradually minimize the car using.
Furthermore, there is monumental advantage when the president increase the petroleum cost which means reducing the subsidy of the gasoline. According to World Bank journal, the government of Indonesia allocated almost 20 % of national income to subsidize energy cost including fuel and gas. If the president would halt the policy, and reallocate the fund to another sector it might possibility obtain proficient point. Funding a research to search an alternative energy to substitute the fossil energy which would provide the better green energy source in the future.
Nevertheless, myriad poverty dwellers argue that the reduction of fuel subsidy would accord advantages for them. The plan seems dubious. Although the expensive price of petrol might potentially reduce the traffic congestion, the policy could suffer the low-class citizen. It based on the past facts when government announced to inflate the gasoline price caused all of daily requirements cost dramatically increased concerning fuel is the fundamental commodity. Those persons hope the decision maker would consider their agonize voice.
Consequently, even though, the gasoline costly expense might decrease the traffic problem and pollution. The president as an executive should contemplate the negative effect through the low-class inhabitants to relinquish them as an object.
- increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve growing traffic and pollution problems to what extent do you agree and disagree what measure do you think would be effective 63
- Should money be spent on space exploration? To what extend do you agree? 85
- At present, science has been developing at a high speed, but people still have a high opinion of artists. What can the arts tell us of the life that science cannot? 75
- There are many animal testing in the world today Is animal testing necessary To what extent do you support give your explanation 74
- Compare modern shopping centers to local markets and shops What way of shopping has more advantages for the people and the society 86
Sentence: Furthermore, there is monumental advantage when the president increase the petroleum cost which means reducing the subsidy of the gasoline.
Description: The fragment president increase the is rare
Suggestion: Possible agreement error: Replace increase with verb, past tense
Sentence: If the president would halt the policy, and reallocate the fund to another sector it might possibility obtain proficient point.
Description: A modal auxillary is not usually followed by a noun, singular, common
Suggestion: Refer to might and possibility
Sentence: It based on the past facts when government announced to inflate the gasoline price caused all of daily requirements cost dramatically increased concerning fuel is the fundamental commodity.
Description: A pronoun, personal, nominative, 3rd person singular is not usually followed by a verb, past participle
Suggestion: Refer to It and based
flaws:
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.044 0.07
It is on top list:
http://www.testbig.com/essay-categories/ielts
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 7.5 out of 9
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 372 350
No. of Characters: 2034 1500
No. of Different Words: 217 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.392 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.468 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.779 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 169 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 130 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.667 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.76 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.389 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.285 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.521 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.044 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5