Atomic energy is becoming more and more popular energy source. However, some people argue that nuclear power puts life on the Earth to danger.
What is your opinion?
It’s true that diverse species has been threatened by improper use of nuclear fission. While I agree that the outcomes of those actions cause numbers of different species of plants, animals and human suffer, the benefits of nuclear power would far outweigh the drawbacks.
On the one hand, the consequences of misused atomic power have threatened the extinction of species. Firstly, in the past, the use of missiles and atomic bombs, a form of nuclear energy, in the Second World War has affected to date with children born with complications such mental retardation and conditions such as autism and other disorders. Secondly, since most nuclear power plants are located along lakes, rivers or seacoasts, cooling water discharged from a plant can affect the ambient habitat conditions for aquatic species. If the water temperature is overheated or freezing, it can harm or kill fishes, affect their health and damage their habitats. Fish may not swim in rivers with the altered temperature that can compromise their spawning activities.
On the other hand, there are several good reasons for atomic energy is widely favoured. Currently, fission power is essential to our response to climate change and greenhouse gas effect by producing emission-free electricity. This can also be used as an alternative to eliminate the uses of other natural resources like coal, oil and gases which cause air pollution. Furthermore, nuclear power stations are cleaner than fossil fuel power stations and could help to reduce carbon emission that causes global warming. With improvements in nuclear technology, the risks of accidents are being reduced. As a result, many countries are now considering nuclear power as a solution to high oil and gas prices, increasing demand for electricity, and worries about pollution and climate change.
In conclusion, although nuclear power can cause tremendous results if misused, we should not dismiss all the benefits it brings rather use it with a precautionary approach.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-12-24 | m_sepahi@ymail.com | 89 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, second, secondly, so, while, in conclusion, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 41.998997996 90% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1692.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 316.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35443037975 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21620550194 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77937473012 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.626582278481 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.3394749514 49.4020404114 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.857142857 106.682146367 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5714285714 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.07142857143 7.06120827912 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.112587799569 0.244688304435 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0403399954715 0.084324248473 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0284459631068 0.0667982634062 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0649008383275 0.151304729494 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0206403889071 0.056905535591 36% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.05 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.87 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 78.4519038076 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 9.78957915832 138% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.