To solve the ever-increasing environmental hazards throughout the world, the best way is to increase the price of fuel.
What is your opinion on the above assumption?
There are several causes of environmental hazards and out of them, the burning of fossil fuel is a major one as it contributes more than a third of total pollution. Therefore, many people believe that increasing the price of fuel so as to curtail its use is one of the best options to tackle the environmental problems that the world is facing. However, there are many other side effects of raising fuel price which also needs to be taken under careful consideration before making a decision.
The automobile and other machinery are the leading source of environmental pollution as they produce a large amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. It is imperative to control the excessive use of fuel and promote environmentally friendly equipment. Raising the price of fuel could be a good strategy to discourage its use in many ways. Firstly, with a higher price, people tend to search for cheaper options and try to be more economical with fuel consumption. For example, people will buy more electronic cars, solar panels, and other environmentally friendly utilities. This trend will certainly reduce the unnecessary use of fuel and contribute to reducing environmental degradation. Secondly, a higher cost to run a car will encourage people to use more public transportation, carpooling, walking for short distance, and bicycling around the city area. These activities, furthermore, decrease the number of cars on the road and reduce the smoke and carbon dioxide that the vehicle produces.
In contrast, there are some disadvantages of higher fuel price because our daily activities largely depend on it. For instance, it is one of the main factors of production and cost of production proportionally increases with the increase in fuel price. The higher production cost will enhance the living cost which eventually brings instability into the society and the poor people get hit hard. Likewise, people who depend on the car for their daily job will face a financial hardship.
In conclusion, rising fuel price to reduce its consumption can be a good, if not the best, strategy to control environmental damage caused by the fuel emission. Nevertheless, the disadvantages of rising fuel price are also very significant and need to be evaluated while trying to increase the fuel price.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-10-31 | Laxman Basyal | 73 | view |
- Some people say that professional workers such as doctors nurses and teachers who make greater contribution to the society should be paid more than those people in the field of sports and entertainment To what extent do you agree or disagree 87
- USING A COMPUTER EVERYDAY CAN HAVE MORE NEGATIVE THAN POSITIVE EFFECT ON YOUR CHILDREN.DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE? 78
- Has the easier food preparation process nowadays improved the way people live? 84
- Is freedom of speech necessary in a free society? Give reasons for your answer. 73
- Do you support that the nuclear technology should be used for constructive purposes?Use your own knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence.Give reasons for your viewpoint. 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 231, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...lieve that increasing the price of fuel so as to curtail its use is one of the best opti...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 903, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ity area. These activities, furthermore, decrease the number of cars on the road ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, likewise, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, while, as to, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1936.0 1615.20841683 120% => OK
No of words: 374.0 315.596192385 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17647058824 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3976220399 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01012997991 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.51871657754 0.561755894193 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 627.3 506.74238477 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 27.4030533999 49.4020404114 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 113.882352941 106.682146367 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3529411765 7.06120827912 161% => 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: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.219387918434 0.244688304435 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0780274944543 0.084324248473 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0712415936757 0.0667982634062 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158335144133 0.151304729494 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0586046606956 0.056905535591 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.4159519038 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 78.4519038076 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.