Some people think that increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve the world’s environmental problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
One school of thought holds that an increase in petrol prices is the most effective measure to deal with environmental problems that happen worldwide. While I acknowledge the reasons behind this thinking, I am of the opinion that there are particular measures that could be more effective than raising fuel costs.
On the one hand, it is understandable why some people propose increasing petrol prices as the foremost method of addressing environmental issues. The key rationale is that this practice would lead to a decrease in the amount of petrol consumed for transportation. This means the discharge of CO2 and other toxic fumes, one of the main culprits behind global warming, would be reduced. However, such a scenario would not happen since using petrol terms to be a deep-rooted practice of humans, which could be seen in almost all vehicles that currently use petrol as the main source of energy. Therefore, raising the price of petrol should not be deemed as a practical solution.
On the other hand, I believe that there are other measures that can be more workable in addressing environmental issues. One of these is to raise public awareness about the consequences of environmental pollution. For example, it is imperative that campaigns that encourage citizens to use public transport should be intensified which may directly reduce the volume of exhaust fumes from private vehicles. Secondly, the government should allocate more money to researching and developing green technologies, such as renewables, which is key to lowering the reliance on carbon-intensive energy sources. Compared to raising petrol prices, these solutions tend to be more sustainable in solving environmental issues.
In conclusion, for the reasons elaborated above, it stands to reason that increasing petrol prices should not be considered as the best way to mitigate environmental problems and that the proposed measures seem more workable.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-18 | nguyenkhangtriem | 73 | view |
- The table below shows the percentages of the population by age groups in one town who rode bicycles in 2011
- The picture below shows the process of producing ceramic pots Summarizing the information by selecting and reporting the main features 80
- Some people think that countries should produce food their population eats and import less food as much as possible To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- The table below shows the percentages ofthe population by age groups in one town who rode bicycles in 2011 78
- Everyday millions of tons of food are wasted all over the world Why do you think this is happening And how can we solve this problem 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => 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: 1637.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 305.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36721311475 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03056187765 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 176.041082164 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.531147540984 0.561755894193 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 516.6 506.74238477 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.4752190858 49.4020404114 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.923076923 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4615384615 20.7667163134 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.61538461538 7.06120827912 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.180746790972 0.244688304435 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0726767279794 0.084324248473 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0766514392531 0.0667982634062 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125221792701 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0502527998542 0.056905535591 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.0946893788 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.