Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve growing traffic and pollution problems.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
What other measures do you think might be effective?
It is said that traffic congestion and pollution are a serious issue for the natural environment. There is now a growing agreement that a rising cost of gasoline is the most important way to tackle these problems. Personally, I completely agree with this view.
On the one hand, many researchers have illustrates the increase in the price of gasoline would be one of the best ways to dramatically reduce the number of people using fuel in daily commutes. Besides, depending on the pressure of reducing human demand, vehicles using fossil fuels such as gasoline, the oil will also be reduced on the market. For example, during the past, people tend to use public transport instead of private vehicles because the price of gasoline is too expensive compared to their daily expenses.
On the other hand, for a variety of possible pollution to deal with these issues. Firstly, the government should promote many public campaigns such as encouraging people to use environmentally friendly fuels or renewable energy from solar, wind and water power to replace gasoline and oil. Besides, each government should take specific measures to raise public awareness about the use of fuels such as gasoline. By enacting community projects or programs so that people can better understand the harmful effects of petroleum on the human environment. Moreover, upgrading and improving the public transport system is also one of the effective measures to reduce traffic congestion especially in large cities. Reducing the burning of petroleum conjugates in the air will also increase the quality of the air and human environment.
In conclusion, from what has been discussed above, increasing the price of gasoline is reasonable to view to addressing the environmental problems. Besides, the government has an important role to play in raising people's awareness of using fossil fuels.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-29 | m_sepahi@ymail.com | 11 | view |
| 2021-08-14 | pourya | 73 | view |
| 2020-09-22 | lunhongquan | 73 | view |
| 2020-07-24 | zukky | 73 | view |
| 2020-06-29 | ayofigo | 73 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, first, firstly, if, moreover, so, 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 : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 24.0651302605 37% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1578.0 1615.20841683 98% => OK
No of words: 299.0 315.596192385 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.27759197324 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8408610282 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.548494983278 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 507.6 506.74238477 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.9650607831 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.714285714 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3571428571 20.7667163134 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.35714285714 7.06120827912 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => 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: 0.122797321369 0.244688304435 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0442942112453 0.084324248473 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0331342544815 0.0667982634062 50% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0786068344201 0.151304729494 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0102844081623 0.056905535591 18% => 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: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.4159519038 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 78.4519038076 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => 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.