Which of the following three ways do you think would be most effective in protecting
46 | P
the natural environment and why?
Walking or cycling instead of using cars
Recycling and reusing objects instead of throwing them in the trash
Buying organic and chemical-free foods
That deleterious human activity put enormous pressure on mother earth in the past few decades is an axiom. In this regard, some people believe that altering eating habits or recycling can be the answer to this complication, while others stand on the other side of the continuum, believing that cutting back the use of automobiles and by substituting walking or using bicycles is a more beneficial option. Personally, I embrace the view of the latter for two main reasons, which I will explore in the following paragraphs.
To begin with, by regulating the transportation rules, the number of fossil fuels that have to be burned in order to keep up with the demands will be reduced to a great extent. To be more specific, even though we live in the area of promoting green energies, the use of fossil fuels like gas, oil, and gasoline is the primary source of energy even for trivial, everyday tasks. Therefore, promoting alternatives for cars seems promising, which has been a definite routine for many countries. For example, the study at the University of Teheran has shown that Netherland is one of the pioneers in this field that could establish a habit among their citizens to use bicycles instead of cars. It has yielded to be one of the clean cities in the world. Moreover, besides its many merits to the environment, taking a few steps more daily or going to work or campus by cycling can result in a healthier body and mind.
Secondly, one of the other advantages of turning to green transportation methods might be to decrease the need to construct new infrastructures. It is evident that as the number of cars increase, it gives rise to building more bridges and roads to support the extent of them to avoid traffic jams. The more cars produced, the more trees have to be cut to expand roads and streets. For instance, according to the report of the famous climate change organization in Belgium, in every minute, one meter is adding to the existing roads on the planet. This data clearly shows that if the authorities do not take action against this phenomenon, we will face a more significant future setback. The time is limited when it comes to shielding mother earth against our actions.
To conclude, not only will biking and walking constrain the excessive emitting of greenhouse gases into the air but also it will omit the labor of constructions to handle the insatiable growing number of cars worldwide.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-01-15 | negarborhani | 94 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement After completing high school students should take at least a year off to work or travel before they begin studying at a university Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 76
- Because people are busy doing so many different things they do very few things well Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 83
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement To be successful a business must spend a lot of money on advertising 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The rules that societies today expect young people to follow and obey are too strict Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 64
- TPO 53 task 1 88
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 28, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'bike'
Suggestion: bike
...actions. To conclude, not only will biking and walking constrain the excessive emi...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for example, for instance, to begin with, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 43.0788530466 60% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 52.1666666667 132% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.0752688172 74% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2015.0 1977.66487455 102% => OK
No of words: 418.0 407.700716846 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.82057416268 4.8611393121 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52162009685 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73331928559 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 212.727598566 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.574162679426 0.524837075471 109% => OK
syllable_count: 638.1 618.680645161 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.6003584229 78% => 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: 26.0 20.1344086022 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 58.4344919012 48.9658058833 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.9375 100.406767564 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.125 20.6045352989 127% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.3125 5.45110844103 152% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.122607871483 0.236089414692 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.035121459987 0.076458572812 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0197769922813 0.0737576698707 27% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0671350900173 0.150856017488 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0203399451566 0.0645574589148 32% => 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: 14.3 11.7677419355 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 10.9000537634 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.42 8.01818996416 117% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 86.8835125448 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 10.002688172 150% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.0537634409 123% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.