There is an argument over whether alternative sources of energy will soon replace fossil fuels. Some people might believe that it is possible to change renewable sources of energy (막연하게 바뀐다는 것 보다는 renewable sources가 어떻게 바뀔 것 이라고 쓰는 게 좋을 것 같아요)as world leaders are getting more and more interested in environmental problems. My view, however, is that fossil fuels would cause problems more than ever if renewable sources are used for energy. This is largely because there are no common criteria(무엇에 대한 common criteria 를 말하는 건가요?). Moreover, rapid change in sources of energy leads to the country’s economic recession.
To begin with, many leaders in all over the world have no norms collectively. The country that used fossil fuels is different from their situation. (문장의 의미전달이 명확하지 않아요. Detail을 포함해서 글쓴이가 정확하게 전달하고자 하는 바가 무엇인지 나타내는 것이 좋을 것 같아요) Some country consumed more fossil fuels, whereas other countries might be well-developed in alternative energy. However, in this regard, many rules, norms, and criteria on alternative energy would be made by a stronger state, or well-developed country, such as the United States. As a result, these rules were simply to temporary methods. (무슨 말을 하려는 건지 잘 모르겠습니다.) Suppose your country is the one of the strongest nation. Also, the nation used that uses a large percent of renewable sources. In this sense, you can make the rule have priority. (문법상으로도 틀린 문장이지만 이 문장 역시 의미전달이 확실하지가 않네요. 무슨 말을 전하려는 건지 명확하지가 않습니다) As a result, these forced method were not effective solution. Therefore, had it not been for collective and cooperative method, the world would have not improved on environmental problems.
이 문단은 전반적으로 글쓴이의 point가 무엇인지 명확하지가 않은 것 같아요. Renewable source를 에너지자원으로 사용하는 것과 계속 mention되는 rule, norm의 관계가 명확하게 나와있지 않기 때문에 전체적으로 무슨 말을 하려는 건지 잘 알 수가 없어요. 때문에 well-supported 되지도 않고요. 다시 한번 읽어보면서 detail들을 포함해서 수정 해보세요.
Furthermore, fast transition of energy sources caused can cause the nation to get severe problems. If some nations have a higher (무엇과 compare 하는 건가요?) percentage of fossil fuels, the nation would put in more efforts (what efforts? Efforts for what?) when compared the other nation. And Therefore, civilian of the country should do unnecessary activities, such as taking transportation instead of taking personal cars. These situations gives the people unbalanced life. (why?) According to a study conducted by a group of researcher at Harvard University, if the policy that the nations should reduce the use of fossil fuels is implemented, more than two-third of the countries is will get harmful to economic recession. Also, this policy can be burden to people’s overwhelming load. As the study shows, changes lead to economic recession.
To summarize, the adverse effect of rapid change far outweighs the benefit of renewable sources of energy considering the facts that there is no collective rules and alternative resources gives the more detrimental problems. Of course, replacing fossil fuels with renewable sources is beneficial to environmental aspects, such as reducing of air pollution, but it caused unfair norms.
전체적으로 essay에 detail이 부족하고 의미전달이 잘 안되고 있어요. 그리고 동사의 시제에도 신경을 써서 다시 proof reading을 해 보시는 것이 좋을 것 같아요. 내용적인 면과 문법적인 면 모두에서 보완이 필요한 것 같습니다. 전반적인 clarity가 부족해요.