Used and loved by millions
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com
long standing emission
Grammar usage guide and real-world examplesUSAGE SUMMARY
The phrase "long standing emission" is not correct in standard written English.
The correct form would be "long-standing emission," which refers to emissions that have been occurring for a significant period of time. Example: "The long-standing emission of pollutants from the factory has raised concerns among local residents."
⚠ May contain grammatical issues
Science
News & Media
Alternative expressions(1)
Table of contents
Usage summary
Human-verified examples
Expert writing tips
Linguistic context
Ludwig's wrap-up
Alternative expressions
FAQs
Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources
Similar Expressions
59 human-written examples
Construction and installation of the hood has been performed and a 65% reduction in fume emission was achieved, thus significantly mitigating a long-standing emission problem.
Wives of long standing shuddered in empathy.
News & Media
He received a long standing ovation.
News & Media
Settlement there is of long standing.
Encyclopedias
They're all friends of long standing.
News & Media
This confirms a long standing expectation.
This state influence is long standing however.
News & Media
Treatment of long standing alopecia areata can be extremely difficult.
These investments could have long standing impacts.
News & Media
*LSIs, Long standing illnesses.
Science
Unfortunately, this is a long standing systematic problem.
Science
Expert writing Tips
Best practice
When referring to emissions that have persisted for a considerable time, prefer the term "long-standing emissions" with a hyphen or use alternatives like "persistent emissions" or "chronic emissions" to ensure clarity and grammatical correctness.
Common error
Avoid using "long standing" as a direct modifier before a noun like "emission". Instead, use "long-standing" (with a hyphen) to function as a compound adjective, or rephrase the sentence to use alternatives like "persistent" or "chronic".
Source & Trust
79%
Authority and reliability
1.8/5
Expert rating
Real-world application tested
Linguistic Context
The phrase functions as a noun modifier, aiming to describe a type of emission that has existed for an extended duration. Although Ludwig AI highlights that the phrase is not correct in standard written English, the intention is to qualify the noun "emission" with the attributes of being long-lasting.
Frequent in
Science
0%
News & Media
0%
Formal & Business
0%
Less common in
Science
0%
News & Media
0%
Formal & Business
0%
Ludwig's WRAP-UP
The phrase "long standing emission" is considered grammatically incorrect in standard written English, according to Ludwig AI. The correct form is "long-standing emission", using a hyphen to create a compound adjective. The intention of the phrase is to describe emissions that have persisted for a significant period. When referring to such emissions, consider using the grammatically correct form or opting for alternatives like "persistent emissions" or "chronic emissions" to ensure clarity. While the individual words are commonly used, their specific combination without a hyphen is not standard practice.
More alternative expressions(6)
Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:
long-term emissions
This alternative focuses on the temporal aspect of emissions over an extended period.
persistent emissions
This alternative emphasizes the continuous nature of the emissions.
chronic emissions
This alternative suggests that the emissions are a recurring or ongoing problem.
sustained emissions
This alternative highlights that emissions continue or are maintained at a certain level.
protracted emissions
This alternative underlines the extended duration of the emissions.
enduring emissions
This alternative indicates emissions that last for a long time.
historical emissions
This alternative focuses on emissions that have occurred in the past.
legacy emissions
This alternative highlights emissions that are the result of past activities and continue to have an impact.
continuous emission
This alternative describes the steady and uninterrupted flow of emissions.
on-going emission
This alternative refers to a current emission or one that is happening now.
FAQs
How to correctly refer to emissions that have occurred for a long time?
The correct way to describe emissions that have persisted for a considerable duration is by using the term "long-standing emissions". Alternatives such as "persistent emissions" or "chronic emissions" can also be used.
Is "long standing emission" grammatically correct?
No, "long standing emission" is not considered grammatically correct in standard English. The proper form is "long-standing emission", with a hyphen to create a compound adjective. You can also use alternative terms such as "prolonged emission" or "sustained emission".
What's the difference between "long standing emission" and "long-standing emission"?
"Long standing emission" is grammatically incorrect. The correct form is "long-standing emission", where "long-standing" acts as a compound adjective describing the emission. Using the hyphen creates a clear and accepted grammatical structure. You could also use a synonymous phrase like "legacy emissions".
What are some alternatives to "long-standing emission" that I can use in my writing?
Depending on the context, you can use alternatives like "persistent emissions", "chronic emissions", "historical emissions", or "legacy emissions". Each of these options emphasizes a slightly different aspect of emissions occurring over time.
Editing plus AI, all in one place.
Stop switching between tools. Your AI writing partner for everything—polishing proposals, crafting emails, finding the right tone.
Table of contents
Usage summary
Human-verified examples
Expert writing tips
Linguistic context
Ludwig's wrap-up
Alternative expressions
FAQs
Source & Trust
79%
Authority and reliability
1.8/5
Expert rating
Real-world application tested