In many countries, plastic shopping bags are the main type of rubbish. They cause water pollution and land pollution, so they should be banned. To what extent do you agree?
Plastic, in the forms of shopping bags, in general caused a worldwide concern as the major source of polluter that contaminates land and water; therefore, some expert suggest to prohibit the usages of plastic bags. I somewhat disagree with this idea because a complete prohibition is rather a draconian solution whereas alternative solutions are readily available.
Undoubtedly, plastic shopping bags being the by-product of plastic which is non-biodegradable, are one of the primary source of land and water pollutions. Firstly, disposal of it into landfills leads to aggravation of land condition because they might spread out from those to nearby human habitats due to natural phenomenon like strong winds, cyclones and floods. Secondly, disposing them into water sources such as Sewages and Canals also creates disruptions of water natural flows by stagnating waste into the flows which ultimately leads to water pollutions. Finally, burning them, which causes emission of toxic substances, for instance, CFCs, carbon-di-oxide and carbon-mono-oxide into the atmosphere, also causes air pollutions. Therefore, banning the production and usages of it is the only option left to tackle land and water contaminations.
Despite this, there are others attractive alternatives instead of total ban of usages and production of plastic shopping bags. Recycling of it rather than disposition to landfills combined with introduction of eco-friendly products such as jutes bags into the markets would be ideal solution to the problems. Besides this, enlightening the masses by raising awareness among them about the usages and importance of environmentally friendly products with regards to environment protection, would be another quantum leap towards resolution of the same. Furthermore, when it comes to combating land and water pollutions, banning and reduction of it alone could not resolve the situation at all because there are other equally important sources of pollutants. For examples, construction, domestic waste, industrial waste and agriculture all contributes to land degradation, while waste from factories, sewage, power plants, underground coal mines and oil refineries contributes to water contaminations. If government fails to undertake pragmatic step to regulate pollution from those sources, it would be foolish to expect something dramatic change to happen in terms of land and water protection by prohibiting plastic bags alone.
In conclusion, although plastic shopping bags admittedly one of the major polluter of land and water worldwide, prohibiting usages and production is rather hard and fast approach to the problem; however, controlling usage and recycling of it combined with promotion of better alternatives would be best solution to the problems.
- Although more and more people read the news on internet, newspapers will remain the most important source of news for the majority of people. Do you agree or disagree? 78
- In many countries, plastic shopping bags are the main type of rubbish. They cause water pollution and land pollution, so they should be banned. To what extent do you agree? 78
- A person’s worth nowadays seems to be judged according to social status and material possessions. Old-fashioned values, such as honour, kindness and trust, no longer seem important.To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? 61
- Many young people regularly change their jobs over the years. What are the reasons for this? Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? 73
- Many university students live with their families, while others live away from home because their universities are in different places. What are the advantages and disadvantages of both situations? 36
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 168, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggest prohibiting'.
Suggestion: suggest prohibiting
... land and water; therefore, some expert suggest to prohibit the usages of plastic bags. I somewhat ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ion by prohibiting plastic bags alone. In conclusion, although plastic shopping...
^^^
Line 7, column 296, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'be the best'.
Suggestion: be the best
... promotion of better alternatives would be best solution to the problems.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in general, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 10.4138276553 173% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 41.998997996 167% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 8.3376753507 276% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2372.0 1615.20841683 147% => OK
No of words: 413.0 315.596192385 131% => OK
Chars per words: 5.74334140436 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15625583279 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 176.041082164 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554479418886 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 734.4 506.74238477 145% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 20.2975951904 143% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 52.9669226778 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 169.428571429 106.682146367 159% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.5 20.7667163134 142% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.9285714286 7.06120827912 183% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.20150251352 0.244688304435 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0748862542496 0.084324248473 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0556227954172 0.0667982634062 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130420924743 0.151304729494 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0149332872111 0.056905535591 26% => 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: 20.4 13.0946893788 156% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.12 50.2224549098 50% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.0 11.3001002004 150% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.6 12.4159519038 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.08 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 131.0 78.4519038076 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.1190380762 134% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => 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.