Environment conservation is one of the most controversial topics in our society. The prompt argues that the best solution for fighting against environmental problems related to consumer waste, is to pass a law to limit amount of waste gathering from each person. I mostly disagree with this assertion for two reasons, the better solution is to make an efficient system of recycling, and make innovation in products. However, I do concede that, in some cases, make a cap for collecting waste can be beneficial.
First of all, one of the most efficient ways to tackle with this issue is to introduce a better recycle system. For instance, many unspoiled foods are being dumped every year by carefree people. An efficient system can gather this food from consumers in the exchange of coupon, for instance, and handing them out to the poor people who suffer from malnutrition. This way can lead to decreasing the amount of waste which people throwing away to the nature. Moreover, scientist and engineers can work together to invent a purifying system which is able to eliminate the toxic waste in various items and discharge the remains to the nature which is unharmful. Therefore, one efficient way to reduce consumer waste is to upgrade or introduce a better recycle system.
Second of all, another wat to mitigate environmental problem which comes from consumer waste is to factories modify some food products. For example, many packages are made of plastic or include other harmful and long resistance substances. In this case, scientist can make on some material to substitute them with environment-friendly ones. This can be beneficial in terms of wasting as the consumers can dig a hole in their backyards and place them in the soil. In addition, the factories owner can pack more items with a single packing material and reduce the prices for bigger volumes. In this situation, the consumers tend to buy them as price is one of the most prominent factors in buying products. Hence, factories can invent some innovation in order mitigate environment problem.
Nevertheless, in some cases, limiting acceptance trash could work to reduce environment problem. After passing a law to accept much less trash, people are forced to buy carefully and consider the waste. Otherwise, they would face many problems in case of finding a solution to throw their trashes, such as location. Furthermore, this could hinder them to reduce buying of non-essential products which most of them would be thrown away. In this situation, the buyers would become unconsciously careful when regard to the nature and lead to other related activities. Subsequently, by proposing and enforcing a law to limit rate of acceptance, the environment problem can be diminished.
In conclusion, although limiting the amount of acceptable waste from each consumer can be productive, the best way is to make some innovation in factories as well as introducing and upgrading recycle systems.
- The following appeared in a memo to the board of directors of Bargain Brand Cereals One year ago we introduced our first product Bargain Brand breakfast cereal Our very low prices quickly drew many customers away from the top selling cereal companies A 79
- The following appeared in a memo to the board of directors of Bargain Brand Cereals One year ago we introduced our first product Bargain Brand breakfast cereal Our very low prices quickly drew many customers away from the top selling cereal companies A 83
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a Batavia newspaper quot The department of agriculture in Batavia reports that the number of dairy farms throughout the country is now 25 percent greater than it was 10 years ago During this same time 79
- Some people argue that successful leaders in government industry or other fields must be highly competitive Other people claim that in order to be successful a leader must be willing and able to cooperate with others 79
- The best way to solve environmental problems caused by consumer generated waste is for towns and cities to impose strict limits on the amount of trash they will accept from each household Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree 83
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, hence, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, well, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as, as well as, first of all, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 77.0 58.6224719101 131% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 12.9106741573 178% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2583.0 2235.4752809 116% => OK
No of words: 485.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32577319588 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69283662038 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.13044152658 2.79657885939 112% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 215.323595506 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501030927835 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 783.9 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.1411379279 60.3974514979 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.0 118.986275619 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0952380952 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.7619047619 5.21951772744 187% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.203379176468 0.243740707755 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0660509063273 0.0831039109588 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0635256047163 0.0758088955206 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135252145833 0.150359130593 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0332823289083 0.0667264976115 50% => 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: 15.2 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.1639044944 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.94 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 100.480337079 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.