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.
Many would assert that restrictions on consumers can solve environmental problems. In some senses, it is undeniable that impolitic consumption of customers sometimes worsen environmental issues such as the waste problem. Only by focusing on the merits of regulations on consumers does the speaker overlook the limitation of the policies from the perspectives of promoting illegal practices and the effectiveness of regulations on companies.
Admittedly, few would disagree that household restrictions can improve environmental problems. When it comes to enhancing consumers’ awareness of environmental problems, it seems less corporation regulations than those of general people in daily life that helps the environmental problems. Recycling policies, which encourage people not only to decrease their daily waste, but also to use recycling products, make the public understand the severity of the waste problem, thereby contributed to decreasing total waste amounts
resolve issues of the environment. The point here is that environmental policies on the public are basically beneficial for the environmental condition.
Nevertheless, customer regulations can be dissected by the lens of promoting illegal practices. Rather than solving intended problems on the environment, trash policies imposing an extra tax on garbage amounts made people throw away their trash illegally in order to avoid the tax. This brought about the increase of waste amounts, and unwittingly worsened the trash problem. This implies that too much emphasis on the customer regulation needs to be reconsidered.
Moreover, restriction on customers is not the only way to solve the problems. Considering the impact on the environment, companies which create a myriad of waste including baneful pollutants make more problems for the environment. In fact, most of the striking environmental issues are mainly caused by companies, like wastewater issues in Korea hurting countless victims. This indicates that regulation on companies regarding environmental issues should be considered to solve the problems.
To sum up, despite the beneficial outcomes of customer restrictions, promoting people’s illegal actions and companies’ gigantic impacts on the environment illuminate for us that regulation to the public does not always lead to an enhanced environment. Only if we were to ignore the downsides and limitations of regulating citizens, could we conclude that policy concentrating on the public invariably solves environmental issues.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-19 | Juhong Park | 10 | view |
| 2023-10-19 | Juhong Park | 66 | view |
| 2023-10-18 | Juhong Park | 83 | view |
| 2023-10-18 | Juhong Park | 66 | view |
| 2023-10-18 | Juhong Park | 66 | view |
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 54
- 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 66
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 58
- In any profession business politics education government those in power should step down after five years 16
- 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 10
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, moreover, nevertheless, regarding, so, in fact, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.6327345309 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2166.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 366.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.91803278689 5.12650576532 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37391431897 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.28149697568 2.78398813304 118% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.540983606557 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 676.8 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.2395290267 57.8364921388 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.411764706 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5294117647 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.11764705882 5.70786347227 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.88822355289 218% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.239643555219 0.218282227539 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0813506851084 0.0743258471296 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0421531583349 0.0701772020484 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129989129509 0.128457276422 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0286542990518 0.0628817314937 46% => 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: 17.2 14.3799401198 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 48.3550499002 69% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.06 12.5979740519 135% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.68 8.32208582834 116% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 98.500998004 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.