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 or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
The statement posit imposing strict limits on the amount of trash from individual household accepted by the government as the best way to solve environmental problems precipitated by the waste is simply overrated and haphazardly thought. The statement assumes that if the city limits the amount of waste accepted, household waste productions will definitely be less, therefore the environmental problems caused by it will subsequently decline. Household waste production is something inevitable but, we could always prevent the raising of environmental problems. There are some better options available to do it, such as making use company CSR for recycling facilities and forcing companies to produce any daily necessities product with environmentally friendly packaging by passing the necessary law.
The amount of corporeal social responsibility funds is not negligible. If the government could make company use this money to build recycling facilities, the number of facilities could be built would be enough to create a sustainable recycling process. With this sustainable recycling process, we could manage the recyclable part of the waste which is the one apt to accumulation (because they’re made from non-biodegradable material) and catalyzing long-term environmental problems. In addition, the recycling facilities open more jobs, and will eventually yield money from selling recycled goods. It’s like hitting two even three birds with one stone.
Today’s technology enables eco-friendly packaging for goods. Edible spoons, forks, and plates; bio-degradable layer to replace plastic wraps; even a sturdy mechanical appliance could also be created with eco-friendly material. There is only one reason for companies to use pernicious plastics and Styrofoam instead: the cost and availability; they are cheaper and easier to get. Thus, government should pass a law that enables efficient mass production of these eco-friendly substitutes. Also, one more law should be passed to force companies to use them.
One may argue that limiting trash accepted from household will gradually increase people’s awareness of their household-generated waste effects on environment and eventually they’ll try to reduce the amount of waste they produce daily. That may sound rational, but unfortunately it is ridiculous at the same time. It is true eventually people will realize how their waste contributes on environmental problems. But, the process will take a long time and during that period, the amount of unprocessed waste would be enormous and obviously engendering many more detrimental effects such as spreading of diseases, accumulation of nocuous substance, etc.
To conclude, limiting trash accepted from household is an option but definitely not the best way to solve environmental problems. There are better options available as mentioned above: empowering recycling facilities, substituting plastics and styrofoams with eco-friendly substitutes, and of course passing the necessary law. Nevertheless, I wouldn’t dare to say those options are the best that is a parochial way of thinking we definitely should avoid when offering solution.
| 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 |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 713, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'necessities'' or 'necessity's'?
Suggestion: necessities'; necessity's
... forcing companies to produce any daily necessities product with environmentally friendly p...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 661, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... accumulation of nocuous substance, etc. To conclude, limiting trash accepted fro...
^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'if', 'may', 'nevertheless', 'so', 'therefore', 'thus', 'in addition', 'of course', 'such as', 'it is true']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.241635687732 0.240241500013 101% => OK
Verbs: 0.165427509294 0.157235817809 105% => OK
Adjectives: 0.117100371747 0.0880659088768 133% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0446096654275 0.0497285424764 90% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0297397769517 0.0444667217837 67% => OK
Prepositions: 0.0910780669145 0.12292977631 74% => OK
Participles: 0.0520446096654 0.0406280797675 128% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.26639718746 2.79330140395 117% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0278810408922 0.030933414821 90% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.0016655270985 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0743494423792 0.0997080785238 75% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0334572490706 0.0249443105267 134% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0092936802974 0.0148568991511 63% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3183.0 2732.02544248 117% => OK
No of words: 467.0 452.878318584 103% => OK
Chars per words: 6.81584582441 6.0361032391 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64867537961 4.58838876751 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.44539614561 0.366273622748 122% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.361884368308 0.280924506359 129% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.295503211991 0.200843997647 147% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.248394004283 0.132149295362 188% => Too many words length more than 8 chars.
Word Length SD: 3.26639718746 2.79330140395 117% => OK
Unique words: 248.0 219.290929204 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.531049250535 0.48968727796 108% => OK
Word variations: 62.7122335599 55.4138127331 113% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6194690265 102% => OK
Sentence length: 22.2380952381 23.380412469 95% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.3893696949 59.4972553346 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.571428571 141.124799967 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2380952381 23.380412469 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.571428571429 0.674092028746 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.21349557522 38% => OK
Readability: 58.4265320689 51.4728631049 114% => OK
Elegance: 1.60465116279 1.64882698954 97% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.477980624876 0.391690518653 122% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0877348250542 0.123202303941 71% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0922469605303 0.077325440228 119% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.505582594595 0.547984918172 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.148807508371 0.149214159877 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.16473177798 0.161403998019 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.114713839978 0.0892212321368 129% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.260083872952 0.385218514788 68% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.103435907558 0.0692045440612 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.302687841008 0.275328986314 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0928224136367 0.0653680567796 142% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.4325221239 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.30420353982 151% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88274336283 82% => OK
Positive topic words: 9.0 7.22455752212 125% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 3.66592920354 218% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.70907079646 74% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 13.5995575221 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.