A significant quantity of food is wasted by overwhelming majority of people. This is a serious issue because it affects both environmental and social spheres of society. This essay will discuss the root causes of food wastage, before proposing two potential solutions.
Perhaps primary cause of food wastage is lack of knowledge of people in healthy nutrition. On the basis of basic metabolism rate, weight, height and immune system, each individual should adhere to specific nutrition plan which in turn paves a way to prevent an excess demand for foods. For example, the recent research publicized by Times magazine sheds the light on issue that food wastage is 25 % less among the people who have participated in healthy nutrition seminars. Another important cause is that governments don’t allocate enough budget to highlight the devastating consequences of ecological problems that are the results of food wastage amongst people by organizing various events. Therefore, people can’t delineate the importance of even small actions that could lead to catastrophic results., for instance, pollution due to wastage.
Fortunately, there are two promising solutions to this problem. First of all, people should attend conferences, seminars, and lectures that devoted for explaining the inevitable role of proper and healthy consumption of foods on frequent basis. For example, the citizens of one of the most environmentally friendly city – Oslo - owe their clean society to the regular nutrition seminars that they attend. Secondly, governments ought to shoulder the blame of food wastage by spending a good money on the TV advertisements, preparation of inspirations projects, and organization of collective festivals which devoted to revealing the severe blow of wastage, which would cut down the member of food wasters.
To conclude, food wastage is a serious problem caused by significant gap in the nutrition knowledge of people and governmental actions to reduce it. I recommend that government address this problem by investing in food wastage related issues and that people should spend more time on more healthy and relevant nutrition program.
- The Graph below shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kindom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- The Graph below shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kindom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 84
- A University should accept male and female students equally in every subject.To what extent do you agree or disagree with the above statement? 61
- The Graph below shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kindom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- Most countries want to improve the standard of living through economic development. However, others think the social value is lost as a result of economic development. To what extent do you think the advantages of economic development outweigh its disadva 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 484, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'good money'.
Suggestion: good money
...r the blame of food wastage by spending a good money on the TV advertisements, preparation o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example, for instance, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1841.0 1615.20841683 114% => OK
No of words: 333.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.52852852853 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96901050697 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.603603603604 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 568.8 506.74238477 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.9316117313 49.4020404114 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.5 106.682146367 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7857142857 20.7667163134 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.92857142857 7.06120827912 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.216571354389 0.244688304435 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0818833537531 0.084324248473 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0605569267284 0.0667982634062 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13871447617 0.151304729494 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0179045760477 0.056905535591 31% => 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: 16.5 13.0946893788 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.09 12.4159519038 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.14 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 78.4519038076 144% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.