Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement.
In the last decades, it seems that recycling becomes the number one occupation of the modern world. As some people would discern, there are not enough waste being recycled from individual homes in comparison to the possible level in different occasions. Because of this, one would propose that government should make the recycling as a legal requirement in order to provide more strict politics of waste management. From my standpoint, supporting the immediate legal activity should be the preferred option.
Firstly, let us take a look at homes which are actively included in the recycling process. Some data show that less than a half population in each modern city of the world take advantage of waste management. This information shows that people find easier to put all the garbage together rather than to sort it under the specific categories. The activity such as this, encourage another half of population to behave in the same way and we have disheartening results showing that the most of the potential recycling material go away.
Taking a look at the second view, one can see that, nowadays, there are a lot of individuals proposing government's action in this field. They believe that if the governments make the recycling as obligation enshrined in law, the most of people will change behaviour and comply the recycling activity with the legal requirements. As a result, it would bring a lot of revenues for the state as the material would be additionally used in the recycling circle. The excellent example for such practice is Switzerland where recycling became a legal obligation 10 years ago. Consequently, the Swiss citizens turned to be more disciplined with regards to the waste and recycling politics.
In conclusion, it has become the obvious fact that governments need to activate their mechanisms in order to increase preserving the nature from the malpractice. The legal amendments, as well as regular consultations on this topic, would be the most satisfying way for fulfilling this obligation.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-06-29 | nobitaa | 84 | view |
| 2024-06-10 | ThHuong | 61 | view |
| 2024-06-10 | ThHuong | 56 | view |
| 2023-11-19 | paniz_kiani | 56 | view |
| 2023-11-19 | paniz_kiani | 56 | view |
- A person’s worth nowadays seems to be judged according to social status and materialpossessions. Old-fashioned values, such as honour, kindness and trust, no longer seemimportant.To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? 73
- In many countries schools have severe problems with student behaviour.What do you think are the causes of this?What solutions can you suggest? 84
- Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement. 73
- The chart below gives information about Someland's main exports in 2005, 2015, and future projections for 2025.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 84
- In many countries schools have severe problems with student behaviour.What do you think are the causes of this?What solutions can you suggest? 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 230, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the people') or simply say ''most people''.
Suggestion: most of the people; most people
...ing as obligation enshrined in law, the most of people will change behaviour and comply the re...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['consequently', 'first', 'firstly', 'if', 'look', 'second', 'so', 'well', 'in conclusion', 'such as', 'as a result', 'as well as', 'in the same way']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.242339832869 0.247107183377 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.147632311978 0.155533422707 95% => OK
Adjectives: 0.08356545961 0.0946595960268 88% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0473537604457 0.0501214627716 94% => OK
Pronouns: 0.025069637883 0.0437548338989 57% => OK
Prepositions: 0.144846796657 0.122226691241 119% => OK
Participles: 0.0445682451253 0.0403226058552 111% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.8995940925 2.80594681477 103% => OK
Infinitives: 0.025069637883 0.0326793684256 77% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00163938923432 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.142061281337 0.0861772015684 165% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.025069637883 0.021408717616 117% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00557103064067 0.011925033212 47% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2026.0 1933.35771543 105% => OK
No of words: 329.0 316.048096192 104% => OK
Chars per words: 6.15805471125 6.12580529183 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25891501996 4.20517956788 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.358662613982 0.374742101984 96% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.282674772036 0.28420135186 99% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.234042553191 0.203846283523 115% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.170212765957 0.137316102897 124% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8995940925 2.80594681477 103% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.037074148 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553191489362 0.56093040696 99% => OK
Word variations: 59.5932685306 60.7387585426 98% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0891783567 93% => OK
Sentence length: 21.9333333333 20.7743622355 106% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.2535153578 49.517814964 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.066666667 127.492653851 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9333333333 20.7743622355 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.866666666667 0.814263465372 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38877755511 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.99599198397 25% => OK
Readability: 50.200810537 49.1944974215 102% => OK
Elegance: 1.96202531646 1.69124875643 116% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.491717665416 0.332605444948 148% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0916500331755 0.102741220458 89% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0438003845967 0.0668466124924 66% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.574349360492 0.534860350844 107% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.112983506448 0.148594505496 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.203303559378 0.134430193775 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0643537117348 0.0742795772207 87% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.491562944344 0.324371583561 152% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0153006127334 0.0638462369009 24% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.349635805015 0.228012699653 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0415164412665 0.058150111329 71% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.68436873747 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.41683366733 59% => OK
Positive topic words: 9.0 5.90881763527 152% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 2.5751503006 116% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 1.9629258517 102% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 10.4468937876 134% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.