If people want to contribute to the society, which of the following is the best way?
1- riding bicycle or walking on foot
2- recycling the waste
3- buying local organic food
In the modern era, technology is being developed at a galloping rate. This progress has resulted in many breakthroughs of protecting our planet. One of the big challenges of societies is discovering the ways which lead to saving energy. The controversial question which arises here is that if people want to contribute the society, what can they do among three values. Some people prefer to provide organic food to distribute in society, and people who decide to protect those producers. Some are of the opinion that riding bicycle or walking on foot is the best way. As far as I am concerned, recycling the waste has a pivotal effect in order to save our planet. In the following paragraphs, my viewpoint will be elucidated through two remarkable reasons.
The first vital point to bear in mind is that recycling helps protect the environment. Recycling reduces the need for extracting (such as mining, quarrying and logging), refining and processing raw materials. All of these create substantial air and water pollution. Not only does recycling save energy, but also it reduces greenhouse gas emission, which helps to tackle climate changes. Furthermore, recycling saves resources. When we recycle, used materials are converted into new products, reducing the need to consume natural resources. Consequently, if the materials are not recycled, new products are made by extracting fresh, raw materials from the earth, through mining and forestry. Recycling helps conserve important materials and protects natural habitats for the future. For instance, recycling paper and wood saves trees and forests. You cannot replace virgin rainforest or ancient woodlands once they are lost. Recycling plastic means creating less new plastic, which is definitely a good thing, especially as it is usually made from fossil fuel hydrocarbons. Recycling metals means there is less need for risky, expensive and damaging mining new metal ores.
The second noteworthy reason is that recycling saves energy. Using recycled materials in the manufacturing process uses considerably less energy than that required for producing new products from raw materials. As a matter of fact, cost of producing energy is a significant issue in societies. Recent researches show that the amount of energy saved from recycling one glass bottle could power an old light bulb for 4 hours, and a new low-energy LED equivalent for a lot longer. This indicates that the cost of producing and consuming energy is more cost-effective by this approach. Besides, we cannot overlook the important role of using renewable energy rather than burning fossil fuels. As an example, wind is the common phenomenon all over the world as well as it is ubiquitous, just by installing the wind turbines, we can produce electricity.
To bring everything into conclusion, considering the given three main values, I definitely believe that recycling the waste has the prominent role to protect the environment. The more governments provide incentive to recycle the waste, the more people can enjoy the green planet.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-10 | Negarmaleki | 76 | view |
| 2019-05-24 | neda.rrr | 90 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree ?Television advertising directed toward young children (aged 2 to 5) should not be allowed. 90
- At work or school, you might encounter a problem that requires creativity- for example, you are given a task to complete that is very different from other tasks you do. In work or school situation that requires you to think creatively, would you prefer to 70
- summarise the points 3
- Taking a lot of time to make an important decision is viewed as a bad quality for a person to have. But now it’s considered as a good quality of a person. Do you agree or disagree with the statement? 88
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement To solve present and future problems it is necessary to understand the past 95
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, consequently, first, furthermore, if, look, second, so, well, for instance, such as, as a matter of fact, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 13.8261648746 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 43.0788530466 63% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 52.1666666667 88% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2577.0 1977.66487455 130% => OK
No of words: 486.0 407.700716846 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3024691358 4.8611393121 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69525374022 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86429878375 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 276.0 212.727598566 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.567901234568 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 803.7 618.680645161 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 20.6003584229 141% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.1344086022 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.5569246004 48.9658058833 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.8620689655 100.406767564 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7586206897 20.6045352989 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.68965517241 5.45110844103 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 23.0 11.8709677419 194% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.187662146384 0.236089414692 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0468523127742 0.076458572812 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0619230918285 0.0737576698707 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117191134492 0.150856017488 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105443053708 0.0645574589148 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 11.7677419355 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 58.1214874552 80% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.16 10.9000537634 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.01818996416 111% => OK
difficult_words: 137.0 86.8835125448 158% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.002688172 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.0537634409 84% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.