Two years ago, consultants predicted that West Egg's landfill, which is used for garbage disposal, would be completely filled within five years. During the past two years, however, the town's residents have been recycling twice as much material as they did in previous years. Next month the amount of recycled material—which includes paper, plastic, and metal—should further increase, since charges for pickup of other household garbage will double. Furthermore, over 90 percent of the respondents to a recent survey said that they would do more recycling in the future. Because of our town's strong commitment to recycling, the available space in our landfill should last for considerably longer than predicted.
In this argument the author claim’s that West Egg’s landfill space will last for longer than they predicted. However, this argument depends on several unsubstantiated assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.
First of all, the author’s sated that town residents have recycled twice as much aluminum and paper as they did in previous years. However this does not provide any evidence to support this assumption. It is possible that initial recycled amount might be too law to compare. For example, resident of West Egg have no idea of how to throw away their plastics and papers due to the lack of facilities and education. So after their infrastructure of recycled method was well launched, the amount material recycled can be increase surprisingly. Moreover, there will be other factor that non-resident of West Egg can throw away their trash without recycled. For instance, there might be some factories waste that can affect their recycling rate. Because of the factories are stop working the non-recycled amount get decreased. Therefore, further evidence that predicting next month recycled amount is needed to support the claim. Unless the author offers sufficient data, this assumption is logically flawed.
Similarly, the claims that ninety percent of the respondents to a recent survey can demonstrate the future amount of recycling. Nevertheless, the author offers no evidence to verify this assumption. To satisfy the claim survey of respondents should be detailed. While the recent survey shows that ninety percent of respondent will do more recycling in the future but need to verify that data is reliable. For example, people can lie on the survey paper to get good image and reputation of being eco-friendly person. Moreover, sample size of the responds can be small. To satisfy the claims more sample of respondent and convincing evidence will be needed.
To sum, the author’s assumption that there will be available space in their landfill contradict to the prediction that will be filled within five years. To strengthen his or her argument, the author should closely examine all the condition and possible factors of any potential and additional factors that influenced previous data and validation of the survey. In conclusion, the author’s argument reflects unsupported claims without clear reasons or evidence.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 50 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 371 350
No. of Characters: 1936 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.389 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.218 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.702 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 155 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 110 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.864 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.04 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.636 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.29 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.463 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.053 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 137, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...nd paper as they did in previous years. However this does not provide any evidence to s...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 747, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...e that can affect their recycling rate. Because of the factories are stop working the n...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 546, Rule ID: DT_RESPONDS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'response'?
Suggestion: response
...ly person. Moreover, sample size of the responds can be small. To satisfy the claims mor...
^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 159, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... that will be filled within five years. To strengthen his or her argument, the aut...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, similarly, so, then, therefore, well, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2019.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 371.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44204851752 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8989641247 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 204.123752495 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.522911051213 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 613.8 705.55239521 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.6362766697 57.8364921388 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.7727272727 119.503703932 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8636363636 23.324526521 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.72727272727 5.70786347227 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.159171990966 0.218282227539 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0481706290551 0.0743258471296 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0495807238487 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0910679792826 0.128457276422 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.053865253452 0.0628817314937 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.