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.
As the worldwide population grows so does the amount of trash produced. Landfills are increasing in size and scientists believe this is causing harmful effects to the environment. In the above statement, it is said that the best way to solve the environmental problems produced by consumer-generated waste is for towns and cities to impose strict limits on the amount of trash they accept from each household. This is disagreeable since it is not a realistic option and it is not the sole solution to the problem but, on the other hand, it would cut down on the trash that lands in landfills.
Firstly, this overall proposed solution is not realistic. What would happen with the extra trash that households have but cannot set to the curb for trash pick-up? This trash will end up in people’s yards and making more of the environment problematic. Residents may also begin to dispose of materials in an inappropriate way such as burning batteries and other chemicals that can be harmful to the body if inhaled. Chemicals may also be dumped in backyards and domestic and wild animals would have access to them. If ingested, the chemicals can be fatal to any animal and thus lead to a smaller animal population in the area.
Not only is this proposed solution not realistic but it is not the best solution as stated above. More research can be conducted in order to figure out the best solution to cut down on consumer-related trash amounts and thus smaller landfills. The author should assess a survey for each of the cities and towns in which they want to establish this rule to see what works best for the residents and what does not work at all. For example, many people may be open to purchasing recycling containers and using those for their glass, paper, and plastic goods if there were someone to pick it up weekly. Residents may also pay an extra fee for extra trash cans used in order to compensate the labor workers.
This proposed idea may not be realistic or the best solution, but if enforced, it would cut down on the amount of trash used per household. Advocates for this limit can visit each household and describe the program along with answering any questions the resident may have. In order for this program to succeed it would need to be an enforced policy so each resident may cooperate. People may find themselves reducing the amount of trash consumed and watching what they are throwing away if they know there will be consequences for any trash above the limit.
All in all, the proposed program on creating a strict trash limit for cities and towns needs an evaluation before being set in place. This above proposal is not realistic and may not be the best solution to this trash problem. Other solutions should also be explored upon establishing a solution. But, if this strict limit were to be set in stone before any reevaluation, then it could cut down on the amount of trash and help the environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 597, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n on the trash that lands in landfills. Firstly, this overall proposed solution ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 312, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an inappropriate way" with adverb for "inappropriate"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... may also begin to dispose of materials in an inappropriate way such as burning batteries and other che...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 639, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... smaller animal population in the area. Not only is this proposed solution not r...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 709, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... order to compensate the labor workers. This proposed idea may not be realistic ...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 563, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...equences for any trash above the limit. All in all, the proposed program on crea...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 449, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ount of trash and help the environment.
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'firstly', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'then', 'thus', 'for example', 'such as', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.212612612613 0.240241500013 88% => OK
Verbs: 0.172972972973 0.157235817809 110% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0828828828829 0.0880659088768 94% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0432432432432 0.0497285424764 87% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0288288288288 0.0444667217837 65% => OK
Prepositions: 0.117117117117 0.12292977631 95% => OK
Participles: 0.0558558558559 0.0406280797675 137% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.64937402569 2.79330140395 95% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0378378378378 0.030933414821 122% => OK
Particles: 0.0126126126126 0.0016655270985 757% => OK
Determiners: 0.118918918919 0.0997080785238 119% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0432432432432 0.0249443105267 173% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0126126126126 0.0148568991511 85% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2975.0 2732.02544248 109% => OK
No of words: 514.0 452.878318584 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.78793774319 6.0361032391 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76146701107 4.58838876751 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.287937743191 0.366273622748 79% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.212062256809 0.280924506359 75% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.173151750973 0.200843997647 86% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.112840466926 0.132149295362 85% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64937402569 2.79330140395 95% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 219.290929204 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.437743190661 0.48968727796 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 50.2230073917 55.4138127331 91% => OK
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6194690265 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.347826087 23.380412469 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.0515481667 59.4972553346 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.347826087 141.124799967 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.347826087 23.380412469 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.521739130435 0.674092028746 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.21349557522 115% => OK
Readability: 43.5540517679 51.4728631049 85% => OK
Elegance: 1.57352941176 1.64882698954 95% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.490467591877 0.391690518653 125% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.110684242606 0.123202303941 90% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0804524803373 0.077325440228 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.52246227975 0.547984918172 95% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.14668674065 0.149214159877 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.190971311118 0.161403998019 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.12658492162 0.0892212321368 142% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.483407634111 0.385218514788 125% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0295862803199 0.0692045440612 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.349830634867 0.275328986314 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0921984881135 0.0653680567796 141% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.4325221239 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.30420353982 132% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88274336283 143% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 7.22455752212 111% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 3.66592920354 136% => OK
Neutral topic words: 6.0 2.70907079646 221% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 13.5995575221 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.