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.
A common saying is that necessity is the mother of invention. To solve environmental problem there always a necessary step should be taken. But strict limits on the amount of trash from each household would not be a very satisfactory decision to solve environmental problem. Rather in this age of technology we should take a scientific method to mitigate environmental problem attributed by consumer generated waste.
Now a days many European and North American country is trying to convert degradable consumer generated waste into energy. Sweden is one of those country which done this excellent work very satisfactorily. In Sweden, they converted consumer generated waste in which hydrocarbon is mainly processed to produce electricity. In Katmandu, many municipalities collect waste and make 1-ton waste into 60 Kilowatt electricity, gas and fertilizer for the agriculture. So, if we encourage people to cooperate with waste management in this scientific method then it will bring a satisfactory result towards solving environmental problem.
But, imposing strict limits on the amount of trash is one kind of unrealistic way to solve environmental problem. When a person was forced to limit their consumer generated waste then it is very much possible that they throw their waste in every inappropriate location such as park, road etc. Then the environmental problem will be turned in a massive problem. For example, in my country Bangladesh where government strict limits on consumer generated waste for towns like Dhaka and the result is worst. And Dhaka is so polluted that it is announced one of the top unlivable cities in the world.
So, government should take some realistic solution like scientific method to solve this problem. Reduce the usage of undegradable plastic products which is very dangerous for the environment and increase biodegradable product which is easily composed. Government should also impose fine if any consumer throws their waste in an inappropriate location. Which also reduce environmental problem and make the country clean.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 276, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Rather,
...ecision to solve environmental problem. Rather in this age of technology we should tak...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: NOW_A_DAYS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'nowadays'?
Suggestion: Nowadays
...ttributed by consumer generated waste. Now a days many European and North American countr...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 5, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a day' or simply 'days'?
Suggestion: a day; days
...buted by consumer generated waste. Now a days many European and North American countr...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 12, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun European seems to be countable; consider using: 'many Europeans'.
Suggestion: many Europeans
...y consumer generated waste. Now a days many European and North American country is trying to...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 459, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[4]
Message: “So , if” 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.
...gas and fertilizer for the agriculture. So, if we encourage people to cooperate with w...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, then, as for, for example, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 58.6224719101 63% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1748.0 2235.4752809 78% => OK
No of words: 322.0 442.535393258 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.42857142857 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23607819155 4.55969084622 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04475825536 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 215.323595506 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.527950310559 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 565.2 704.065955056 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 6.24550561798 16% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.7134655625 60.3974514979 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 97.1111111111 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8888888889 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.44444444444 5.21951772744 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 5.13820224719 234% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.421891062325 0.243740707755 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.125375907974 0.0831039109588 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103314475872 0.0758088955206 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.252953518332 0.150359130593 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.114367443358 0.0667264976115 171% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 48.8420337079 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.38706741573 98% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 100.480337079 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 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: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.