Environmental protection policies should not be applicable to corporations, which generate significant financial and economical growth, even if such growth may have a negative impact on the environment.
In today's world, technological advances have made humans achieve things which were impossible just decades ago. However, how has this development affected the environment? Are the practices followed by the humans today sustainable? Or are we depleting the Earth's natural resources to an extent where our future generations will have serious problems surviving on this planet? These are some of the questions which need to looked at. Industrial revolution is at the core of this development. Industrial corporations and organizations play a key in deciding the progress of our world and, I feel they will continue to do so. If these organizations are to play a major role in our lives for years to come, they should be aware of the environmental impact that of their actions. I therefore strongly disagree with the statement that environmental policies should not be applicable to such corporations.
There have been instances in the past, where due to lack of stringent policies, catastrophies have occured. One such example is the Bhopal Gas Tragedy in India. A small town, Bhopal, in the central state of Madhya Pradesh in India is still facing the consequences of industrial negligence. A fertilizer company, Union Carbide, was using very harmful isocyanates in their manufacturing process. An uncontrolled chemical reaction caused this chemical to escape in the form of fumes in the nearby areas which were densely populated. The people affected have had genetic disorders till date. If stringent policies against the use of harmful chemicals had been in place such a disaster wouldn't have occured.
The ozone layer, which surrounds the Earth's atmosphere, protects us from the harmful ultraviolet rays of the Sun. Chloroflurocarbons (CFCs) are chemicals that are quite often used for refrigeration in many appliances and also in perfumes and deodrants. When these escape into the atmosphere, they lead to disruption of the ozone layer. A hole in the ozone layer was discovered over Australia, after which strong policies were put into place against the use of these chemicals worldwide. Many organizations were using CFCs frequently and making considerable profits and this may have been a reasons why the chemical wasn't banned previously. However, if the environmental impact of every step that an organization takes is studied carefully, and all such steps which have a negative impact are modified, if not stopped completely, such grave environmental problems can be avoided.
John Warner and Paul Anastas of the United States outlined the 12 principles of Green Chemistry in 1999. They have clearly explained how by modifying processes to make them cleaner and safer can ultimately lead to profits. These principles have clearly explained how environmental friendly alternatives can be designed and the criterias for measuring such alternatives. Thus, strict environmental protection policies can lead to profits not just for the environment but for the corporations as well
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 387, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...ems surviving on this planet? These are some of the questions which need to looked at. Indu...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 589, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “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.
...d have had genetic disorders till date. If stringent policies against the use of h...
^^
Line 3, column 682, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...icals had been in place such a disaster wouldnt have occured. The ozone layer, which...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 615, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
...ay have been a reasons why the chemical wasnt banned previously. However, if the envi...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, may, so, still, therefore, thus, well, as for, i feel
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2521.0 2235.4752809 113% => OK
No of words: 469.0 442.535393258 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37526652452 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65364457471 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08260559491 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 260.0 215.323595506 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554371002132 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 796.5 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.1846038907 60.3974514979 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.9615384615 118.986275619 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0384615385 23.4991977007 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.19230769231 5.21951772744 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244997268323 0.243740707755 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0575836968221 0.0831039109588 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0613677702403 0.0758088955206 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.139834620435 0.150359130593 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0360189657353 0.0667264976115 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.1392134831 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 12.1639044944 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 132.0 100.480337079 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => 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: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.