The increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to the natural environment. What are the causes of this? What can be done to solve this problem?
The rise of consumer goods fabrication has attributed greatly to the deterioration of the natural environment. This essay will shed some light on the precursors and solutions of the phenomenon.
Techological developments and a faster pace of life are the main contributors to the degradation of the environment. Given the advent of new machineries, automation, and manufaturing methods, the use of labor and capital are optimized. This acts as a predecessor for ramping up industrialization. The more land are deployed for industrial operation, the less sustained for natural habitats and biodiversity. Another cause of natural destruction can be witnessed in the shift of contemporary ways of life. Modern people are favoring products that are having a shorter life cycle as they tend to be more convenient and affordable. The abundance of the products made to satisfy such demands means that the waste dumped to the environment is raised accordingly.
Governments’ interference and accessible information should be introduced in order to alleviate the negative implications of the movement. To lessen the impacts of consumerism, governments should impose stricter regulations and heavier taxes upon entities whose wastes are harzadous to the environment. Conversely, eco-friendly production techniques should be backed by the authorities with subsidies and tax cuts. Another approach can be harnessed is making provision of products’ origins, components, package procedures mandatory online. While looking at the given data consumers can voice their concerns about any commondities associated with a dangerous producing procedure with other internet users, therefore together they can decide which products are worthy of their purchases.
In sum, advancement in technology and change in lifestyle account for the damage of the earth. The demerits can be addressed by the alteration on taxes, regulations as well as giving data of products on internet platforms.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, conversely, if, look, so, therefore, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 8.0 24.0651302605 33% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.3376753507 204% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1687.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 294.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.7380952381 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.3531291268 2.80592935109 120% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.619047619048 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 539.1 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.192184728 49.4020404114 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.4375 106.682146367 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.375 20.7667163134 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.875 7.06120827912 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.224111369284 0.244688304435 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0624430153355 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0426779028954 0.0667982634062 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124720286036 0.151304729494 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.020659427803 0.056905535591 36% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.0946893788 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 50.2224549098 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.01 12.4159519038 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.44 8.58950901804 122% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 78.4519038076 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.