It is argued that recycling diposal from residential areas has limitations.
It is argued that recycling diposal from residential areas has limitations. Some people suggest that governments should impose a law of recycling in order to promote this environmentally friendly action. However I contend that it is essential to make regulation for reusing, some other measures can lead to positive results for surroundings.
On the one hand, it is commonly believed that implementing a law of recycling gians widespread acceptance for some reasons. First prominent issue is that some strict regulations are likely to encourage individuals to use efficiency of their products that may trigger less damage on environment. For instance, some plastic products such as bags or cups are consumed on the domestic can be recycled effortlessly if the government impose a fine for releasing these unrecycling categories on the public. The second things that is worthing mention that with fear of fine, individuals have tendency to use optimal products. In fact, It is not unusual that individuals are favourable to alter their cars anually for catching up egde-cutting trend. When imposing regulation of recyling, this enables them to last the time of using their own cars.
On the other hand, some other measures are more feasible than a law for reusing. Initially, the programmes or projects need be expanded on the community. There is a clear evidence for this is that clubs or organisations celebrate short course of how to reuse their equipments effectively. As a result, people in domestic can raise awareness of importance of protecting invironment and take actions to presevere their surroundings. The another solution is that available facilities have to be equiped for every house with free of charge. Furthermore, bins with suitable trash treatment could be applied in the household, this assists in terms of wast classification.
It seems to me that legal requirement can have own benefits in rising recycling on the domestic. However I am of opinion that some feasible solutions need be considered to take in practice.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 205, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...e this environmentally friendly action. However I contend that it is essential to make ...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to positive results for surroundings. On the one hand, it is commonly believed...
^^^^
Line 2, column 99, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ting a law of recycling gians widespread acceptance for some reasons. First promi...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ast the time of using their own cars. On the other hand, some other measures a...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...sists in terms of wast classification. It seems to me that legal requirement ca...
^^
Line 4, column 99, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...ts in rising recycling on the domestic. However I am of opinion that some feasible solu...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, so, for instance, in fact, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 7.30460921844 192% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 24.0651302605 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1719.0 1615.20841683 106% => OK
No of words: 326.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27300613497 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24917287072 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07017826521 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579754601227 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 551.7 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.1181172258 49.4020404114 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.117647059 106.682146367 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1764705882 20.7667163134 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.58823529412 7.06120827912 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.01903807615 120% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.132866947365 0.244688304435 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0712616912262 0.084324248473 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.233274995855 0.0667982634062 349% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106325046907 0.151304729494 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.140851253644 0.056905535591 248% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.4159519038 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.33 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 78.4519038076 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.