Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement.
To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?
Give reasons for your answers and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experience.
Recently, waste recycling has sparked a controversy among the public whether governments should introduce laws to make it a legal obligation. Although I accept that new legislation to force people to recycle could alleviate environmental issues, I do not agree that a recycling law is the only measure that governments should take.
It is true that people do not recycle enough of their domestic refuse, even when they know about the advantages of doing this. Therefore, a new recycling law would be one possible way to tackle the waste problem. Governments could make regulations to ensure their citizens sort through all household waste to separate reusable materials. There could be punishments for people who fail to adhere to this law, ranging from a small fine to community service, or even heavy fines for repeat offenders. Besides, if householders face fines for neglecting environmental protection rules, they would be more likely to take extra minutes to place plastics, papers and other reusable items in proper bins rather than lose out financially. In fact, countries that set up such systems, such as Singapore and Sweden, have higher rates of recycling, suggesting this law is effective.
However, I believe that protecting the environment requires co-operation from the public and this cannot be achieved without increasing awareness of the importance of recycling. Governments should educate homeowners about the benefits involved, as well as how to sort trash into suitable bins. Additionally, children could be taught about recycling through school programmes, so that they could be informed about the environmental impacts of household waste, hence resulting in a marked increase in the percentage of people participating in recycling programmes.
In conclusion, I strongly hold that recycling is the responsibility for both governments and citizens to share, with the enforcement of laws to punishments for the former and a public willingness for the latter.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, hence, however, if, so, therefore, well, in conclusion, in fact, such as, as well as, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1681.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 308.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45779220779 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05627456526 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.594155844156 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 50.8185087673 49.4020404114 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.083333333 106.682146367 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6666666667 20.7667163134 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.75 7.06120827912 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.324844206593 0.244688304435 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117517943947 0.084324248473 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.071163669447 0.0667982634062 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.194151112412 0.151304729494 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0772259043873 0.056905535591 136% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 78.4519038076 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.