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?
Few individuals contend that there is a lack of recycled products from home, thus imposing an official rule to force citizens to increase their amount of recycling is the only method believed to be effective. While this view is valid to a certain extent, I somewhat agree with it because there are other more pragmatic methods to tackle this problem.
On the one hand, it is argued that it is essential to introduce legislation to increase recycling. If a recycling-related rule is strictly set, various people will perceive the significance of the matter and follow owing to the chance of being sentenced or seriously punished for not observing it. However, this is actually a flawed solution. As an increasing quantity of disposable items is generated, governments would not be able to require individuals to reuse their past products, leading to an alarming rate of waste released to the environment.
On the other hand, I believe that the increase in the cost of daily commodities and the policy to encourage companies to produce a wide range of reusable products are more effective means to address the root of the problem. First and foremost, raising the price of items will present an opportunity for people to reuse the products they have recently bought. A good illustration of this is if the price of a flower vase is 50 dollars, customers will take several used water bottles into account and decorate them to utilize for flowers. Secondly, urging entrepreneurs to manufacture more environmentally friendly products is of utmost importance. Only by this way will customers stand a better chance of recycling their products as opposed to throwing them away.
In conclusion, I somewhat support the notion that a new law should be enacted to raise the number of people who recycle due to the perception they can derive from it. However, I admit that there are different potential approaches that contribute to a higher rate of recycling.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, thus, while, in conclusion, 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: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1633.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 324.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04012345679 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9265688594 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 176.041082164 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.567901234568 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 529.2 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.2754482929 49.4020404114 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.615384615 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.9230769231 20.7667163134 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.84615384615 7.06120827912 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.242648597713 0.244688304435 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0711170893213 0.084324248473 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0618698437311 0.0667982634062 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14149968522 0.151304729494 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0203841918967 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: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.4159519038 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 78.4519038076 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 9.78957915832 138% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.