Some people think that companies and private individuals should pay to clean up the pollution that they produce, not the government.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Experts throughout the developing and developed world have debated whether the cost of anti-pollution measures should be paid by individual and business sectors or the government. This essay will assert the notion that the government should play the major role in this topic.
To begin with, corporations and individuals have the responsibility to get rid of the pollutants by paying the cleaning services. The central reason behind this is twofold, firstly they are the major sources of the rampant pollution problem. In fact, by studying the figures from the Environmental Department, the majority of waste in our landfill originate from household and various business sectors in Hong Kong. Secondly, eliminating pollutants by charging its sources raise the public concerns. For instance, instead of having an agency remove the waste free of charge, those who have to pay for their waste are likely to increase the awareness regarding the severity of pollution, and this encourages them to use things responsibly.
Although there are reasons to support that individuals and business sectors should pay for the pollution they create, the difficulties cannot be neglected, in particular the differentiation of responsibility. Take packaging waste for example. The packaging material accompanied by a new iPhone is, of course, employed by the Apple company, while it must not be forgotten that the consumers drive the demands, resulting in a disagreement of who should be responsible for this kind of waste. Furthermore, compared to those who produce the waste, the government is deemed more sufficient and energy-efficient in waste control, because the government can educate the public and establish recycling points in low cost. Therefore, it is possible to state beyond doubt that the initiatives taken by the government increase the likelihood of reducing pollution cost-effectively.
In conclusion, government constitutes the most suitable role in reducing pollution, despite the fact that individual and business sectors are responsible for pollution at large. It is predicted that the government will enact any measures to raise the public awareness about environmental protection in the foreseeable future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...urages them to use things responsibly. Although there are reasons to support th...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, in particular, kind of, of course, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1891.0 1615.20841683 117% => OK
No of words: 337.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.61127596439 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28457229495 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18326407061 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 176.041082164 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545994065282 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 589.5 506.74238477 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.9261450215 49.4020404114 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.071428571 106.682146367 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0714285714 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.0714285714 7.06120827912 185% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.126223559917 0.244688304435 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0484005697244 0.084324248473 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0509609970278 0.0667982634062 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0794523350196 0.151304729494 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0241922637106 0.056905535591 43% => 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: 17.0 13.0946893788 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 78.4519038076 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.