An increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to our natural environment. Why is this happening? What is the solution to it?
An expansion in the generation of consumer goods brings about harm to our native habitat. This essay will first suggest that the most significant cause behind this phenomenon is the progressive use of fossil fuels as an energy resource for the manufacturing process, and then suggests that encouraging the use of nuclear power as the most viable solution.
To embark with, the burgeoning population of the world needs products for their usage. As the demand for goods increases, manufacturing plants require a considerable amount of energy to meet the demands of this growing population. Since most of the energy required comes from fossil fuels such as coal, the exhaust fumes from the power generation centres contaminate the environment. As a result, our biosphere gets contaminated with carbon fumes giving rise to contaminations such as air pollution and soil pollution. For example, China is at the forefront of producing various consumer goods. However, the level of air pollution in China is far more than anywhere else in the world because of the excessive carbon footprint emerging from power stations.
Nevertheless, simple measures can resolve these increasing pollution levels in the environment. Governments should encourage the use of nuclear power instead of using non-renewable resources such as coal. Also, an enact should also be imposed to restrict the amount of waste produced by manufacturing companies which would aid to limit the amount of industrial waste dumped into landfill sites. For example, the United Kingdom has regulated the amount of industrial waste generated by its leading organisations which have significantly reduced the water and soil pollution in the nation.
In conclusion, due to the population explosion and an ever-increasing demand for consumer goods, our natural habitat is affected adversely. However, if authorities take a proactive approach to change the traditional energy generation methods and also limit the amount of commercial waste, our biosphere can be free from various contaminations and would become an ideal habitat for all the life forms on earth.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 212, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...renewable resources such as coal. Also, an enact should also be imposed to restrict the ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, nevertheless, so, then, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1795.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 329.0 315.596192385 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45592705167 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25891501996 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99938248711 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.55623100304 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 564.3 506.74238477 111% => 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: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.4203290988 49.4020404114 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.214285714 106.682146367 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5 20.7667163134 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06120827912 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.170026914307 0.244688304435 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0616814481062 0.084324248473 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0590091959553 0.0667982634062 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106110301696 0.151304729494 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0417070469726 0.056905535591 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 13.0946893788 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.43 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 78.4519038076 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => 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.