Today single-use products are still very common. What are the problems associated with this? What are some possible solutions?
It is undeniable that using disposable products are still a common trend among consumers and productions. However, despite the affordability of these goods, it may give rise to grave concerns. In this essay couple of issues will be outlined and will suggest the most valuable solutions.
The main problem caused by disposable items is their accumulation whether in water bodies or even controlled landfills bringing about environmental pollution. This is because single-use products not only are used only one time but also tend to remain there unlimited time being non-degradable contaminating water and soil. Furthermore, it may emit toxic gases and harmful substances over time which tend to negatively affect the ecosystem. In other words, contaminated water, as well as polluted soil, may jeopardize the fauna, dwindling numbers of species and human society on a global scale. Poisoning of drinking water, famine or drought due to lack of safe irrigation and infertility of soil is a prime example of detrimental effects.
The best remedy to tackle these issues might be a total prohibition of disposable items by replacing them on non-disposable. For this reason, the authorities should take drastic measures such as levying taxes on producing non-biodegradable and single-use products. Moreover, raising awareness of possible dire consequences, people may be engaged to refuse to consume. Another way to address problems is construction waste processing centres. This is important because only recycling may contribute to reducing already existing landfills without adverse effect on nature. To illustrate, the Netherland government has been invested in recycling has managed to address plastic pollution by inspiring their residents to use only reusable items.
In conclusion, while disposable products are widely used, it can lead to harmful effects on the environment giving rise to contamination with negative knock-on effects. The most effective methods might be forbiddance whether producing or using and encouraging to recycle.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 260, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'recycling'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'encourage' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: recycling
...ther producing or using and encouraging to recycle.
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, may, moreover, so, still, well, while, in conclusion, such as, as well as, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1739.0 1615.20841683 108% => OK
No of words: 308.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.6461038961 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12226773793 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.652597402597 0.561755894193 116% => OK
syllable_count: 557.1 506.74238477 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.024924542 49.4020404114 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.6875 106.682146367 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.25 20.7667163134 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.625 7.06120827912 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => 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: 0.146031453192 0.244688304435 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0440415033069 0.084324248473 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0492797740558 0.0667982634062 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0869488481868 0.151304729494 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0182455987291 0.056905535591 32% => 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: 35.27 50.2224549098 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.49 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.53 8.58950901804 123% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 78.4519038076 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.