The food industry has been overusing hard to recycle plastic packaging However it has caused severe environmental issues As a solution to the plastic packaging crisis casein based plastic packages which are made out of milk proteins have recently been inv

Essay topics:

The food industry has been overusing hard-to-recycle plastic packaging. However, it has caused severe environmental issues. As a solution to the plastic packaging crisis, casein-based plastic packages, which are made out of milk proteins, have recently been invented. The edible milk-based packaging promises to have advantages in general.

First of all, using casein would reduce a large amount of waste. Casein-based wraps are biodegradable, which means they can easily dissolve in water. The good news is, they hardly have any impact on the maritime environment. This is because casein is a chief protein in milk, and protein does not do any harm to the environment when disposed of. Significant drops in landfills can be expected.

Second, food can stay fresher when using casein-based plastic packages. Casein is much more effective in blocking oxygen due to its pores, which are smaller than those of other kinds of plastic materials. Since casein-based films possess strength and low oxygen permeability, they become more effective in preventing food spoilage during distribution processes.

Third, casein-based plastic bags can be nutritious. While many other edible plastic packages are made out of starch, casein contains a high number of proteins and other edible substances such as hydroxyl and amino groups, which are good for producing enzymes, hormones and other bodily chemicals. These are also very nutritious for our bones and muscles. Other nutrients, such as vitamins or probiotics, can be added for more health benefits.

The reading and the lecture are about casein-based packages. The author of the reading feels that casein-based packages have more advantages than normal plastic. The lecturer challenges all the claims made by the author and says that they are not actually correct. He explains his reasons hereunder.

Firstly, the lecturer states that casein-based package usage will not decrease the amount of waste. Moreover, extra packaging would be necessary because of their vulnerability to water. Additionally, due to their vulnerability to water, we finally choose to have plastic packaging. Furthermore, it creates more environmental damage than expected. On the other side, the reading argues that casein-based packages will decrease the waste, dissolves in water making them eco-friendly, and it does not cause any harm to the environment.

Secondly, the reading posits that food can be maintained fresh by using casein-based packages as it blocks much of oxygen to enter because their spores are smaller than plastic. However, the tutor counteracts this particular point by saying that as casein-based packages are vulnerable to water, it easily absorbs water. He also adds the point that as they are highly sensitive to water absorption, they alter the product's taste, and also the hygiene is hampered.

Finally, the professor mentions that casein-based packages are nutritious but not for all people. As there are many people who suffer from allergies even with minute contact of milk products. Moreover, this will not be a good option for them and would not be helpful to be nutritious for them. On the contrary, the writer implies that casein-based packages are more nutritious.

All in all, by considering all points into account the casein-based packages are not good for the people, because of their vulnerability to water, hampers hygiene and affects taste. It is also not useful for many people having milk products allergies.

Average: 8.5 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:


Grammar and spelling errors:
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym. more advantages than normal plastic. The lecturer challenges all the claims made...
Line 7, column 100, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... are nutritious but not for all people. As there are many people who suffer from a...

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, moreover, second, secondly, so, on the contrary

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1639.0 1373.03311258 119% => OK
No of words: 304.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.39144736842 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17559525986 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88718924831 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526315789474 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 509.4 419.366225166 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.765844927 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.0555555556 110.228320801 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8888888889 21.698381199 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.38888888889 7.06452816374 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.248683373557 0.272083759551 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0868826332882 0.0996497079465 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0685391640682 0.0662205650399 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148395833457 0.162205337803 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0382775280595 0.0443174109184 86% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?


Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 Out of 30
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.