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 passage talks about several benefits of casein-based plastic packages. This newly invented technology supposedly substitutes plastic packaging that are not suitable for recycling. But, the lecturer redeems this benefits not actually correct. To support his opinion, he presents several facts and downsides of casein packaging.
Firstly, the passage claims that casein would decrease the amount of waste material as casein-based packaging is bidegradable. As they readily dissolve into water, they will have little to no impact on the environment, and number of landfills will decrease too. But the lecturer dismisses this theory, saying that casein wraps will require secondary wraps around them, as casein is vulnerable to water and high temperature. This secondary wrapping will be synthetic to compensate for the vulerabilities of casein, which will ironically contribute to no decrease in the amount of waste material.
Furthermore, it is stated in the passage that food will stay fresher if it is stored din casein-based packages. Casein is supposed to block oxygen as its pores are of less diameter than that of oxygen molecules. This low permeability of oxygen ensures no spoilage. But the author counters it with the logic that no packaging is totally free from spoilage. Moreover, casein based packages absorb and release water readily due to its vulnerability to water. Thin casein packaging shows low elasticity and are highly absorbent, which makes it likely to affect the products'taste and hygiene inside them.
Lastly, the passage entitles the casein-based packages to having nutritional values as it is made of milk. Casein-based packages contain edible substances like hydroxyl and amino groups which will be beneficial for the production of enzymes and hormones. The packagings are also very helpful for human bones and muscles. but the lecturer argues that not all people can exploit this fact, as many of them are allergic to dairies. So packaging foods in casein-based wraps will be harmful for them, let alone being beneficial.
The lecturer has provided specific points in order to refute every possible benefits of casein based packaging incorrectly presented in the passage. The lecturer clearly disagrees with the passage and finally, offers to talk about solutions to overcome this downsides of casein-based packagings.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 322, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: But
...ry helpful for human bones and muscles. but the lecturer argues that not all people...
^^^
Line 9, column 254, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ers to talk about solutions to overcome this downsides of casein-based packagings.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, if, lastly, moreover, second, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 43.0 30.3222958057 142% => 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: 2006.0 1373.03311258 146% => OK
No of words: 364.0 270.72406181 134% => OK
Chars per words: 5.51098901099 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36792674256 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86442963446 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 145.348785872 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546703296703 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 635.4 419.366225166 152% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 13.0662251656 161% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.6480580067 49.2860985944 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.5238095238 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3333333333 21.698381199 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.33333333333 7.06452816374 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 4.33554083885 231% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252772840193 0.272083759551 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0842919832982 0.0996497079465 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0616619258267 0.0662205650399 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.151582384006 0.162205337803 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0444021830572 0.0443174109184 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 53.8541721854 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.38 12.2367328918 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.42 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 63.6247240618 179% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.