The best way to solve environmental problems caused by consumer-generated waste is for towns and cities to impose strict limits on the amount of trash they will accept from each household.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Does imposing strict limit on the amount of trash to be collected from household help to solve prevalent waste-generated environmental problems? While there might be some critics who accepts this claim as it stands, but I do not accede to this claim. Therefore, my cut-and-dried position is in order to solve several environmental problems resulted due to consumer-generated waste, we should use innovative ideas and technologies. I have following reasons to shore up my position.
Firstly, and probably most importantly, we should not forget the fact that we live in the age of technological wizardry; technology has given us several options to solve such consumer-generated waste problem. Today, we can generate electricity from the methane produced out of the waste. Take Kathmandu Metropolitan City (KMC), for example. It produces 450 tonnes of waste daily - out of which 63 percent is organic waste and the remaining is non-organic and non-biodegradable waste. It was a problem for KMC to manage such huge amount of waste; however, recently KMC introduced waste-to-energy equipment under the auspices of European Union. These equipment consumes 3 tonnes of waste daily, produces 14 kilowatt of electricity, 90 kg of gas and 300 kg of bio-organic fertilizer daily. For this reason, KMC is willing to proliferate this technology in other municipalities to boot. This will be like killing two birds with a single arrow: we will be able to get clean energy reducing environmental problem at the same time.
Furthermore, non-biodegradable waste is another challenge; they do not degrade for very long period of time. They includes plastic products, e-wastes and many more. Nevertheless, it does not mean there is no way to manage them - there are such methods, in fact. Take plastic, for instance. We can reuse and recycle plastic products to keep our environment healthy. In KMC, private business-firms have employed hundreds of people to collect such plastic wastes which are recycled again and again. Similarly, if we changed our attitude and started reducing the plastic uses when it is not really necessary, certainly, we will be able to keep our environment safe and healthy.
Finally, some critics might assert the same idea as mentioned by the author. Nonetheless, I believe that it is the worst idea and contributes to increase pollution on the other hand. The same policy was introduced in Kathmandu, once. However, the result was opposite to what was anticipated: pollution increased in the city. But HOW? As municipality imposed restriction, people started to throw garbage in some public parks - and roads - during the night time which was really difficult to control for the concerned authority. These activities increased pollution of the city, reduced its aesthetic beauty and increased the chance of disease outbreak too. Finally, municipality withdrew its decision to limit the amount to be collected from each household, rather it started to collect all the trashes, but increased the fee.
To recapitulate, to solve problems related to consumer-generated wastes, modern technologies should be effectively employed - like done by KMC. Additionally, regarding non-biodegradable wastes, to some esteem, we need to change our demeanor as well. This will keep our environment healthy and solve the garbage problems.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 21, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Does imposing strict limit on the amount of trash to be colle...
^^
Line 3, column 642, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this equipment' or 'These equipments'?
Suggestion: This equipment; These equipments
...t under the auspices of European Union. These equipment consumes 3 tonnes of waste daily, produ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 704, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'kilowatt' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'kilowatts'.
Suggestion: kilowatts
...es 3 tonnes of waste daily, produces 14 kilowatt of electricity, 90 kg of gas and 300 kg...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 94, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...enge; they do not degrade for very long period of time. They includes plastic products, e-wast...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 115, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'They' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'include'
Suggestion: include
...rade for very long period of time. They includes plastic products, e-wastes and many mor...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 396, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... healthy. In KMC, private business-firms have employed hundreds of people to coll...
^^
Line 7, column 430, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...throw garbage in some public parks - and roads - during the night time which was ...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'furthermore', 'however', 'if', 'nevertheless', 'nonetheless', 'really', 'regarding', 'similarly', 'so', 'therefore', 'well', 'while', 'for example', 'for instance', 'in fact', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.227805695142 0.240241500013 95% => OK
Verbs: 0.172529313233 0.157235817809 110% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0954773869347 0.0880659088768 108% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0502512562814 0.0497285424764 101% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0536013400335 0.0444667217837 121% => OK
Prepositions: 0.0854271356784 0.12292977631 69% => OK
Participles: 0.0318257956449 0.0406280797675 78% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.24630217601 2.79330140395 116% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0452261306533 0.030933414821 146% => OK
Particles: 0.00167504187605 0.0016655270985 101% => OK
Determiners: 0.0686767169179 0.0997080785238 69% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0184254606365 0.0249443105267 74% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0100502512563 0.0148568991511 68% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3345.0 2732.02544248 122% => OK
No of words: 528.0 452.878318584 117% => OK
Chars per words: 6.33522727273 6.0361032391 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79356345386 4.58838876751 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.393939393939 0.366273622748 108% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.314393939394 0.280924506359 112% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.232954545455 0.200843997647 116% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.151515151515 0.132149295362 115% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24630217601 2.79330140395 116% => OK
Unique words: 287.0 219.290929204 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543560606061 0.48968727796 111% => OK
Word variations: 67.5556633037 55.4138127331 122% => OK
How many sentences: 30.0 20.6194690265 145% => OK
Sentence length: 17.6 23.380412469 75% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8399772606 59.4972553346 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.5 141.124799967 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6 23.380412469 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.666666666667 0.674092028746 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.21349557522 134% => OK
Readability: 49.0393939394 51.4728631049 95% => OK
Elegance: 1.24848484848 1.64882698954 76% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.480686115489 0.391690518653 123% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0788518008958 0.123202303941 64% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0718264458605 0.077325440228 93% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.453052658837 0.547984918172 83% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.148390079167 0.149214159877 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.144323360703 0.161403998019 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.086291953941 0.0892212321368 97% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.263623585707 0.385218514788 68% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0554714250794 0.0692045440612 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.302387254797 0.275328986314 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0599502521673 0.0653680567796 92% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.4325221239 105% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.30420353982 207% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88274336283 164% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 7.22455752212 69% => OK
Negative topic words: 10.0 3.66592920354 273% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.70907079646 111% => OK
Total topic words: 18.0 13.5995575221 132% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.