Some people feel that manufacturers have the responsibility to reduce the amount of packaging of goods. Others argue that customers should avoid buying goods with a lot of packaging.
While some people think that it is the responsibility of producers and suppliers to reduce product packaging, others feel that the responsibility lies with consumers. This essay will analyse both sides of the argument.
On the one hand, packaging items for a product is essential, whether it is primary or secondary. It adds many advantages for the product, such as increasing a product sells. Therefore, many manufacturers are quite serious taking into account of their product's packaging; however, overusing package items will result in increasing waste. The manufacturer can use eco-friendly package item though, but mostly they use plastics since it is cheap. As economical as they can be, plastics are hurting the environment because it is difficult to be destroyed naturally. Thus, companies ought to consider reducing their amount of packaging, making it as eco-friendly and straightforward as possible. A local beer factory in Semarang city, for example, using glue to stick their product's can instead of plastic wraps, and recently they won a green company award.
On the other hand, customer, as the end-user of the product, also have an essential role in lessening the waste of packaging. Their purchasing behaviour may be the trigger of companies to use minimal packaging. Suppose they prefer to buy a less-packaged product on the market. In that case, it will form a new culture in shopping, forcing the producer to change their product according to the consumer's demand. However, such a goal required many involved parties, especially the government. They can promote the people to buy a lighter packaged product, through mass media such as national television or government's billboard all over the nations.
In summary, more materials used in a product means more waste. Manufacturers as the first party in the product cycle have the most responsibilities in this issue. However, support from people to provide the right situation in the market also required.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 12, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rd all over the nations. In summary, more materials used in a product means m...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, in summary, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1670.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 314.0 315.596192385 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31847133758 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99327142445 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579617834395 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 520.2 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.7260236443 49.4020404114 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.7777777778 106.682146367 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4444444444 20.7667163134 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.83333333333 7.06120827912 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => 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: 0.166646848527 0.244688304435 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0539331521059 0.084324248473 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.063878357734 0.0667982634062 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117069896311 0.151304729494 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0486423501836 0.056905535591 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.0946893788 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 50.2224549098 91% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.28 12.4159519038 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.36 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 78.4519038076 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.