What is your opinion on whether the consumer should avoid over packed product or is this the responsibility of the manufacturer to avoid extra packaging of product? Share your light on this topic?
Packaging of products being purchased nowadays has a great impact on the environment. It is argued that over-packed items must not be supported by the consumers while others think that it is the duty of the producers to limit additional packaging. I firmly believe that it is a two-way responsibility of the both parties due to simple means to protect the environment for the former and to find alternative materials for the latter.
To begin with, buyers must be vigilant and selective when it comes to their choice to spend on products which are harmful to nature. They should give regard to preserve the natural resources by simply promoting environmentally friendly products and changing their perspective on the items they are purchasing. One must consider the impact of over-packed goods because it generate large waste. For example, mobile phone packaging usually has unnecessary packaging in which after getting the main product itself the package will then be place into garbage.
On the other hand, manufacturers should be responsible enough to change the way they contain products. They should limit extra packaging by looking for alternative resources which is light and at the same time durable. Industries are obliged to strictly follow the government's regulation and standard on packaging. To illustrate this, paper-based packaging become now a trend and being implemented as it is biodegradable and does not make the appearance of product bulky.
Therefore, the proposed argument has been taken into account where consumers as well as producers have an equal give and take responsibility in being more environmentally selective to goods they are trying to purchase and to venture into innovative materials to be use in packaging of products. perhaps, it one of the means to counteract the rapid degradation of the mother earth due to insignificant waste.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 372, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'generates'?
Suggestion: generates
... impact of over-packed goods because it generate large waste. For example, mobile phone ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 296, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Perhaps
...als to be use in packaging of products. perhaps, it one of the means to counteract the ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, look, so, then, therefore, well, while, for example, as well as, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.5418719212 171% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 6.10837438424 115% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 5.94088669951 135% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 31.9359605911 141% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1583.0 1207.87684729 131% => OK
No of words: 299.0 242.827586207 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29431438127 5.00649968141 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0281210543 2.71678728327 111% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 139.433497537 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.555183946488 0.580463131201 96% => OK
syllable_count: 503.1 379.143842365 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.71428571429 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.65517241379 82% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 12.6551724138 103% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.9984399994 50.4703680194 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.769230769 104.977214359 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 20.9669160288 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.76923076923 7.25397266985 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.188800655825 0.242375264174 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0657217200553 0.0925447433944 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0402874160338 0.071462118173 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114399858897 0.151781067708 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0486954617873 0.0609392437508 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 12.6369458128 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 53.1260098522 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.9458128079 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 11.5310837438 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.32886699507 107% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 55.0591133005 142% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.94827586207 111% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.5123152709 86% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.