Some people feel that manufacturers and supermarkets have the responsibility to reduce the amount of packaging of goods. Others argue that customers should avoid buying goods with a lot of packaging. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
A problem of modern societies is plastics pollution, with conflicting views on how to tackle this worrying trend. One possible solution is to encourage producers and supermarkets to reduce the amount of packaging of goods.
Advocates of this believe that manufacturers and supermarkets are the places where all of the plastic on earth was originally produced. If businesses set rules to limit the packaging of goods with excessive plastics, fewer plastic particles would be disposed into the environment and find their way into the oceans as well as the human stomach. The responsibility to society being fulfilled by the company will also improve the image and reputation of that company in the market, which might even lead to increased sales as well as profit.
However, this solution disregards the large initial investment that might not be interesting to businesses. Replacing the plastic with environmentally friendly materials such as glass, paper or plant-based polymer will be more expensive, and the design must be altered. Water bottles made by glasses, for example, might cost more to produce and require different technology to inscribe the marketing brand on the bottle, as compared to traditional plastic bottles.
Another better approach to reduce pollution from plastic is one from the customer level. As well as being effective on a large scale, raising awareness among the consumer is more plausible and feasible. Education on the harmful consequence of plastic will make the consumer lower the amount of plastic waste being dumped into the environment. Not only do the educated people learn that they need to sort their household garbage, together with commercial, into recyclable and non-recyclable types, but they may even find innovative ways to reuse their plastic products. For instance, seasonings containers or planting pots can be created from plastic jar cutouts.
From a personal perspective, relying on manufacturers to reduce product packaging is too financially impractical and would not have the desired result. People should be informed of both the dangers of discarding plastics and the proper way to discard those plastics.
- The pie charts below show the main reasons why students chose to study at a particular UK university in 1987 and 2007 78
- Some people think that the only way to have success in business is to have a unique product. What factors do you think influence the success of a company? 89
- The chart below shows the percentage of the population in the UK who consumed the recommended daily amount of fruit and vegetables in 2002 2006 and 2010 93
- The table shows the cost of water in 5 cities in Australia 78
- In many nations people in huge cities either live alone or in small family units instead of a large extended family Is this a positive or negative trend 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 19, Rule ID: BELIEVE_BELIEF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'belief' (noun) instead of believe (verb)?
Suggestion: belief
...kaging of goods. Advocates of this believe that manufacturers and supermarkets are...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 84, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...s and supermarkets are the places where all of the plastic on earth was originally produce...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 15, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... be created from plastic jar cutouts. From a personal perspective, relying on ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, well, for example, for instance, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1844.0 1615.20841683 114% => OK
No of words: 338.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45562130178 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92307692308 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 176.041082164 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.58875739645 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 571.5 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 5.43587174349 18% => 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: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.6659374938 49.4020404114 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.933333333 106.682146367 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5333333333 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.66666666667 7.06120827912 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.129118707809 0.244688304435 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0474766165207 0.084324248473 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0491006690875 0.0667982634062 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0884954135146 0.151304729494 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0573275765243 0.056905535591 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.0946893788 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.01 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 78.4519038076 144% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.