An increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to the
natural environment. Why is this the case, and what solutions are possible?
It is true that there has been an enormous increase in the production of consumer goods
worldwide during the last two or three centuries. There has also been incalculable
environmental damage in this same period. While there are reasons to connect these two
trends, some solutions are possible to help prevent the ecological crisis which is resulting.
Two major causes of the damage caused to the natural environment by the growing
production of consumer goods can be easily identified. Firstly, there is the
environmental degradation that results from the extraction of minerals. For example,
there are about 1.5 billion cars in the world, and electric vehicles are promoted as an
environmentally friendly alternative to petrol, as this will cut down on emissions and
reduce reliance on fossil fuels. However, for the batteries alone of these electric cars, the
mining of minerals like cobalt and lithium will lead to massive habitat destruction across
the world. Secondly, consumption of goods creates mountains of toxic waste, most of
which is not bio-degradable, and often pollutes water sources and kills the wildlife which
depends on clean water.
Measures must be taken to reduce consumption and to develop recycling technology. In
terms of reducing consumption, too many consumer goods become obsolete too quickly.
Washing machines, computers, refrigerators, cars and televisions, for instance, should all
function for decades, and so there must be strict controls on production standards and
marketing. From a recycling perspective, advances in technology enable many
materials to be re-used, and governments must provide funding for more research in this
field. If more goods can be recycled, then there will be less depletion of natural
resources.
In conclusion, causes of environmental damage stemming from consumption are obvious
and reducing consumption and more recycling are part of the solution.
- An increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to the natural environment Why is this the case and what solutions are possible 39
- An increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to the natural environment Why is this the case and what solutions are possible 56
- An increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to the natural environment Why is this the case and what solutions are possible 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 8.0 24.0651302605 33% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.3376753507 204% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1663.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 295.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.63728813559 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14434120667 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01051685276 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589830508475 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 502.2 506.74238477 99% => 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: 5.0 0.809619238477 618% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.9927998775 49.4020404114 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.785714286 106.682146367 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0714285714 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.71428571429 7.06120827912 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 23.0 4.38176352705 525% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.226396969416 0.244688304435 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0714379223683 0.084324248473 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0678489889268 0.0667982634062 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0547625789833 0.151304729494 36% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0698506349077 0.056905535591 123% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 13.0946893788 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.43 12.4159519038 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.76 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 78.4519038076 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.