Today the importance of recycling is not deniable among societies, Yet public participation in separating domestic rubbish to reuse some valuable materials is not as it should be. Therefore, I suppose regulating new rules that compel people to participate is a prominent solution.
To address this problem, need to consider the reasons behind people's reluctant. currently, governments or municipalities determine definite instructions for classifying rubbishes according to their type. Most of the time, these instructions are perplexing. Consequently, some people are unwilling to involve in recycling programs. For example, in our area, this structure is specified by which besides separating glass, metal, paper from each other, the resident must sorting plastics in terms of type A, b and C plastics. Apart from that carrying out this structure precisely is laborious and time-consuming, several dwellers, in particular, elderly persons even can not distinguish between kind of stuff such as glass and plastics. As a result, recycling rarely done in our district.
However, in my opinion, the unwillingness of citizens to participation due to the complexity of the recycling process is not acceptable, while our environment confronts serious problems that are caused by the enormous amount of rubbish in particular recyclable materials that most of them are not decomposed for a decade at minimum. Although setting laws and fines can not eradicate this selfish and indolent manner of human, I suppose at least can be successful contrivance to some extent. when contravention of recycling programming has own cost ,in people view, It seems that recycling is less time-consuming and more reasonable compared to before regulating. Therefore, they will more involve in order to prevent the penalized cost. In addition, Take our area as an example again, in the case of regulating, due to the fines there is comparatively more motivation for families to learn process of recycling.
To conclude, unfortunately, our environment is being devastating as a repercussion of our boundless rubbish, yet we are not paying enough attention to this issue and its possible solution such as recycling. Therefore, it seems that with establishing new rules we can reach a proper solution.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 80, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Currently
...r the reasons behind peoples reluctant. currently, governments or municipalities determin...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 491, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: When
... successful contrivance to some extent. when contravention of recycling programming ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 534, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n contravention of recycling programming has own cost ,in people view, It seems t...
^^
Line 3, column 548, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...n of recycling programming has own cost ,in people view, It seems that recycling ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, consequently, however, if, so, therefore, well, while, apart from, at least, for example, i suppose, in addition, in particular, kind of, such as, as a result, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1928.0 1615.20841683 119% => OK
No of words: 351.0 315.596192385 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49287749288 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32839392791 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.23858323349 2.80592935109 115% => OK
Unique words: 211.0 176.041082164 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.60113960114 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 610.2 506.74238477 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.3501874572 49.4020404114 148% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.5 106.682146367 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9375 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.375 7.06120827912 161% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.178279777898 0.244688304435 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0591510086112 0.084324248473 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0457625616278 0.0667982634062 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.094601438558 0.151304729494 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0542521959743 0.056905535591 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.58 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 78.4519038076 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.