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
Opinions diverge on the allocation of responsibility for curtailing excessive packaging. While some advocate for manufacturers and supermarkets to curtail their packaging practices, I am steadfast in my belief that customers wield a more influential role in addressing this issue.
On one hand, there exist numerous strategies that manufacturers and supermarkets could employ to mitigate the overuse of plastic packaging. Primarily, manufacturers distributing their products to grocery stores and retail outlets could minimize packaging by opting for larger boxes or adopting alternative eco-friendly materials. Moreover, supermarkets are increasingly participating in environmental initiatives, such as displaying compelling banners that highlight the detriments of plastic consumption and substituting single-use plastic wrappings with sustainable, chic alternatives that customers can repurpose multiple times.
Notwithstanding the aforementioned notions, the elevation of customer awareness holds paramount importance for the sustained triumph of this endeavor. Foremost, the choices made by consumers to eschew purchases of heavily packaged goods exert a substantial influence on manufacturers' profits, compelling them to adjust their practices to align with consumer preferences. Additionally, environmentally conscious materials often command a higher price tag than their plastic counterparts, which in turn may translate to augmented costs for such products. Consequently, if patrons are willing to shoulder the extra expense, manufacturers will exercise significant prudence in their selection of packaging materials.
In summation, while it remains true that manufacturers and supermarkets could proffer a range of measures, I contend that by instigating judicious shifts in consumer behavior, this phenomenon can be mitigated to a significant degree.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-20 | hoaithuongnguyen283 | 89 | view |
| 2023-08-23 | quynhu | 73 | view |
| 2023-08-23 | quynhu | 73 | view |
| 2023-08-17 | RkmsU | 78 | view |
| 2023-08-06 | viviannguyen | 61 | view |
- It has become easier and more affordable for people to travel to other countries Do you think it is a positive or a negative development 61
- 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 61
- The graph below shows the percentage of female students on four different course at one university from 1970 to 2015 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and comparisons where relevant 84
- The table below shows the consumption of three basic foods rice wheat and maize by people in four different countries 78
- Spoken communication is more powerful than written communication To what extent do you agree or disagree 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, if, may, moreover, so, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 13.1623246493 23% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1624.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 250.0 315.596192385 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.496 5.12529762239 127% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97635364384 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.55280171133 2.80592935109 127% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 176.041082164 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.672 0.561755894193 120% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 2.0 1.60771543086 124% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 16.0721442886 62% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 55.1452627158 49.4020404114 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 162.4 106.682146367 152% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 20.7667163134 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.6 7.06120827912 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.167639709315 0.244688304435 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0630547546312 0.084324248473 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0384646652843 0.0667982634062 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0961246366334 0.151304729494 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0375541845357 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.7 13.0946893788 166% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 12.26 50.2224549098 24% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.8 11.3001002004 158% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 20.72 12.4159519038 167% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.89 8.58950901804 138% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 78.4519038076 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.78957915832 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.