"Regulators and policymakers should respond to potential environmental threats even before the information is fully known or concrete."
When regulators and policymakers makes decisions, only a few have the environment in mind. Lawmakers just wants to pass a bill. But lawmakers have to look at one important thing before submitting their policy. Will this policy cause any potential environmental threats? Policymakers have to consider the future threats to ensure the safety of the environment and sustain it for the future.
First, environmental threats can be long-lasting and cause harm to people's health. Such examples could be seen currently in the world. Beijing, China's capital and one of the most densely populated city in the world is already flooded with health hazards due to pollution. China's government are constantly industrializing the country without thinking about the potential harm caused by building constructions and factory. Another Asian country, Japan, is making laws with the environment in mind. Policymakers can avoid future harm to their country by consider the damage their policies can cause the environment.
Another related point, responding to potential environmental threat can create future plans to help the environment. The U.S. has been constantly thinking of new ways to conserve the environment and also build environmental friendly. By responding to potential threat, the U.S. will be able to not damage the area and also prevent future damage. For example, the U.S. is constantly trying the conserve land sustain the environment and prevent the environment to future harm.
Although it is impossible to accurately predict what will happen to the environment, regulators and lawmakers have to be cautious of their policy-making because environmental threats can and will happen due to negligence and ignorance. China is a example the whole world needs to look at because the people in China are currently in a health hazard zone due to the government's negligence on environmental safety. Policy makers have to fully comprehend how much harm is going to be added to the environment and how will it effect it inhabitants.
Will this policy cause any potential environmental threats? Policymakers have to consider the future threats to ensure the safety of the environment and sustain it for the future.
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2018-07-30 | vsn1541997 | 83 | view |
2017-01-12 | bhaskarvemuri18 | 50 | view |
2017-01-12 | bhaskarvemuri18 | 16 | view |
2016-10-04 | cybertelic | 83 | view |
2016-08-20 | nikita2792 | 50 | view |
- Chemists have determined that spring water from Augusta, Maine contains minerals necessary for a healthy body. Residents of Augusta, Maine, have a longer life span than the average U.S. citizen. Even though spring water from Augusta, Maine may be expensiv 75
- The following was used as part of an internet advertising company's appeal to businesses: Furniture Depot employed our internet advertising company to help. Since then its sales increased by 10% over last year's totals. Furniture Depot's success demonstra 50
- Seniority (years of service) should not be the basis of employee compensation. Employees should be promoted and given raises solely on the basis of their work performance and merit. That is a better way to encourage high productivity. Discuss the extent t 70
- "Regulators and policymakers should respond to potential environmental threats even before the information is fully known or concrete." 40
When regulators and policymakers makes decisions
When regulators and policymakers make decisions
Lawmakers just wants to pass a bill.
Lawmakers just want to pass a bill.
how will it effect it inhabitants.
how will it affect its inhabitants.
Sentence: Will this policy cause any potential environmental threats?
Description: The fragment policy cause any is rare
Suggestion: Possible agreement error: Replace cause with verb, present tense, 3rd person singular
Sentence: By responding to potential threat, the U.S. will be able to not damage the area and also prevent future damage.
Description: The token to is not usually followed by a negator
Suggestion: Refer to to and not
flaws:
No. of Different Words: 151 200
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 347 350
No. of Characters: 1831 1500
No. of Different Words: 151 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.316 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.277 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.015 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 139 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 71 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 57 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.35 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.234 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.3 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.35 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.548 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.124 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5