Question

read his draft.
every year, according to the environmental protection agency, americans throw away millions of pounds of garbage. where does this garbage go? what is done with it? who has to handle it? these are probably questions wed rather all not think about, but we must.
most materials that end up in landfills include glass, steel, aluminum, metals, paper, and electronics. these materials are all recyclable. if we were to remove all recyclable materials from landfills and actually recycle them, it would free up a lot of space. this is why i believe that americans should be required to recycle goods, and should receive a fine if they choose not to do so.
in europe, garbage bags cost more per bag than bags that hold recycling. this deters people from overusing garbage bags, and causes them to stop and think before simply throwing something away that could be recycled. if you were paying for every piece of garbage you threw into the can, youd probably stop and think too. so the government doesnt necessarily need to directly fine people, but could rather indirectly fine people by charging more per garbage bag. these funds could then go to causes like cleaning up waters and creating more efficient landfills.
there could also be a more direct fine, comparable to getting a parking ticket. just as parking tickets raise millions of dollars for cities every
which statement should pierce add to the text to address the counterargument that fines for people who do not recycle would be difficult to enforce?

1. if cameras can be used to stop drivers from speeding, surely we can find a way to fine people who are not recycling.
2. both recycling and waste generation have increased per person from 1980 to 2010, but waste generation rates are higher.
3. it is unfair to punish people if they are not aware of recycling options available to them, so we must first educate people.
4. in san francisco, garbage collectors sort through color - coded bins to make sure people are recycling and give them a ticket if they are not.

Explanation:

To address the counterargument that fining non - recyclers is hard to enforce, we need a statement that shows a practical way of enforcement. Option 1 uses a weak analogy (speeding cameras vs recycling fines) without a concrete enforcement method. Option 2 is about recycling and waste generation rates, not enforcement. Option 3 is about education first, not addressing enforcement of fines. Option 4 gives a real - world example from San Francisco where garbage collectors sort through bins and issue tickets for non - recycling, showing a practical way to enforce fines.

Answer:

1. In San Francisco, garbage collectors sort through color - coded bins to make sure people are recycling and give them a ticket if they are not.