The bar chart demonstrates the percentage of urban waste dealt with via four methods in four different countries.

Overall, it can be seen that among four states, the higher amount of urban waste is disposed through traditional methods; meanwhile, environment-friendly ways are utilized to treat small number of garbage.

Apparently, landfill is the most common means to dispose garbage in three countries, namely UK with the majority of waste (60%) and Italy, Spain, each copes with 45% and 40% respectively. In contrast, the least of trash is buried in the land in Netherland. It is interesting to note that in Netherland, most of waste (nearly 50%) there is burnt; while, this way is not widely applied in other nations which only burn around 10% of waste.

Regarding to the proportion of waste treated biologically, Italy and Spain deal with the same amount, at aproximately 8%; meanwhile, the figure in Netherland is the highest (30%). No data is recorded in the UK.

The bar chart illustrates the proportions of urban waste processed using four different methods in four countries.

Overall, it is clear that traditional disposal methods, particularly landfill, were the dominant means of waste treatment in most countries, while more environmentally friendly approaches accounted for smaller shares. An exception can be seen in the Netherlands, where incineration and biological treatment were used more extensively. Notably, the UK did not employ biological treatment at all.

In terms of landfill, the UK recorded the highest figure, with 60% of waste disposed of in this way. Italy and Spain followed, at 45% and 40% respectively. By contrast, the Netherlands relied least on landfill, with only 10% of its waste buried. Instead, nearly half of Dutch waste (48%) was incinerated, a proportion far higher than in the other three countries, where burning accounted for around 10% or less.

Regarding recycling, the UK and Italy showed similar patterns, with 30% of waste recycled in each country, while Spain recorded a slightly higher figure of 35%. The Netherlands recycled 15% of its waste. As for biological treatment, the Netherlands again led, at 30%, whereas Italy and Spain treated only about 8% of their waste using this method. No data was recorded for the UK in this category.

Hạn chế

• Một số collocation chưa tự nhiên:

  • ❌ deal with via → ✔ treated by

  • ❌ dispose garbage → ✔ dispose of waste

  • ❌ the percents of recycled waste → ✔ the percentages of recycled waste

• Lặp từ waste / garbage khá nhiều.

Lỗi thường gặp

• Giới từ & mạo từ:

  • ❌ Regarding to → ✔ Regarding

  • ❌ the least of trash → ✔ the smallest proportion of waste

• Câu bị ngắt bằng dấu phẩy sai (comma splice).

• Một số lỗi chia số nhiều/số ít.

✅ Task Achievement

• Overview rõ, nêu điểm nổi bật nhất (Netherlands & UK).

• So sánh hợp lý, không liệt kê máy móc.

✅ Lexical Resource

• Từ vựng học thuật & collocation chuẩn:

  • dominant means, accounted for, relied least on, recorded the highest figure, by contrast

• Không lặp từ “waste” quá nhiều.

✅ Grammar

• Câu phức tự nhiên, chính xác.

• Không còn lỗi giới từ, mạo từ, chia số nhiều.

✅ Coherence & Cohesion

• Mạch bài rõ ràng.

• Liên kết tự nhiên (Overall, By contrast, Instead, Regarding).