"Our declining environment may bring the people of the world together as no politician, philosopher, or war ever could.  Environmental problems are global in scope and respect no nation's boundaries.  Therefore, people are faced with the choice of unity and cooperation on the one hand or disunity and a common tragedy on the other."  

　　Environmental problems will require a joint efferct amoung people to solve, however, environmental problems may not cause people to come together.  Should the problems continue for an extended period of time before any effert is made to solve them, they will reach a point of no return no matter how people come together to work on it.  When this happens there will be increased shortage in our natural resouses.  As supply of our resouces goes down and demand remains the same or goes up there will be increased presure to claim what resouces remain.  So instead of people working together to solve the problem, they will be fighting for what's left by the problem.  

　　To solve this, people need to come together before the problem reaches a state of no return.  This may be hard to do since the effects of environmental problems are not yet felt by a large degree (if felt at all) by everyone.  At this point in time many feel it is not there problem to worry about since it does not immediatly effect them.  To remidy this people should become more aware of their current environment. Comments: 

　　This response is seriously flawed.  Its strongest feature is a fairly clear position:  it agrees with the claim that environmental problems will require cooperation and presents a scenario for what will happen if there is no cooperation -- conflict over diminishing resources.  However, the writer offers little support for that position.  Threatened "resources" and the "effects of environmental problems" are mentioned but not specified, and the paper provides no examples of how people might "come together" to address the problem or how they might "become more aware of their current environment."  

　　Some of the sentences are worded clearly ("So instead of people working together?"), but others are so flawed by imprecise word choice that the meaning is difficult to understand:  "t yet felt by a large degree (if felt at all) by everyone."  

　　Also, run-on sentences (the first sentence, for example) and unclear pronoun references add to the confusion, reinforcing the score of 2.