int 41
in the reading, the author claims that regarding some people of power companies, establishing new and strict regulations to handle and store coal ash is are not necessary and might have negative results. However, finding all the ideas questionable and implausible, the lecturer totally repudiates this claim and presents some evidence to the contrary.
First, the reading passage asserts that there are some regulations which have good impacts on the environment like using liners for the pond and landfill. Conversely, the lecturer mentions that ongoing regulations are not enough due to the fact that the liner just uses for new landfills and ponds, while liners are not used by older landfills. Thus, the coal ash components go through the ground water and make it contaminated. Therefore, creating new and strict regulations are indispensable.
Second, the author declares that if the government makes new regulations for handling coal ash, the consumers will not have any tendency to buy recycled products of coal ash. On the other hand, the lecturer refutes this reason by explaining that Mercury is a hazardous material that has some strict regulations for handling and storing. It has been recycled over 50 years without any concern reaction from its customers. As a result, new regulations would not have any negative consequences on consumers.
Finally, the reading states that decisive new regulations cause the cost of the handling coal ash increase. On the contrary, the speaker asserts that increasing costs have valuable consequences for people. Although the expense of handling and storing coal ash is about 15 billion dollar, the general public should pay just about one percent increase in their bill that is not much cost for having a clean environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: In
in the reading, the author claims that reg...
^^
Line 7, column 293, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...oal ash is about 15 billion dollar, the general public should pay just about one percent incre...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, first, however, if, regarding, second, so, therefore, thus, while, as a result, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1499.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 283.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29681978799 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77780322158 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56890459364 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 450.9 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.0350677559 49.2860985944 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.307692308 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7692307692 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3846153846 7.06452816374 147% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 10.7273730684 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.