The reading passage explains environmentalists wanted the government to induce some new restricted rules on storing and using coal ash.However, the writer disagrees with this proposal and rises three strong doubts on the necessity of this work. While, the lecture supports this opinion and refutes all the writer's arguments in the reading.
First, the reading states already regulations and strict rules for coal cash exist such as that enforced companies to use the liner. Contrary to this viewpoint, the lecture argues that the rules are not sufficient. In fact, these rules just have to consider only when companies and factories are using new lakes and ponds, unfortunately, there are no rules about old lakes and ponds. As an illustration, coal ash would contemplate ground waters. Therefore, according to the writer view, the rules should be for the new land and lakes as well as the old once.
second, according to the reading, the amount of coal ash has being recycled is sufficient for instance recycled coal ash has been using in construction building materials. So more restricted rules lead to more recycling coal ash which would cause users wonder if these recycled materials are safe or not. The lecture, conversely, disagrees with the readings' explanation. She states that customers would not stop using recycled materials. Recycling mercury could validate benefits of recycling. Mercury has been subjected to strict rules for recycling and over 50 years is been recycled there are few concerns about the safety of this.
Finally, the reading puts forward that new limited regulation would increase the cost of electricity and therefore people dissatisfaction. Nonetheless, the lecture refutes it by pointing out the result of performing to new strict rules would be more worthy. In fact, now not using coal ash cost 50 billion dollars but by inducing this new rules the price of electricity would increase just one percent. Whit this in mind, the united states government should induce new restricted rules.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 136, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: However
...ted rules on storing and using coal ash.However, the writer disagrees with this proposa...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Second
...d and lakes as well as the old once. second, according to the reading, the amount o...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, however, if, nonetheless, second, so, therefore, well, while, for instance, in fact, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1720.0 1373.03311258 125% => OK
No of words: 327.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25993883792 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73251130579 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.522935779817 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 419.366225166 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.4131513445 49.2860985944 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.176470588 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2352941176 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.05882352941 7.06452816374 114% => 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 : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.406115170215 0.272083759551 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.130509715192 0.0996497079465 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0988636134622 0.0662205650399 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.244237790605 0.162205337803 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0661054195692 0.0443174109184 149% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.