TPO-41 - Integrated Writing Task Burning coal in power plants produces a waste product called coal ash, a material that contains small amounts of potentially harmful chemicals Environmentalists in the United States are concerned about the damage such harm

In the lecture, the professor discussed why it is urgent to have stricter regulations for the disposition of coal ash.

To begin with, the reading claims that there are already regulations concerning the handling of coal ash, such as using liner at disposal sites. However, the speaker refutes this by saying that current measurements are not efficient enough. Liner, for instance, is only required at newly built landfills and older ones still pose severe threat to the environment.

Next, whilst the second argument in the passage asserts that stricter rules on the storing and handling of coal ash is likely to discourage consumers from buying products made by recycled coal ash, the lecturer uses mercury as a counter example. As an extremely toxic chemical substance, the regulation for handling mercury is really strict, but products made from recycled mercury still had a good market in the past half century or so.

Finally, the instructor admits that harsher rules on the disposition of coal ash could raise the costs for power companies by about fifteen billion dollars, as stated in the reading material. But the professor points out that it will only lead to a minor increase in the price of electricity for each household. Thus it is worthwhile to spend a little more money in exchange for a huge benefit on the environment.

Votes
Average: 8.8 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 313, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...rice of electricity for each household. Thus it is worthwhile to spend a little more...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, if, really, second, so, still, thus, while, for instance, such as, to begin with

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 12.0772626932 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 22.412803532 40% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1124.0 1373.03311258 82% => OK
No of words: 223.0 270.72406181 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04035874439 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86434787811 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6524881637 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.614349775785 0.540411800872 114% => OK
syllable_count: 346.5 419.366225166 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.7888875972 49.2860985944 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.888888889 110.228320801 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7777777778 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.4444444444 7.06452816374 162% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.470122682666 0.272083759551 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.16756120637 0.0996497079465 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.11699304943 0.0662205650399 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.262116653577 0.162205337803 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0293833207074 0.0443174109184 66% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.3589403974 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.