The article states that the new regulations are unnecessary and might have negative consequences and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that we definitely need stricter regulations and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading claims that environmental regulation already exists. The professor opposes this point by saying that the regulation that now exists is not sufficient. She states that the current regulation is only applied to new ponds or landfills and it is not applied to the old ones. She provides an example of an old pond that is leaked and contaminated the water to illustrate this. She explains that they have to use the regulation in all sites to solve the problem.
Second, the author posits that creating the strict rules would discourage the recycling of coal ash into other products because of its negative impacts on consumers. Nevertheless, the professor contends that creating these kinds of rules would not necessarily cause consumers to stop using them. She provides an example of mercury to explain this. She set forth the fact that although mercury subjected to some strict regulation for handling it, consumers still use it after fifty years. According to the professor, it is unlikely that strict rules decrease the use of coal ash.
Third, the article avers that strict regulation would increase the cost for power companies and as a result the price of electricity. The professor refutes this point by stating that it is true that it would increase the costs for these companies but it is well-worth. The costs for the companies would increase about fifty billion dollars. Based on the lecture, this would increases the costs about one percent for the general public which would not be a big price for having clean environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 147, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'existed'.
Suggestion: existed
... saying that the regulation that is now exist is not sufficient. She states that the ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 392, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...taminated the water to illustrate this. She explains that they have to use the regu...
^^^
Line 9, column 270, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...r these companies but it is well-worth. the cost for the company would increases ab...
^^^
Line 9, column 301, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'increase'
Suggestion: increase
...l-worth. the cost for the company would increases about fifty billion dollars. tBased on ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 340, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: TBased
... increases about fifty billion dollars. tBased on the lecture, this would increases th...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 374, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'increase'
Suggestion: increase
...lars. tBased on the lecture, this would increases the costs about one percent for general...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 416, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...creases the costs about one percent for general public which would not be a big price fot havi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, still, third, well, as a result, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 22.412803532 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1521.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 296.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13851351351 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6653992358 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527027027027 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 459.0 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.3946029398 49.2860985944 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.0625 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5 21.698381199 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.875 7.06452816374 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.385539307252 0.272083759551 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120831232812 0.0996497079465 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0734882632547 0.0662205650399 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.198922991543 0.162205337803 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0645527241167 0.0443174109184 146% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.