The chart below compares levels of recycling, as well as some less environmentally friendly forms of waste management, in fifteen European countries.
The presented bar graph demonstrates information about the percentage of recycling and also different less eco-friendly waste management processes classified into landfill, incineration and other in fifteen countries of Europe. The data is calibrated in percentage.
The most striking feature to be observed is that, majority of the European countries use the landfill method of waste management, whilst recycling and incineration are used nearly equal rate. Other methods are used with more less or none rate by country.
Looking at the data in more detail, it is clear that the most environmentally friendly countries are Austria and Belgium, which using recycled/composted type of garbage recovery method approximately 60% and 50%, respectively. Following these countries, Germany, Sweden and Netherlands also have significant greater level of waste recycling programs and it is roughly 40% for each country. Besides, Germany is also accounted for using the highest percentage of other garbage refuse method, which is just over a 15%.
With regarding less eco-friendly waste processing methods, Greece, Ireland and the UK occupy lead position by using landfill method around 85% and just below 15% of the total amount of waste can be processed. In comparison to Italy, Portugal, Spain and Finland, where the percentage of incineration method is considerably less than 10%, that of figure for France, Luxembourg and Denmark reach high of 45%.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-06 | faraj27 | 78 | view |
| 2019-11-18 | Mario Nese | 78 | view |
| 2019-06-14 | Muhammed_10 | 78 | view |
| 2018-09-04 | Limeluminous | 78 | view |
- The pie charts below show units of electricity production by fuel source in Australia and France in 1980 and 2000. 73
- The chart below compares levels of recycling, as well as some less environmentally friendly forms of waste management, in fifteen European countries. 78
- The chart below gives information about Someland s main exports in 2005 2015 and future projections for 2025 71
- The tables below give information about sales of Fairtrade*-labelled tea and pineapples in 2010 and 2015 in five European countries. 73
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by local authorities in Someland in 1980, 1990 and 2000. 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, 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.
... data is calibrated in percentage. The most striking feature to be observed is...
^^^
Line 5, column 221, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'less' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: less
...equal rate. Other methods are used with more less or none rate by country. Looking a...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, if, look, regarding, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 7.0 171% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 6.8 176% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 33.7804878049 86% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 3.97073170732 176% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1242.0 965.302439024 129% => OK
No of words: 221.0 196.424390244 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.61990950226 4.92477711251 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85565412703 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08045445476 2.65546596893 116% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 106.607317073 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.615384615385 0.547539520022 112% => OK
syllable_count: 383.4 283.868780488 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.45097560976 117% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.0231908377 43.030603864 153% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.0 112.824112599 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5555555556 22.9334400587 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.22222222222 5.23603664747 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 1.13902439024 351% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.16402439492 0.215688989381 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0616109140857 0.103423049105 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0453253937872 0.0843802449381 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0980856716642 0.15604864568 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0136272402681 0.0819641961636 17% => 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: 17.3 13.2329268293 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 61.2550243902 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.3012195122 134% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.61 11.4140731707 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.54 8.06136585366 118% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 40.7170731707 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.4329268293 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.