The bar chart depicts four types of waste disposal in four cities. Landfill was the most popular method of waste disposal in Toronto and Amman. Toronto used landfill for disposing of about three-quarters of its waste with the remaining quarter split between incineration, recycling and composting.
Amman used landfill for disposing of almost half of its waste with most of the rest being incinerated. Incineration was the most popular method of waste disposal in Madrid and Kuala Lumpur.
Kuala Lumpur disposed of more than half its waste by incineration with less than one quarter going for recycling and even less still going for landfill and composting. Recycling was the second least popular method of waste disposal.
No cities disposed of more than 25% of its waste by recycling and in the case of Toronto, it was less than 10%. Composting was the least common method of waste disposal. No cities disposed of more than 10% of its waste by compositing and Amman hardly did any composting.
- The graph below shows the consumption of 3 spreads from 1981 to 2007 87
- The line graph below gives information about the number of visitors to three London museums between June and September 2013 30
- The graph below shows consumers average annual expenditure on cell phone national andinternational fixed line and services in America between 2001 and 2010 The graph below shows consumers average annual expenditure on cell phone national andinternati
- This pictures below show how tomato ketchup is made Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features
- The bar charts illustrate the average house expenses in England and its capital city London and to present the comparison regarding the average house prices between distinct areas of England within the year 2013 72
Transition Words or Phrases used:
second, still
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 0.0 3.15609756098 0% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 33.7804878049 83% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 838.0 965.302439024 87% => OK
No of words: 166.0 196.424390244 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04819277108 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.58944267634 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64564157894 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 70.0 106.607317073 66% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.421686746988 0.547539520022 77% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 253.8 283.868780488 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 3.36585365854 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.4926829268 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.3038241555 43.030603864 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.8 112.824112599 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6 22.9334400587 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.3 5.23603664747 25% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 1.13902439024 702% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.09268292683 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.348903063716 0.215688989381 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.176710242482 0.103423049105 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0907884439765 0.0843802449381 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236514646252 0.15604864568 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.074332926954 0.0819641961636 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 13.2329268293 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 61.2550243902 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 10.3012195122 82% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.71 11.4140731707 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.47 8.06136585366 93% => OK
difficult_words: 32.0 40.7170731707 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.9970731707 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.