Professor: There should definitely be stricter rules adopted for handling and disposing of coal ash.First, the regulations we have now, for example, those that require companies to use liner, are not really sufficient. Under the current regulations, liner has to be used only when a company builds a new landfill or a new pond. But companies are not required to add liner to old ponds and landfills. Yet several of those older disposal sites have caused significant damage. For example, the harmful chemicals from coal ash leaked into groundwater and contaminated drinking water. We absolutely need stricter new regulations that will prevent environmental damage at all coal ash disposal sites, the new sites as well as the old ones.Second, stricter rules for handling coal ash won't necessarily mean that consumers will stop using recycled coal ash products. Let's look at how people responded to strict regulations for other dangerous materials. Take mercury for example. Mercury is a fairly hazardous material and it's been subject to very strict handling and storage rules for a long time. Yet despite those rules, it's been successfully and safely recycled for over 50 years. And consumers have had very few concerns about it. So it's unlikely that consumers will become afraid to buy recycled coal ash products if stricter regulations are adopted.Third, it's true that the cost of coal ash storage and handling will increase, but in this case, the result is well worth the extra cost. According to analysts, the cost to the power companies of implementing these rules would be about 15 billion dollars. That sounds like a lot. But when you actually do the math, it would increase the average consumer's household electricity bill by only about one percent. That's not a big price to pay for having a cleaner environment.
According to the reading passage, a by-product is produced, which is called coal ash, by burning coal in power plants. It has been proven that its potentially harmful chemicals are extremely harmful and would pollute the environments, and much stricter regulations and laws for handling and storing coal ash must enact by the United states government. Some representatives of power plant companies have taken the opposition; however, the professor finds the mentioned arguments are not necessary and brings some facts to refute them all.
First, it has been asserted by power company representatives that the proper and effective regulations have been already existed like using liner-special materials to prevent the leaking of coal ash into the soil and surrounding environment. In contrast, the professor states that the liners have been used by power plant companies are not sufficient enough, and these companies must develop new liner in very new ponds and landfills, because the old ones have caused leaking the dangerous chemical materials to the groundwater and contaminating the drinking water.
Moreover, some anticipations by analysts suggested that the crating very strict laws will be a discouraging point for recycling of coal ash. On the contrary, the speaker underlies that creating stricker rules means that it will not stop using coal ash. There have been some strict regulations for other fairly hazardous materials, like mercury, for over 50 years, which are successful and safer, and then there is few concerns about them.
Finally, creating strict new regulations lead to the significantly increasing, about ten times, in the current costs and the price of electricity by power companies, which would not be accepted by the general public. Conversely, the professor dismisses this issue due to the fact that these regulations will definitely increase the cost of power companies about 15 billion dollars which sounds like a lot, but it is worthy. When you actually do the math, it would increase the average consumer's household electricity bill by only about one percent. That is not a big price for having a cleaner environment.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-11-05 | yasy.j728@gmail.com | 85 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement the opinions of celebrities such as famous celebrities or athletes are more important to young people than they are to older people 78
- The benefits claimed for electronic medical records are actually every uncertain First the costs savings are unlikely be as significant as the reading suggests For example there probably won t be any savings related to record storage You see doctors who a 76
- Elephants are fascinating but the beliefs you just read about are based on misunderstandings of elephant behavior First we should not assume that old elephants are aware that they will die soon just because they break away from their herds There is a very 93
- Do you agree with the following statement In the past the young people depended too much on their parents to make decisions for them today young people are better able to make decisions about their own lives 73
- Do you agree or disagree with following statement it is more important for government to spend money to improve internet access or improving public transportation 90
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 406, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are few concerns'?
Suggestion: there are few concerns
...hich are successful and safer, and then there is few concerns about them. Finally, creating strict n...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 202, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ies, which would not be accepted by the general public. Conversely, the professor dismisses th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, conversely, finally, first, however, if, moreover, so, then, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1817.0 1373.03311258 132% => OK
No of words: 341.0 270.72406181 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3284457478 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88096265524 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 145.348785872 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.548387096774 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 555.3 419.366225166 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 69.1168495295 49.2860985944 140% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.416666667 110.228320801 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.4166666667 21.698381199 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.06452816374 123% => 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 : 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: 0.319790840008 0.272083759551 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109407498535 0.0996497079465 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0505480599141 0.0662205650399 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.182714615685 0.162205337803 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0415954478913 0.0443174109184 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 13.3589403974 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 53.8541721854 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 63.6247240618 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 10.7273730684 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.