Alternative energy sources, wave farms
The article introduces the topic of alternative energy sources. According to the writer of the article, specifically wave farms have lots of advantages relative to other energy sources. The lecturer strongly disagrees with this point of view. He mentions that wave farms have negative aspects as well, which should be considered as well.
Firstly, the author states that wave farms cause less environmental damage compared to burning fossil fuels. The professor, however, explains that wave farms still produce carbon dioxide, thus still can cause harmful emissions for the environment. Additionally, dangerous chemicals are released by the heat waves as well. Therefore, wave farms can have a negative impact on the environment as well.
Secondly, the writer of the article claims that the energy obtained from wave farms is reliable, predictable and measurable. The professor, in fact, heavily disagrees with this argument. According to the professor, a lot of technical problems can occur with the method of wave farms. This, on its turn, does not lead to reliability. Besides, he mentions that predictability is not equal to reliability. Even though the waves might be predictable, this does not necessarily mean that it is a reliable energy source. Moreover, the harsh environment of the ocean can cause a lot of inconsistencies in the measures.
Lastly, the author claims that wave farms do not obstruct or influence the ecosystem in a negative matter. Again, the professor believes there are flaws in this argument. For example, the professor mentions the disruptive noises made by the wave farms. These noises can be disruptive for birds, as well as other animals. Furthermore, animals that live in the sea, could get tangled up in the equipment in the oceans.
In conclusion, it is clear that the writer of the article and the professor have conflicting opinions about wave farms as a source of energy.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 142, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...about wave farms as a source of energy.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, lastly, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, thus, well, for example, in conclusion, in fact, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1611.0 1373.03311258 117% => OK
No of words: 307.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24755700326 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88193919678 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.508143322476 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 504.9 419.366225166 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 13.0662251656 161% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 26.6463357872 49.2860985944 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 76.7142857143 110.228320801 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.619047619 21.698381199 67% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 4.45695364238 269% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.37511680638 0.272083759551 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0993070361777 0.0996497079465 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0908163227883 0.0662205650399 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.209636020011 0.162205337803 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0672397029428 0.0443174109184 152% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 53.8541721854 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 11.0289183223 80% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.58 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.6 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.