The pie charts below show how dangerous waste products are dealt with in three countries. The pie charts below show how dangerous waste products are dealt with in three countries.
Write a report for a university, lecturer describing the information shown below. Write a report for a university, lecturer describing the information shown below.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make
comparisons where relevant.
The pie charts illustrate how three particular countries dispose of hazardous waste.
Overall, Sweden and the United Kingdom contribute the most dangerous waste products while Korea takes more measures to recycle.
It can be seen that while nearly 45% of dangerous rubbish is recycled in Sweden more than in Korea, the UK does not use recycling as an option to deal with waste. The most significant way to deal with waste products in the UK is destroying the waste in the underground, at 82%. The proportion of underground in Korea is nearly 35% less than the proportion of the ones in Sweden.
Destroying waste by fire in the UK accounted for an insignificant percentage, at 2%. The proportion of incineration in Korea and Sweden, at 9% and 20% respectively. Only in the UK, chemical treatment and dumping at sea solve garbage and make up the same amount, at 8 %.
- The diagram below shows the development of cutting tools in the stone age One was made 1 4 million years ago and the other was made 800 thousand years ago viewing from the back view front view and side view Summarize the information by selecting and repor 100
- The diagram below shows how to recycle organic waste to produce fertilizer compost 61
- It is suggested that everyone wants to have a car a television and a fridge Do the disadvantages of this development for society outweigh the advantages 11
- The diagrams below show a small local museum and its surroundings in 1957 and 2007 71
- the process of making clothes from recycled plastic bottles
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 6.5 out of 9
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 8 10
No. of Words: 149 200
No. of Characters: 690 1000
No. of Different Words: 85 100
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.494 4.0
Average Word Length: 4.631 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.848 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 44 60
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 34 50
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 27 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 22 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.625 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.957 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.25 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.446 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.446 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.072 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 4