Different materials recycled from 1982 to 2010 in a particular country.
The line graph illustrates the percentage of four distinct materials which underwent the recycling process between 1982and 2010 in a particular country. Overall paper and cardboard were recycled mostly and although there were fluctuations, the trend was downward for this material while the others experienced an upward trend.
As can be seen from the graph, starting at 65% in 1982, the amount of paper and cardboard recycled dipped slightly until 1990, before hitting a peak at 80% in 4 years later. The trend was followed by a gradual decline to 70% at the end of the period. In the same time, 50% of glass containers were recycled in the beginning, however, the figure dropped minimally at 10% less than in the following 8 years. The period from 1990 to 2010 witnessed the fact that the rate of containers made of glass recycled rise gradually, reaching 60% in 2010.
It is interesting that the two remaining materials followed the same pattern. While alumininium cans started being recycled in 1986 and its percentage went up considerably, being at 45% in 2010. In the same year, yet, the proportion of plastics was just below 10% after underwent an insignificant increase beginning in 1990.
(201 words)
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-08-22 | Kripa Darshini | 93 | view |
- some people believe that it is good to share as much as information as possible in scientific research, business, and the academic world. others believe that some information is too important or too valuable to be shared freely. 78
- The diagram below shows the production of electricity using a system called Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC). 78
- Essay topics: the table below describes victims by age group and offence category in Venezuela,1999. 78
- Immigration in UK 42
- Individuals should not be allowed to carry guns. to what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1015.0 965.302439024 105% => OK
No of words: 202.0 196.424390244 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02475247525 4.92477711251 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.76996954942 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74741771266 2.65546596893 103% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 106.607317073 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.638613861386 0.547539520022 117% => OK
syllable_count: 285.3 283.868780488 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.114634146341 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.2488578548 43.030603864 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.777777778 112.824112599 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4444444444 22.9334400587 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 5.23603664747 38% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
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 : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.26960211587 0.215688989381 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0904567461282 0.103423049105 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0905111325293 0.0843802449381 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.168554884784 0.15604864568 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0602173099519 0.0819641961636 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.2329268293 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 61.2550243902 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 11.4140731707 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 40.7170731707 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.