The line graph below shows the production of paper and packaging, wood pulp and sawn-wood from 1980 to 2000.
The graph compares the amount of paper and packaging, wood pult and sawn-wood which were producted in the UK over the period of twenty years. Units are measured in million tonnes.
It can be seen clearly that from all the categories the overall trend was downward with the exception of paper packaging. Additionally, the figure for this category was highest the entire time of the period.
Looking at the graph for more detail, starting with around 220 million tonnes in 1980, the production of paper and packaging experienced a slight increase to 250 million tonnes ten years later before growing more steadily to reach at a peak of 350 million tonnes in 2000.
By contrast, there was a significant decrease in the amount of sawn-wood manufactured from 200 million tonnes at the beginning of the period to only three quarter in 1990 then this figure declined more minimally to appoximately 130 millions in 2000. Similarly, the production of wood pulp slightly fell to 150 million tonnes in 1990 before witnessing a minimal recovery to end the period with 160 miilion tonnes.
- The graph below shows the amounts of waste produced by three companies over a period of 15 years 78
- The line graph below shows the householf recycling rates in three different countries between 2005 and 2015 73
- The line graph below shows the production of paper and packaging wood pulp and sawn wood from 1980 to 2000 78
- The charts below show annual average spending on clothes per person in the US in 1985 1995 and 2005 78
- The line graph below shows the production of paper and packaging wood pulp and sawn wood in the UK from 1980 to 2000
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 165, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a million'.
Suggestion: a million
... of twenty years. Units are measured in million tonnes. It can be seen clearly that fr...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 84, Rule ID: WITH_THE_EXCEPTION_OF[1]
Message: Use simply 'except' or 'except for'
Suggestion: except; except for
...tegories the overall trend was downward with the exception of paper packaging. Additionally, the figu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 52, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the graph for more detail, starting with around 220 million tonnes in 1980, the p...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, look, similarly, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 900.0 965.302439024 93% => OK
No of words: 181.0 196.424390244 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97237569061 4.92477711251 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.66791821706 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61958865897 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 106.0 106.607317073 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.585635359116 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 266.4 283.868780488 94% => 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: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 3.36585365854 30% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 22.4926829268 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 78.105893582 43.030603864 182% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.571428571 112.824112599 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8571428571 22.9334400587 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.57142857143 5.23603664747 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.255133155205 0.215688989381 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107665143914 0.103423049105 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.095009405239 0.0843802449381 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152260550061 0.15604864568 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0794557134674 0.0819641961636 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.2329268293 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 61.2550243902 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.3012195122 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 11.4140731707 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.06136585366 108% => OK
difficult_words: 44.0 40.7170731707 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.9970731707 109% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.