Percentage of different type of waste recycled.
The bar chart compares the recycling rates of four different kinds of waste material (plastic, cans, paper, and glass) in a city, from 1992 to 2002.
It is clear that the percentage of all types of recycled waste generally increased over the period. While glass was the most recycled waste material, the opposite was true for plastic during the majority of the period.
Paper and glass were the two most recycled types of waste material during most of the period. Beginning at approximately 14% and 15% respectively, both figures rose considerably to 21% and 29% five years later. By the end of the period, the recycling rates of paper and glass were almost double that of plastic and cans, at approximately 40% and 50%.
Plastic and cans were recycled far less, with the figures beginning at around 10% and 18% respectively, in 1992. While the figure for plastic slightly increased by about 2% in 1997, the figure for cans dropped by about half. In 2002, the figure for recycled plastic remained the same, however, the amount of cans recycled jumped back up to around 20%.
- The chart below give information about the highspeed continuous internet connection of households in five countries in 2001 and 2002 92
- Nowadays sports is a big business with high earnings for professional sportspeople and companies involved both financially and other ways Is this a positive or negative development for sports 89
- The chart below gives information about car ownership in the UK from 1975 to 2005 84
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of Australian men and women in different age groups who did regular physical activity in 2010. 89
- The pictures show information about average income and spending on food and clothes by an average family in a city in the UK 72
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 33.7804878049 104% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 891.0 965.302439024 92% => OK
No of words: 185.0 196.424390244 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.81621621622 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.68801715136 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48818978088 2.65546596893 94% => OK
Unique words: 95.0 106.607317073 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.513513513514 0.547539520022 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 266.4 283.868780488 94% => 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
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 16.4008430979 43.030603864 38% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 99.0 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5555555556 22.9334400587 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.55555555556 5.23603664747 30% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.250811140449 0.215688989381 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.125512147122 0.103423049105 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.120957245388 0.0843802449381 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.168498872004 0.15604864568 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0959560715338 0.0819641961636 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.2329268293 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 61.2550243902 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.3012195122 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.68 11.4140731707 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.45 8.06136585366 92% => OK
difficult_words: 33.0 40.7170731707 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.