The Pie Charts Below Show The Comparison of Different Kinds of Energy Production of France in Two Years.
The pie charts given below illustrate some comparison of different kinds of energy production of France in two years. The data is measured in percentage. Overall, it can be seen that the greatest change was in the other, whilst the significant decrease was petro.
In 1995, the hugest percentage was coal which had 29.80%. Difference from gas as the second biggest percentage was 29.63%. Followed by petro, it got 29.27%, meanwhile nuclear and other had total 13% which were the smallest percentages of all energy production of France.
On the other hand by 2005, the most popular energy representing 30.93% of all production, and it had fallen although it was still a suitable energy, while gas was the second famous energy to produce, this increase at only 30.31% after ten years. The third most favored was petro, but the production fell significantly to only 19.55%. In contrast, nuclear production went up slightly to 10.10%. Initially, production on the other was fairly low however this energy grew dramatically over ten years at 9.10%.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-12 | Lee Daisy | view | |
| 2023-07-19 | CHÚC | view | |
| 2023-07-02 | Risti | view | |
| 2023-06-23 | ryan.pambudi | view | |
| 2023-06-23 | ryan.pambudi | view |
- Some people say that the best way to improve public health is by increasing the number of sports facilities Others however say that this would have little effect on public health and that other measures are required Discuss both these views and give your 78
- The chart below gives information on the percentage of British people giving money to charity by age range for the years 1990 and 2010 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The Pie Charts Below Show The Comparison of Different Kinds of Energy Production of France in Two Years 78
- The chart below gives information about Southland s main export in 2000 20 and future projection for 2025 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The Charts Below Show US Spending Patterns between 1966 and 1996 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, second, so, still, third, while, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 7.0 157% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 25.0 33.7804878049 74% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 3.97073170732 176% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 878.0 965.302439024 91% => OK
No of words: 172.0 196.424390244 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.10465116279 4.92477711251 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.62144681703 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69519232244 2.65546596893 101% => OK
Unique words: 110.0 106.607317073 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.639534883721 0.547539520022 117% => OK
syllable_count: 253.8 283.868780488 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 57.3285269303 43.030603864 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.8 112.824112599 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2 22.9334400587 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.1 5.23603664747 155% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.239803801758 0.215688989381 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102159862005 0.103423049105 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.180486328957 0.0843802449381 214% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.179177481644 0.15604864568 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.133411265988 0.0819641961636 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.2329268293 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 61.2550243902 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.3012195122 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.0 11.4140731707 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.4329268293 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.