the pie charts below show the comparison of different kinds of energy production of france
The pie charts reveal information on the proportion of five types of energy production in France in 1995 and 2005. Units are measured in percent (%).
From an overall perspective, one of the most outstanding features is that there was a significant difference in the percentage of comparison of energy in 1995 and 2005. Actually, the figure given for Gas and coal accounted for the largest one among five selected groups. Nevertheless, the number of nuclear and other kinds of energy made up the lowest one, with under 10%
Surprisingly, the percentage of Gas was consistently determined to be by far the largest one among the five types of energy between 1995 and 2005, increasing slightly from 29,63% to 30,31 %. Similarly, The rate of coal rose gently during the years 1995 -2005, from 29,80% to 30,93%.
It is interesting to note that, the figure given for Petro comprised of 29,27% in 1995, dropping significantly 10% after 10 years, with 19,55% in 2005. Conversely, The figure given for nuclear and other went up significantly after 10 years. These figures constituting 10,10% and 9,10%, respectively
- table the prensent of national expenditure in Ireland italy and spain 61
- The maps below show the center of a small town called Islip as it is now and plans for its development 73
- ELECTRONIC GOODS AND SERVICES BY AGE OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD 65
- The line graph reveals information on the amount of three kinds of spread margarine low fat and reduced spreads and butter which were consumed over 26 years from 1981 to 2007 67
- reasons of choosing a university 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 373, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...y made up the lowest one, with under 10% Surprisingly, the percentage of Gas was...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 14, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...st one, with under 10% Surprisingly, the percentage of Gas was consistently d...
^^
Line 5, column 148, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e types of energy between 1995 and 2005, increasing slightly from 29,63% to 30,31...
^^
Line 7, column 88, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n for Petro comprised of 29,27% in 1995, dropping significantly 10% after 10 year...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, conversely, if, nevertheless, similarly, so
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 : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 33.7804878049 112% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 930.0 965.302439024 96% => OK
No of words: 182.0 196.424390244 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.10989010989 4.92477711251 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.67297393991 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87226075636 2.65546596893 108% => OK
Unique words: 107.0 106.607317073 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587912087912 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 267.3 283.868780488 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.4752834901 43.030603864 171% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.333333333 112.824112599 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2222222222 22.9334400587 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.88888888889 5.23603664747 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.128041812533 0.215688989381 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0574245769973 0.103423049105 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.097108604943 0.0843802449381 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102830557287 0.15604864568 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102804610331 0.0819641961636 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.2329268293 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 61.2550243902 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 11.4140731707 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 38.0 40.7170731707 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => 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.