The pie charts below show how dangerous waste products are dealt with in three countries. The pie charts below show how dangerous waste products are dealt with in three countries.
Write a report for a university, lecturer describing the information shown below. Write a report for a university, lecturer describing the information shown below.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make
comparisons where relevant.
The pie charts illustrate how three particular countries dispose of hazardous waste.
Overall, Sweden and the United Kingdom contribute the most dangerous waste products while Korea takes more measures to recycle.
It can be seen that while nearly 45% of dangerous rubbish is recycled in Sweden more than in Korea, the UK does not use recycling as an option to deal with waste. The most significant way to deal with waste products in the UK is destroying the waste in the underground, at 82%. The proportion of underground in Korea is nearly 35% less than the proportion of the ones in Sweden.
Destroying waste by fire in the UK accounted for an insignificant percentage, at 2%. The proportion of incineration in Korea and Sweden, at 9% and 20% respectively. Only in the UK, chemical treatment and dumping at sea solve garbage and make up the same amount, at 8 %.
- Human activity has had a negative impact on plants and animals around the world Some people think that this cannot be changed while others believe that actions can be taken to bring about the change Discuss both and gi 89
- The diagram below shows the manufacturing process for making sugar from suagr cane 61
- The diagram shows the process of making soft cheese 61
- The line graph illustrates the proportion of total expenditure in a certain European country between 1960 and 2000 100
- The diagram details the process of making wool
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 6.5 out of 9
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 8 10
No. of Words: 149 200
No. of Characters: 690 1000
No. of Different Words: 85 100
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.494 4.0
Average Word Length: 4.631 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.848 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 44 60
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 34 50
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 27 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 22 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.625 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.957 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.25 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.446 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.446 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.072 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 4