Coal ash, a waste product created in power plants by burning coal, is hazardous for environment. According to the passage, environmentalists raise concern regarding pollution caused by coal ash and suggest to enforce much stricter regulations for handling and storing this material. The author also presents arguments of representatives of power companies opposing against the regulation. However, the lecturer finds the points unconvincing and refutes those arguments providing counter arguments.
To begin with, it is mentioned that efficacious regulations have already applied and power companies have to use liner to prevent leaking of coal ash into soil. By contrast, the lecturer points out that this rule is only applied to disposal ponds and landfills those are newly constructed. As older disposal sites are not regulated under this rule, there is still a chance that coal ash might be leaked by those sites which would be harmful for environment.
Secondly, the representatives posits that adopting strict rule would hamper recycling of coal ash into other products like concrete and bricks. They raise their concern regarding the risk of losing customers as they might be frightened by the pernicious effects of coal ash. On the other hand, the lecturer refutes this argument presenting example of mercury. As mercury is also a harmful chemical component, strict rule was applied to regulate its usage. In spite of that, it would not make any negative impact on usage of recycled products of mercury.
Finally, according to the article, increased disposal and handling cost might cause a rise in price of electricity. Though the lecturer agrees with this argument, she believes that it would be worthy to pay increased bill rather than causing harm to environment. She presents a statistics report which states that power generation cost might be increased by 15 billion, which would consequently increase electricity bill by 1% for each consumer, which is not that much compared to the clean environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 199, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggest enforcing'.
Suggestion: suggest enforcing
...arding pollution caused by coal ash and suggest to enforce much stricter regulations for handling ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, finally, however, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, in spite of, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 30.3222958057 142% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1708.0 1373.03311258 124% => OK
No of words: 318.0 270.72406181 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37106918239 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86963426913 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547169811321 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 419.366225166 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.4828633155 49.2860985944 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.866666667 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.2 7.06452816374 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.210323496043 0.272083759551 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0728747388973 0.0996497079465 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0779374300363 0.0662205650399 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132109685645 0.162205337803 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524032837626 0.0443174109184 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.2367328918 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 63.6247240618 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.