Burning coal in power plants produces a waste product called coal ash, a material that contains small amounts of potentially harmful chemicals Environmentalists in the United States are concerned about the damage such harmful chemicals may be doing to the environment and suggest that the United States government should create new, much stricter regulations for handling and storing coal ash. However, representatives of power companies take the opposite view; they argue that new regulations are unnecessary and might actually have negative consequences They use the following arguments to support their position. Regulations Exist First, power company representatives point out that effective environmental regulations already exist. For example, one very important regulation requires companies to use liner-special material that prevents coal ash components from leaking into the soil and contaminating the surrounding environment. Companies that dispose of coal ash in disposal ponds or landfills must use liner in every new pond or landfill they build. Concerns About Recycling Coal Ash Second, some analysts predict that creating very strict rules for storing and handling coal ash might discourage the recycling of coal ash into other products Currently, a large portion of coal ash generated by power plants is recycled: it is used, for example, in building materials such as concrete and bricks Recycling coal ash reduces the need to dispose of it in other ways and presents no environmental danger. However, if new, stricter rules are adopted for handling coal ash, consumers may become concerned that recycled coal ash products are just too dangerous, and may stop buying the products Increased Cost Finally, strict new regulations would result in a significant increase in disposal and handling costs for the power companies. perhaps as much as ten times the current costs. Power companies would be forced to increase the price of electricity, which would not be welcomed by the general public.
The reading and the lecture are both about coal ash, which is a waste product after burning coal. The author of the reading believes there are some reasons that strict regulations have negative effects. The lecturer challenges that statements made by the author. she is of the opinion that it is necessary to have strict regulations.
First of all, the author suggests that there are already regulations. it is mentioned that one of those regulations is liner that prevent coal ash from leaking into enviromental. The argument is refuted by the lecturer. she says companies only use liners when there is new land or pond. Furthermore, she argues that old land and ponds are leaking harmful chemicals.
Secondly, the article posits that strict regulations descourage the recycle of coal ash. The article notes coal ash is used for concrete, bricks, and so on. And because of strict regulations people would fear. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by asserting that strict regulations would not stop people using coal ash. she elaborates on this by mentioning that such strict regulations have not affected, for examle, usage of mercury even though everyone knows it is a highly dangerious substance. so people would not afraid of it.
Finally, it is stated that costs of disposal and handling would increase due to strict regulations. The author establishes that because of this effect the price of electricity would also increase dramatically. The lecturer , on the other hand, opposes that even though it is true that the price would increase, it would not result that greatly. she puts forth the idea that it is estimated that total cost would increase 50 billion dollars, yet for customers the cost would increase only by 1 percent.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 204, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...rict regulations have negative effects. The lecturer challenges that statements mad...
^^^
Line 1, column 264, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...ges that statements made by the author. she is of the opinion that it is necessary ...
^^^
Line 3, column 71, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...sts that there are already regulations. it is mentioned that one of those regulati...
^^
Line 3, column 221, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...he argument is refuted by the lecturer. she says companies only use liners when the...
^^^
Line 5, column 321, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...s would not stop people using coal ash. she elaborates on this by mentioning that s...
^^^
Line 5, column 500, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: So
...s it is a highly dangerious substance. so people would not afraid of it. Final...
^^
Line 7, column 223, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...also increase dramatically. The lecturer , on the other hand, opposes that even th...
^^
Line 7, column 346, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...ease, it would not result that greatly. she puts forth the idea that it is estimate...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, second, secondly, so, first of all, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 12.0772626932 157% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 22.412803532 152% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1455.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 287.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06968641115 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11595363751 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64041439824 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.522648083624 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 444.6 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.6201585343 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 76.5789473684 110.228320801 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.1052631579 21.698381199 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06452816374 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 4.19205298013 191% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.111083668471 0.272083759551 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0375966713382 0.0996497079465 38% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0641148074494 0.0662205650399 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0720734799633 0.162205337803 44% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0433968802771 0.0443174109184 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 13.3589403974 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 53.8541721854 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.0289183223 73% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.53 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.18 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.